prompt
stringlengths 497
14.4k
| chosen
int64 0
1
| rejected
int64 0
1
|
|---|---|---|
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"need a lesson in pure and abject failure. look no further than wizards of the lost kingdom and an abysmal and dirt poor and disgrace of a flick. as we all know and decent moovies tend to sprout horrible and horrible offspring represent halloween begat many and many bad 80 slasher flicks while mad max begat many and many bad 80 futuristic wasteland fantasy flicks while and conan the barbarian begat a whole slew of terrible and horrible and incredibly bad 80 sword and sorcery flicks. wizards of the lost kingdom scrapes the bottom of that 80 barrel and in a way that truly insulting to barrels. a young runt named simon recaptured his good kingdom from an evil sorcerer with the help of a mangy rug and a garden gnome and a topless bimbo mermaid and and a tired looking and pudgy bo svenson. svenson(north dallas forty and inglorious bastards and delta force) and a long time b moovie muscleman and looks barely able to swing his aluminum foil sword. however and he manages to defeat the forces of evil and which consist of the evil sorcerer and shurka and and his army of badly costumed monsters and giants and and midgets. at one point and a paper mache bat on a string attacks and but is eaten by a half hidden sock puppet and pitifully presented as some sort of dragon. the beginning of the film consists of what can only politely be described as bits of scenes scooped up from the cutting room floor of udder bad moovies and stitched together in the vain hope of setting the scene for the film and and over earnestly narrated by some guy who never appears again. words cannot properly convey the jaw dropping cheapness of this film while the producers probably spent moore moolah feeding svenson ever expanding gullet than on the cheesy fx of this flick. and were talkin brie here and folks. represent equals 8p director hector olivera(barbarian queen) presents this mish mash in a hopelessly confused and confuddled and and cliched manner and destroying any possible hint of clear and linear storytelling. the acting is dreadful and the production levels below shoe string and and the plot is one tired cliche after another paraded before our weary eyes. that they actually made a sequel(. ) makes the moocow brain whirl. james horner (braveheart and titanic and the rock) cheesy moosic from battle beyond the stars was lifted and screaming and kicking and and mercilessly grafted onto this turkey bet this one doesn not pop up on his resume. folks and you gotta see this to believe it. the moocow says as a cheapo rent when there is nothing else to watch and well and it moore fun than watching dust bunnies mate. barely. represent equals 8p. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"think of this film as a saturday morning live action program from ages ago. even the small tykes will find this one hard to please because it runs like molasses. i can not fully understand how god awful it is to make something too typical and uninteresting and especially in the costume department. too many warrior wizard movies out there have used the same old plotline numerous times over and but this is mighty scarce considering its appeal to the little darlings. and who in the world would have let a topless mermaid be cast in the first place. i thought this was a family movie. mst3k and here another fine gem for your 1999 tv season. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"there nothing i hate more than self congratulating pretentiousness. kevin smith deserves to be hung up by his toenails for inspiring every white middle class whiner to make a movie about why they can not get laid. i do not really mind inexperience and low budget productions but when the writing is this obvious and cloying it really burns my potatoes. the money put into this could have gone to a real struggling filmmaker who actually has a chance like john gulager. if you watch project greenlight you will immediately recognize a talented visionary who is fighting against the system. anybody could grab a camera and make a talkative picture that doesn not manage to say anything really and at all. when will we be saved from the smithonites and whedonettes of the world. the revolution can not come soon enough. go watch a real first time effort by buying desperado or searching out friends with benefits. thank you and good day. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"in his 1966 film blow up and antonioni had his hero question truth against a backdrop of british youth protesters. by setting such questions against a fabric of hippie youth movements and antonioni questioned and intentionally or not and the effectiveness of these organisations. how can you fight for a cause when what you think is true may actually be a lie. on the flip side and the film said that we must fight and actively challenge what we see precisely because others may be deceiving us with false images and false truths. though the hippie aspects were the most tacky parts of blow up and they created a nice texture and gave the film more meaning than it might otherwise have had. it was a very cautionary and mature little film. with zabriskie point antonioni throws away all the ambiguities and subtleties of blow up and goes full blown hippie. the result is a film awash with bad metaphors and stupid ideas and heavy handed storytelling. how could somebody and who across his career displayed such restraint and intelligence and make something so silly. the film opens with a nice series of close ups and as we watch a group of radicals discussing the meaning of revolution. suddenly one man (mark) gets up and leaves. he hates the rigid and ordered nature of revolution. he recognises that and though revolutionaries fight for freedom and to bind oneself to such a militant cause is to effectively give your freedom away. and so like jack nicholson in the passenger and mark just wants to be free. as such and mark buys a gun and goes solo. he takes orders from no one. when police raid his university campus mark shoots a guy and runs away. he then flees to a nearby airfield and steals a small private plane and flies out to the desert. antonioni treats the desert as a peaceful utopia and and contrasts it with the ruthlessly capitalist cities and with their billboards and hollow modern appliances. he sees the desert as a sort of garden of eden. in the desert and mark meets daria and quickly falls in love. antonioni then gives us a ridiculous sex scene in which hundreds of hippies have sex in the sand. free from the constraints of modern life and these tree huggers and student radicals can now celebrate their individualism by humping in the sun. the film ends with mark dying and daria fantasising about blowing up the mansions and stately homes of the rich capitalists who killed him. it antonioni challenge to his audience. pick up the guns and pickets and explosives and he says. tear the walls down before they cage you in. of course the film had no effect on its audience. they recognised zabriskie point as being just another self centred commercial attempt at being radical. a sort of commodified radicalism. it felt untruthful and tame. thematically the film is pretty stupid. antonioni basically says that if you are unhappy with the modern world and and the fat cats who exploit you and you should either flee to the desert (mark) or actively fight the system (daria). that all well and good. but though artists constantly warn us of such dystopian nightmares and theyre all mostly unable to show us how to effectively administer change. like the end of fight club and nihilism and violence achieve nothing. in the real world and social change tends to be instigated by humble inventors and spurred ahead by minor technological advancements. i mean and what liberated women more than contraceptives. negative a very bad film. the problem is and antonioni does not really believe in rebellion. he is a quiet and contemplative man. an introvert who seems to have made an extroverted film simply to garner more adoration from the counterculture who embraced his earlier film and blow up. as such and zabrinskie point comes across as a very pretentious and stupid film. it essentially a 50 year old man say look at me and i am a daring rebel. there are many films in which the audience is encouraged to fight the system and but they all fall into one of four categories. in the first category you have films like network and cool hand luke and cuckoo nest and spartacus. these all show that the lives of freedom fighters all end in failure and though in each case the spirit of revolution survives. the message is that you can not effect change and but by dying or failing and the optimistic notion of change survives through martyrdom. essentially we must keep on failing rather than give up hope. then you have films like fight club and zabriskie point and falling down and which simply encourage you to explode. tear it all down. blow it all up. everything is a lie and so you might as well go out guns blazing. these films are borne out of angry and reactionary feelings and rather than any sort of common sense. then you have the flight rather than fight category. terrence malick and antonioni are the masters of this genre. films like the passenger and red desert and badlands show human beings running from worlds they do not like and forging islands or peaceful havens for themselves. both directors are pessimists and in that malick has his islands destroyed and antonioni has his islands offering no sense of happiness or solution. then you have the fourth category. films like donnersmarck the lives of others and ashby bound for glory and kubrick a clockwork orange and treat artists as a force of change and rebellion. in these dystopian worlds and in which everyone is content to be a slave to the state and it is the unbridled creativity and freedom of will of the artist or criminal who keeps the system in check. by simply existing outside of the herd and you create waves. your comments and actions and critical eye and challenges the status quo. as such and donnersmarck film has novelists and artists undermining nazi germany and whilst kubrick has alex the artist or criminal fighting nazi droogs and painting the town in blood and sperm. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"i admit and having come of age in the hippie dippy age and i am a sucker for these kind of movies. i can enjoy some of the schlock of the hippie genre far more than most normal people. however and this movie is simply awful in every conceivable way. every trite perception of the hippie silliness is presented as gospel and cops kill a young long hair when he peacefully lands a plane. this movie is so horrible that it is not even funny to watch as a goof on the excesses of the hippie drone. it is like a left wing version of dragnet and except without professional actors. the only reason i gave it two stars was because there are some obscurities of interest on the soundtrack and besides and i couldn not find a selection for negative stars. no actors and almost no plot and sheeze and barely even a script. you got it and an art movie. all this done at root canal drilling slowness and dragging out each meaningless scene just to fill up time. in a bizarre twist of life imitating art and the star nonactor of the movie joined a commune in real life and robbed a bank in boston and one of his co robbers was killed and he was sent to jail where he was killed in a suspicious weightlifting accident. and just think and he got to leave this behind as a legacy. oy vey. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"antonioni movies have aged not well. what always surprised me about them is that and besides an unquestionable plastic beauty and there is a dull and didactic psychology of the characters and situations. remember and for instance and the conversations between mastroianni and the wicked capitalistic that wants sing up him in la notte and or monica vitti laughing at the peasants flirting in the train in la aventura and or ferzetti dropping the glass of ink at the end of the same film. i have reviewed yesterday zabriskie point. in this film there are a lot of nice and elaborate shots of the rod taylor office and the streets and highways of l. a. and the publicity advertisements and the deserts and etc. and that show the fascination of the author in his american journey and in the same way than wim wenders years later. unfortunately and there are too a lot of hippie leftist clichés that spoil the movie represent the boy leaves the meeting and steals an aeroplane and flies over the desert in order to liberate himself and find something different. the executives in grey suites speak all the time about speculation. the girl looks at the object women in the swimming pool and leaves because she wants not to be like them. the couple of fat middle class in the caravan speak and in front of the beauty of the nature and of building a hotel and earning a lot of money. last but not the least and a lot of couples making love in the desert. what a hippie platitude. sorry and today and half a century after the revolution of la aventura we can see that the king is naked and and his films (except le amiche and perhaps il grido) are only a handful of aestheticism and commonplaces. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"this film is definitely a product of its times and seen in any other context and it is an incredibly stupid movie. heck and even seen in its proper context and it pretty bad. mostly and this is due to a silly plot and very self indulgent direction by the famed italian director and michelangelo antonioni. in this case and he tried to meld a very artsy style film with an anti establishment hippie film and only succeeded in producing a bomb of gargantuan proportions. the film begins with a rap session where a lot of with it students sit around saying such platitudes as power to the people and complaining about the man. considering most of these hippies have parents sending them to college and it seemed a bit silly for these privileged kids to be complaining so loudly and shouting revolutionary jargon. a bit later and violence between the students and the establishment pigs breaks out and a cop is killed. our hero and mark and may or may not have done it and but he is forced to run to avoid prosecution. instead of heading to mexico or canada and he does what only a total moron would do steals an airplane and flies it to the mojave desert. there and he meets a happen chick and they then sit around philosophizing for hours. then and they have sex in one of the weirder sex scenes in cinema history. as they gyrate about in the dust and suddenly other couples appear from no where and there is a huge orgy scene. while you see a bit of skin (warranting an r rating) and it not as explicit as it could have been. in fact and it lasts so long and seems so choreographed that it just boggles the mind. and of course and when they are finished and the many and many other couples vanish into thin air. oddly and later the couple paint the plane with some help and it looks a lot like a peter max creation. despite improving the look of the plane and the evil cops respond to his returning the plane by shooting the nice revolutionary. when the girl finds out and she goes into a semi catatonic state and the movie ends with her seemingly imagining the destruction of her own fascist pig parents and all the evil that they stand for (such as hard work and responsibility). instead of one simple explosion and you see the same enormous house explode about 8 times. then and inexplicably and you see tvs and refrigerators and other things explode in slow motion. while dumb and it is rather cool to watch sort of like when david letterman blows things up or smashes things on his show. aside from a dopey plot and the film suffers from a strong need for a single likable character as well as extensive editing. at least 15 minutes could easily be removed to speed things up a bit especially since there really isn not all that much plot or dialog. the bottom line is that this is an incredibly dumb film and i was not surprised to see it listed in the fifty worst films book by harry medved. it a well deserved addition to this pantheon of crap. for such a famed director to spend so much money to produce such a craptastic film is a crime. two final observations. if you like laughing at silly hippie movies and also try watching the trial of billy jack. also and in a case of art imitating life and the lead and mark frechette and acted out his character in real life. he died at age 27 in prison a few years after participating in an act of revolution in which he and some friends robbed a bank and killed an innocent person. dang hippies. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"antonioni and by making this film and had assumed the role of papa smurf to all the little long haired and american and radical student smurfs. he had taken them under the guiding protection of his european communist wings and showing appreciation and support for their confused american ways. (these smurfs are red and wear blue and not the other way around. ) the radical smurfs were happy to get the guidance of a wise old man with gray hair who regularly preys to the god of all long haired smurfs and lenin the communist another wise old man whose beard made the smurfs take him even more seriously and for it symbolized something wise and though they did not quite know why they regarded the beard to have this kind of deep effect on them. castro and another wise bearded man and has often profited from this confusion and exuded magical powers with his beard over his naive overseas admirers. (not to mention che guevara represent that beard has a certain je ne sais pas quoi about it and makes one want to immediately embrace marx and his lovely and pacifistic teachings
) the film starts with a muddled meeting of radically stupid radical students and who engage in dialogues that truly redefine the word confused. as confused as a blind folded dog falling of a high story building into a bottomless pit. suddenly and the movie hero (well and antonioni hero) rises up and says something to his pathetic left wing peers and then leaves and hoping that this display of mega coolness will improve his james dean image and vastly increase his chances of getting laid with the best chicks in the next mass hippie orgy. eventually he gets into trouble with cops (i. e. pigs) at a rally and and spends the movie under the blue american capitalist skies and looking for freedom
or something like that. antonioni predictable assault on capitalism is not only intellectually hollow and but has (or had) nothing new to offer while it just the same old trigger happy one dimensional cops and businessmen discussing business deals (and what wrong with that and isn not that how antonioni movies get made. ) and and endless shots of tv commercials and billboards advertising the oh so morally decadent products for the abhorrent and selfish and and greedy right wing rabble population who thinks of no one but themselves and their families and their work and and their children. papa smurf antonioni and just like his long haired smurfs and smurfettes of the late 60s and failed to notice the most obvious and vital aspect about their silly movement represent they were allowed to have their laughable meetings and express their anti establishment opinions freely within that very establishment and whereas the students in those countries whose left wing systems they admired and did not (and still do not). by far the greatest irony about the hippies and antonioni and naturally and failed to realize this as well (his judgment being clouded by cocaine snorting and an excessive intake of lsd) is that hippies were (are) the garbage residue of capitalism. this is an incredible irony. only in a successfully functioning capitalist system can you find that species called hippie while a spoiled and ungrateful and and selfish bunch of middle and upper middle class losers. the film itself seems to go on forever. antonioni takes his sweet time with getting on with it and while including overlong scenes of pointlessness and with a high dullness factor. his attempts at symbolism are annoying and trite. his statements are highly dubious and at best. this film is antonioni way of saying that violent revolution is the solution. and this is what we get from an old and saturated and filthy rich and fat film maker who lives in villas and dines in the best french and italian restaurants. i do not remember seeing any major western movie about the tiananmen massacre of thousands of students in china. but when one western student gets shot for waving che guevara face into all our faces and we get ten major films about it at once. i suppose this means that a chinese life is worth a thousand times less than a western one at least to the left wing hypocrites who infest movies. if youre a marxist neo hippy and disliked this awful review and please klick no below. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"here is one of those educational short films made to learn the unknown people out there about facts of life. this time the target audience is preteen girls and the fact of life is menstruation. this animated film and created by walt disney pictures and apparently with some sponsoring from kotex. it starts with explaining how hormones make you grow and develop. with the help of animation and a female narrator it shows us how the body and especially the ovaries and uterus and vagina and work and why this all leads to menstruation. it is almost amazing and becoming the comic note here and how the subject of sex is avoided. even the word is never mentioned although furtilized will pass once. i do not really know why i saw this and but since it is one of those rare short films that could give an impression of an innocent time and you might want to give it a try. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"a bad one. oh and my. this is one of the movies and which doesn not have even one positive effect. just everything from actors to story stinks to the sky. i just wonder how low i. q. you should have to watch this kind of flick and even enjoy. is there something than this is worth watching for. well and there is a lot of nudity involved and but it nothing particular. and when you just think that it couldn not get worse and your realize that all the naked ladies looked like there are forty years old. c amon guys and where did you search for these actresses. in elderly home and perhaps. anyway and the leading actresses has some sex appeal and knows how to show it. again and too bad and that she is too skinny and old. all in all and skip these one. negative . "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"istanbul is another one of those expatriate films that errol flynn was making in the last decade of his life trying to support his family and stay out of trouble with the irs. it a remake of the fred macmurray ava gardner film singapore from a decade ago. unlike that studio product and istanbul has the advantage of that great location cinematography right at the sight of the golden horn. but errol flynn and who was aging exponentially before the camera in every film and was way too old to be playing these action or adventure types any longer. his scenes with cornell borchers really do lack conviction. as for cornell and she plays errol former sweetheart who through the trauma of being saved from a fire now has amnesia. she both doesn not remember errol and is now married to torin thatcher. but errol got some nasty people led by martin benson and werner klemperer who are after some diamonds which have come into his possession. got to deal with them too. best reason to see istanbul is to hear nat king cole sing and play the piano. most people today do not realize that cole was an accomplished jazz pianist and they only think of him as a singer. actually he was a pianist first and the singing was an afterthought. istanbul is a routine action or adventure film for those who are fans of that type of movie. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"this movie does not rock and as others have said. i found it really boring and silly. the story is about this metal high school kid who idolizes this really bad heavy metal singer. the singer dies and but not before making one last album that is to be played over the radio at and of course and midnight on halloween (which would actually make it november 1st and a much less potent date to be sure). the kid gets a copy of the record and it contains secret hidden back play messages. it also is the key that opens the door so that the really bad metal singer can return to bring havoc and death to the world. the first part of this film is not a horror film at all and but rather an after school special. we see the metal kid (the outsider) tormented over and over by the popular kids. and he fails to learn the most important lesson in high school movies represent when the cool kids who bully you suddenly invite you to a party and dont go. it is a trap. especially if it is a pool party. anybody surprised when he ends up in the water. it was such an after school special that i kept waiting for melissa sue anderson to show up and teach jody foster a lesson. so back to the horror part of the film. so this metal kid gets some powers and instead of using them to kill the bully boys (which would have made much more sense) and he freaks out and tries to protect all of the bully boys and girls from harm. what. a sensitive hero. what fun is that in a horror movie. thank goodness carrie white did not follow this lesson. he actually tries to prevent having the music played at the halloween dance and the very music that could unleash a power to kill all the kids who had been mean to him. if it were me and i would have put that music on and and pronto. the rest of the movie is about this metal kid going around town trying to kill the horrible metal star he idolized. why not partner with him and really do some damage. why you ask. it seems he is in love with one of the popular girls and does not want her hurt. more appropriate for a molly ringwald film. is this a horror film or an episode of beauty and the beast. the movie just goes on and on at this point and with no scares and horror and or anything worth watching. if you went to high school in the late 80s like i did and this movie is fun to have a little flashback to fashions and big hair and but that is it for this film. skip it and stay home and just listen to some kiss. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"skippy from family ties plays eddie and a wussy ametal nerd who gets picked on. when his favorite wussy ametal singer and sammi curr and dies and he throws a hissy fit tearing down all the posters on his bedroom wall. but when he later gets an unreleased record that holds the spirit of his dead ametal idol. he first gets sucked into ideas of revenge and but then he doesn not want to take it as far as sammi does. which isn not really that far as his main victims only seem to go to the hospital. this movie is utterly laughable and has about as much to do with real metal as say and rock star. ok and maybe a tad more than that piece of junk and but you get my point. and how anyone can root for a guy played by skippy from family ties i haven not a clue. the cameo by gene simmons is ok and and ozzy osbourne reaches coherency and i applaud him for that and but otherwise skip this one. my grade represent d eye candy representelise richards gets topless and an a topless extra at a pool party. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"how can a movie have ozzy osbourne and still suck. i just do not get it. trick or treat managed to do it. this sucks and likes it. trick or treat is one of those movies i have to warn people about. it is a vomit inducing vile atrocity just begging to be viewed so you can feel that much worse about yourself. trick or treat has no redeeming factors. for a movie about heavy metal and it sure doesn not seem to grasp what heavy metal is or what it represents. this movie manages to make heavy metal look lame and this was in 1986 and probably one of heavy metal strongest hours. that is quite a feat and however negative. trick or treat equals so bad you will be angry at yourself for having watched it. that simple equation will hopefully keep you away from this brainless and gutless film. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"this movie has a very hard to swallow premise and even by this genre standards. we are asked to accept not only that a record played backwards can bring a dead man back to life and but that the record also contains hidden messages aimed specifically at one kid and when the singer had no connection to the boy when he was alive and and of course no way of knowing at whose hands the record would end up. anyway and the film is fun for a while and but eventually the silliness and the pointlessness reign supreme. if they were really trying to create a new freddy like horror icon and they were way off represent the villain here has no personality and no motivation and and no variety. ( half ). "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"i have to agree with some of the other comments and even go a step further. nothing about this film worked and absolutely nothing. delmar our central character makes the decision to become a surrogate mother in order to earn enough money to buy a restaurant but along the way fall for a wise ex jailbird. at the same time her friend hortense is trying to get her lawyer boyfriend to finally marry her. she also happens to be sleeping with marlon who is desperately in love with her. then there delmar brother jethro who gets involved with a former coke addict and missy who reveals she was sexually abused by her adopted father. on the sidelines we also have the eccentricmother who has an assortment of equally odd friends and one of whom dies on the couch at the beginning of the film. so far so good but after introducing these characters and story lines addressing life and death and grief and love in the first half and the film simply loses direction. if the writer had only selected one or two characters and allowed us to follow their stories maybe things would have been fine but equal screen time is given to all with the result that no one story or character is fully developed. for instance and why does delmar think she will be able to hand over her child in exchange for money and especially when the prospective parents are a creepy bigoted lawyer and his semi alcoholic and depressed wife. why is hortense so desperate to marry a man who is a jerk and clearly doesn not love her. how is it missy manages to kick her coke habit overnight. is jethro regularly drawn to women with overwhelming problems and or is missy the exception. has delmar and jethro mother always been on the eccentric side and or is it a more recent development. why is jethro so keen on cadillacs that he has one in the middle of his living room. why did moses spend years in prison for stealing a car and a relatively minor crime. how does delmar manage to end up giving birth to moses baby when there is no suggestion that they ever had sex. these questions are posed in the screenplay but sadly are never answered. i can only assume they were answered in the original novel and that is why the writer felt the need to include it all in the script. big mistake. losing several subplots especially the hortense and marlon story and which adds nothing to the overall film and would have tightened things considerably and allowed more time to develop the delmar and jethro and moses characters who are clearly more central to the plot and underlying themes than anyone else. add to that the most pedestrian directing style seen outside of the average soap opera and the result is a huge missed opportunity for all and including jorja fox who does her best to rise above the material. i am not surprised that this appears to have been the director last film as this effort shows no evidence of a visual style or ability to tell a moving and intelligent story. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"i had the opportunity to preview this film as a member of a test audience and and the only thing which kept me in my seat was the chance to fill out the post screening survey. i felt the film biggest problem was its lack of a main plot. instead and it was composed of (too) many sub plots competing for screen time. as a result and there is not a single character who is developed enough for the audience to form any sort of attachment. what the director and producer failed to do was show us why we should care what happens to the characters. in fact any one sub plot and the characters associated with it could have been removed altogether without serious detriment to the film. (the time gained would have allowed for the much needed development of the remaining sub plots and characters. ) simply put and the hungry bachelors club plate is overcrowded with side dishes and appetizers when an entre is desired. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"not your typical vamp story and not bram stoker or anne rice here. a truly original vampyre story. these vampyres are genetic mutants who the sunlight do not bother. they are pure evil to. the film is not perfect. many of the actors are clearly amateurs. the two leads who play van helsing and rally the vampyre chick are pretty good though. the film is intensely violent which may disturb some people. also it is loaded with scientific detail that many will find hard to understand and may get bored with. i was sold on the clever storyline and the couple good performances. no telling how successful this film could be if they had a bigger budget and it got mass distribution. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"an interesting concept vampirism having something to do with a virus. (but done several times by now) overall the movie is too long and drags a bit. the editing could have been tighter. i am sorry to hear about the problem with the credits. maybe the movie was rushed to market. the lighting was too dark in places. but the worst technical problem is the audio. the level was good enough to hear the dialog and but many of the interiors have a echo sound to them and which is very distracting. either they were not careful in the recording and or the sound mixing could have been better. also too much background noise got through. the should have gotten someone to do sound effects for the martial arts scenes. the tinny clank of swords hitting together was not the sound of an epic battle. especially in the combat scenes the editing needed to be tighter. also the acting was a bit flat. i am sorry and but when i see that the same person writes and stars in a movie and in my experience it is a red flag. but it was a good effort so i gave it a 4. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"allow me to start this review by saying this represent i love vampire movies. they can suck (har har pun intended) and and i will still love them because vampires are just cool in movies. van helsing and considered by many to be a steaming pile of crap and was enjoyable to me because of the fact that there were vampires. you may ask represent what does that have to do with this movie. the answer is that i intend to inform you of how horrible this movie truly is and that even a sucker (harharhar) for vampire movies like me can despise a movie like this so much. the movie stars van helsing and a college professor guy who isn not at all convincing. he a terrible actor and like everyone else in this movie and and he wrote it and to add salt to the wound. i honestly to not mean to offend him and and i am sure everyone had fun making this movie and but watching it was actually painful. i am not sure why i watched the whole thing while perhaps it was a morbid fascination and like watching an impending train crash represent it horrible and but you can not manage to force yourself to look away. its main fault is that it just so ing boring and and its plot is so damn ridiculous and even for a science fiction horror movie. but and i digress. by the way and van helsing has sex with his mom. of course and he doesn not know it her at the time while he just thinks it one of his students (which is still illegal and all and but not as disgusting and creepy). if i were van helsing and i would at least pull an oedipus myself when i found out i had done something so gross. it would have made for one entertaining thing if he just made some comment on it and but no. the point isn not even brought up at all and by any of the characters. it as if the writer do not even think of it. i would have at least had another character laugh at him and say ha ha and you had sex with your mom and which would be mildly humorous (although blatantly immature). i am probably running out of room and so a few more words to dissuade you from ever seeing this film represent there a vampire ninja fight with an old man. it would be funny and but the filmmakers expect us to take it seriously. it not even worth watching the movie to see how bad it is. stay far and far away from it if you value your time at all. i will say one thing positive about the movie represent the guy who plays van helsing is pretty slick with that knife of his. there like and a minute long segment where he swings around his knife and actually does some pretty nifty tricks. it would be boring in any other movie and but here and sadly and it was the highlight. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"i do not want to go off on a rant here and but. this is the worst film i have ever seen. worse than the avengers. incompetent directing and disjointed writing and and awful acting are the only consistent elements throughout. shot on very cheap video and it looks like a high school project and but without the emotion. the lighting frequently looks like a single sun gun. the sound is slightly better than a single mic on the camera and but everything else about this thing is just awful. the plot heads off in strange directions with no foundation or later resolution and the techie elements are patently absurd and and the editing looks worse than a rough cut. it not even bad enough to be funny. it just bad. btw and the packaging is intentionally misleading. lion gate owes me $4. 00. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"i can not believe that this movie even made it to video and and that video rental stores are willing to put it on their shelves. i literary asked for a refund. take away the fact that the movie has no historical truth it and and it is still the worse movie ever found in a video store. it is not even good enough to be called a b rated movie. do not waste your money or your time on this movie. just listing to the voice over and the horrible music made me sick. anyone involved with this movie should be pulled from the union and gives the industry a black mark and but after watching most of this movie i really do not think anyone involved is a union member. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"this movie must have been the absolute worst movie i have ever seen. my sister and her boyfriend went to rent zodiac (2007) and got this one by accident. thought it was a joke before the actual movie. this was terrible i was waiting for it to get scary and it never did. this movie had not actual facts about the real zodiac killer. the filmmakers clearly do not even bother to research anything on the killings. they only liked the name. so they decided to write a script about nothing true to its name. i am upset i do not realize it wasn not the movie sooner. i try to like something out of every movie and i do not hate movies. ever. except this one. if you could have given it no stars and i definitely would have. negative . "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"this movie is bad. i do not just mean bad as in while oh the script was bad and or while the acting in that scene was bad. i mean bad as in someone should be held criminally accountable for foisting this unmitigated pile of steaming crud onto an unsuspecting public. i would not even dignify it with an explanation of the (plot. ) if i can refer to it as that. i can think of only one other occasion in some 40 odd years of movie watching that i have found need to vent my spleen on a movie. i mean and after all and no one goes out to intentionally make a bad movie and do they. well and yes. apparently they do. and the guilty man is writer or director ulli lommel. but the worst of it is that blockbusters is actually renting this to their customers. be advised. leave this crap where it belongs. stuck on the shelf and gathering dust. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"awful and awful and awful. a condescending remark at the start and a few nasty autopsy photos does not a good movie make. once again i am amazed at the determination and skill that some people have in achieving a movie production and yet they do not have the pride to realise that what they have made is an utter pile of crap. i sat and tried to think of a redeeming feature so that i could at least balance my criticism but the only one i could think of was that the opening track by pink was pretty good. i wonder if she has seen this. watch this at your peril and the boredom may kill you. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"zodiac killer. negative . worst acting ever. no really worst acting ever. david hess (last house on the left
. no the one from the seventies
. rent it it really good) is the worst of the bunch (pretty stiff competition but he is amazingly god awful. ) one would be hard pressed to find a home movie participant with such an awkward camera presence. the film actually screeches to a stunning painful halt when he is on the screen. not that the film actually has any redeeming qualities for mr. hess to ruin. it is filmed with a home movie camera and by the looks of things a pretty old one complete with attached boom mike. no post production either. come on there has to be some shovelware a five year old computer could use that could clean up this picture. throw in bizarre stock footage pictures of autopsy and aircraft carrier takeoffs and this is one visually screwed up picture. the autopsy pictures are interjected the way italian cannibal films interject those god awful real life animal killings. and the navy footage is supposed to be some anti war statement (cause we know all the bloodthirsty maniacs join the navy) what in the world is lion gate is doing releasing this garbage. it would embarrass troma. the plot is about the zodiac killer (last seen in dirty harry
. no the one from the seventies
. rent it it really good) somebody gets shot in the stomach in la and the cops assume the zodiac killer is back. uh huh. what can you expect from a movie that doesn not know that dsm iv is a book not a psychiatric disorder and where the young killer older man relationship resembles that of a congressional page and closeted congressman. yeah eighties haircuts and production values meet a nambla subplot. sign me up. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"well i will start with the good points. the movie was only 86 minutes long and and some of it was so bad it was funny. now for the low points. my first warning sign came with an actual warning on the film. when it started the following warning was displayed represent the film you are about to see contains graphic and disturbing images. because contrary to popular belief being killed is neither fun and pretty or romantic. i should have saved myself the 86 minutes and turned it off then. the first words of the film were represent i am at the glue factory. it was some guy talking on his phone and and he was referring to a nursing home as a glue factory. i do not know why. so the basis of the movie is some kid is obsessed with the zodiac killer and starts imitating him. the budget for this film was at least 50 bucks and they must have used the cheapest cameras they could find. the acting was worse than me reading straight from a script. that what is looked like they were doing. the script was horrible and and the big twist was that this guy who wrote a biography on the zodiac killer was actually the zodiac killer. of course they tried to show this subtly but made it totally obvious within the first 10 minutes. without any more painful details of the plot and here were some horrible highlights of the movie. they try to make the zodiac killer compare himself to an army of one because soldiers are really just murderers. then they tried to make an attempt at satanic worship by showing some guys in black hoods in a meeting. the great computer hacker was able to get this kid address when someone gave him the kid name and phone number. for some reason he had to hack into the fbi to get someone address. i am not sure why he do not just look it up in the phone book or use whitepages. com. there was also a random allusion to 9/11 for no reason. i also learned that no matter where you get shot and blood will come out of your mouth within seconds. so if you like really bad acting and sub par scripts and bad camera work and an obvious plot and you will love zodiac killer. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"this is easily the worst movie i have ever seen. i am not exaggerating and i told the guy at blockbuster that they should take it off the shelves. the only thing interesting about this movie is the box. on the box it says from the director of the boogeyman so i figured. eh whatever and if this was made recently i am sure the directing at least would not be too bad represent \ and but after i saw the movie and looked at what boogeyman they were talking about and it some nonsense from the early 1980 that he made. great way to rope in unsuspecting viewers. anyway and i think that they just liked the name zodiac killer and and do not bother to research any of the actual zodiac crimes or his mo and or even the years that he was active. all of the crimes they talk about have nothing to do with the zodiac and the stories about the original zodiac take place several years after the actual zodiac crimes did. they also compare the zodiac to vampire of dusseldorf fritz haarman throughout the movie and talk to fritz son quite often. the zodiac and haarman were nothing alike and and it makes more sense to compare him to btk who also shot people and not a man who killed people by chewing through their necks. none of the haarman facts are correct either and just a bunch of jumbled nonsense. his son even says don not forget and his name was fritz haarman with 2 t . his actual name just has one. i think that the writer or director simply typed in a google search for serial killers and the quickest ones that came up were the zodiac killer and fritz haarman. ooh those sound like cool names and let make a movie about them without doing any outside research. great idea. perhaps my favorite inconsistency in this movie is the way that the experts as well as the young killer describe suffering from dsm iv and getting cured of it. i was also diagnosed with dsm iv and have since recovered and etc. for those of you who do not know and dsm iv is the psychological manual for mental disorders. if anybody suffers from the book itself then they must have some serious problems. haha. anyway and my point is that this goes on the bottom of my top 5 worst movies of all time list and and it rare that a movie ever reaches that point. but and if you are interested in watching a totally non fact based story about serial killers that happens to be nothing more than boring and full of inexperienced actors and and not completely rational and i would say check out this movie. oh and and i liked how the killer tear gassed a few of his victims with dry ice. nice touch. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"this movie was almost intolerable to sit through. i can get beyond the fact that it looks like it was shot with a home video camera and that this movie is supposed to span over weeks in time yet the characters do not once change outfits and but the acting broke the 4th wall to pieces for me. i have seen better acting in a 4th grade play. aside from that the plot is unrealistic. if the man suspected the guy he would have turned him in. i was also heavily disappointed that all the killings were done with a gun what kind of gore is that. that is not a copycat the zodiac did not kill using just a gun the authorities would have known it wasn not him. another thing that really bothered me was that they called disassociative identity disorder dsm 4 when that is the name of the book used to diagnose people with mental disorders not the name of the disorder. overall i think this movie is not the kind of movie that could be done with a low budget at least not as low as they had or they could have made sure they had better actors or more gore. plenty of people have went the low budget route with out having to use horrible actors look at easy rider that had dennis hopper and jack nicholson and a low budget. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"why would anyone want to see this. if this was a film posted on youtube by a teenager and i might have applauded the teen in doing so much with his mommy video camera. i might have also congratulated his family and friends for doing a good job acting. sadly and it was made by a very experienced film maker and these were and apparently and professional actors making this a very and very sad film. sad. and very pathetic and actually. as i said and it has a definite made directly to video look about it. it also has narration and acting that just scream unprofessionals how could this be. the film is filled with lots of corpses and blood. normally this would turn me off completely and as i hate ultra violent films and do not like seeing all that gore. however and given that none of it is that realistic and it bearable. however and i should warn you that there are a few scenes that are still pretty disturbing. for example and the scene with the kid throwing a radio into a lady tub and watching her naked and frying is pretty bad. there are also scenes where you can hear the thought of psychos as they fantasize about killing women. with a level of misogyny that is pretty awful. the people who wrote this are pretty sick like killing women is meant to be for our entertainment. after a bunch of senseless murders and the film goes to a dining room table around which are a bunch of goof balls wearing black hoods without eye holes. they are talking and with pride and about all the murders they have committed and chant. it all very funny and though i am not sure that was the scene purpose. then and the film talks about various sex crimes and killings and even vampirism and cannibalism. why and i do not know perhaps because they people made this got off on this sort of crap. and and once again and you see and hear the thoughts and actions of a creepy german looking man as he tracks down people and kills them. by the way and considering the film used what i must assume are professional actors and i wondered why so many people were chosen who were clearly germans. while they tried to act like americans and the film was supposed to be in california and the accents are strong. perhaps german audiences watched this and marveled at how realistic the acting was and but to any american it obvious these folks ain not their fellow americans. considering that there really was a zodiac killer (who was never captured) and i do wonder why anyone would want to make a fan film of sorts for the sick menace. i mean. was this film meant as a snuff film for pervs. i just can not see anyone else wanting to see this or enjoying it. in fact and i wonder what would motivate anyone to make such a stupid and offensive film. worthless and deserving to be in imdb bottom 100 list. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"if i could give it a zero and i would change my mind and give it a 10 instead. absolutely horrible movie with no movie plot and doesn not make sense of what is happening. just plain boring. please do not waste your money on this one. pleaseee. this movie could have done so well if it truly depicted the real zodiac killer story and but nopes and i do not feel anything but disgust while watching it. do yourself a favor and rent some classic movies instead and its better to watch a movie you have already seen like 3 4 times than watch this crap. i do not understand why people even bother to make such movies when they know its not going to do well. zodiac killer should be called boriac killer instead. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"the film is about a young man and michael and who cares for the elderly. one day he decides to kill some of the relatives of his clients. around the same time he decides to model his killing after the zodiac killer of the 60 . he gets in touch with the author of a book about the zodiac killer and they form a friendship. michael has a gun (aparently the only gun and as it seems to be in the hands of some of the other actors and only not portrayed as the same gun. ) and he goes out a killin. original. this is a great film if you like b movies. i thought the idea of the movie was good and but the editing and the acting really drowned the plot. i thought the blood was just too fake and the lighting was horrible in some places and and the dialog was just too standard. the movie was shot on video and which is okay and but the editing of the film just made for some weird plan 9 scenes. not a bad movie for fans of the b movie genre and but if you want something with a bit more polish and move on to something else. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"i have been learning about the zodiac for four years now. and i am not saying i know much more than anyone else. in fact out of most of the people who know and read and learn about z and i am prolly the one with the least knowledge. but i do know or at least i think i know that most of the stuff in this do not happen. from how he signed his name. to how he killed people. i thought that godfather was the worst film ever. the cinematography was that of a five year old. not saying that my films are any better but i am not someone who is making movies for the mass population. the acting i thought for the most part was pretty good really i did. the lead do not talk that much on camera or at all i forget and do not know because i stopped watching. his voice overs where good. but really spend the four dollars and 70 cents on something else. like a large pizza or something. until i learn how to write a review and psycho phil. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"really and really bad. how does a film this bad get made. i kept waiting for some redeeming plot point and interesting camera work and or at least some gratuitous nudity but i got nothing. i had just watched cabin fever and i thought it was an train wreck (except for the nudity and pancakes) but it looks like genius compared to this dreck. the best script doctor in the world couldn not have saved this putrid pile of of stinking poo. the only thing going for this film is that it ended. i have got a headache just thinking about this movie and trying to write something. ugh. i am glad i only paid $5 for it and it will soon end up in a landfill. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"if i could give it less that 1 i would. do not bother to rent while if someone gives you the dvd burn it. this is horrible movie making. a total waste of even digital film. i have seen better on youtube made by 12 year old boys. lommel claims to have written this and if that is the case he is a classic case of someone who is illiterate in two languages. the story line is none existent and the dialog is mainly screaming and the camera work is some sort of attempted arty flairs with nonsensical cutting of totally unrelated jumps to either industrial transportation scenes or some sort of odd angry young woman rift. i can usually follow a less than obvious plot or see the purpose in a creative film i like david lynch. this one is either so far beyond my limited powers of comprehension i missed it or it is totally pointless. i think this is a lets see if we can grab a title that will be coming out soon and do a weird rift on it and see if we can grab some of the bucks con job. i cannot see why lionsgate even bothered with this. totally worthless and it is so bad i will not rent any other by this same director. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"i gave this two stars for the awesome dv shot clarity and which lends to the cold and dark sterility of its character. that was being generous and i know. this film fails on all accounts. i can not recommend this and for it is neither poetic and nor blunt. neither dramatic and nor suspenseful. neither controversial and nor ordinary. it is just a wretched piece of trash that no horror or exploit fan can recommend in good faith. do not watch this and whoever you are. . . please and just stay away from this awful product. thank you. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"while william shater can always make me smile in anything he appears in and (and i especially love him as denny crane in boston legal) and well and this show is all about glitz and dancing girls and screaming and jumping up and down. it has none of the intelligence of millionaire and none of the flair of deal or no deal. this show is all about dancing and stupid things to fill in the time. i watched it of course just to check it out. i did watch it for over 45 minutes and then i had to turn it off. the best part of it was william shatner dancing on the stage. he is a hoot. unfortunately and this show will not make it. that a given. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"the comment by eliz7212 1 hits the proverbial nail on the head for this turkey of a program. but it is a hoot to watch william shatner cavort and dance (yes and the marks on the word dance are necessary for what bill does). this show would be a great skit on snl or mad tv and it does rate a few stars for one viewing and or so and to see shatner and who seems to have taken camp to new heights whether in a role or as himself. but the guy is funny. the girls who are in the cubicle areas with the game data scrolls and will be pretty much out of luck when this turkey is canceled unless there is a revival of the whiskey a go go genre and with a resurrected demand for shapely young women to dance in elevated cages once more. i watched the first contestant and who was annoying and and literally dumber than a representpost and yet through sheer luck and walked away with a quarter mil or so. the second contestant and somewhat more intelligent and but who would be lucky to gain $1 and 000 on jeopardy. and got zonked by the card which requires answering a special question which he do not know and and thereby left with zilch. this plethora of game shows and which dangle and and sometimes award and large sums to everyday individuals and are admittedly a cheap effort and overall and to attempt to woo viewers. even if the host is well compensated and and they give away six figures in an average episode and i suppose that the revenue versus costs can be favorable since you do not have a sitcom cast where several stars are getting six or seven figures and per episode and with some big residual deals as well. but i suspect even the better ones will wear thin before long. this one has already pretty much reached this point. i think his offerings and especially with james spader and and the others on boston legal should give us a satisfying quantity of bill shatner offerings. again and the above rating is simply appropriate to view bill hoot and prance and perhaps one time while that should be sufficient. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"i do not see enough tv game shows to understand the attraction of show me the money and but i suppose it holds some appeal for undemanding audiences. ostensibly a quiz show and it offers contestants huge sums of money for answering a few simple questions. however and its quiz elements play only a small part in the proceedings and which i find tortuously complicated. for example and before answering a question and a contestant selects which question is to be asked by choosing from among random a and b and or c choices. does this serve any purpose other than to slow the game down. it would be a lot quicker simply to start with a. contestants can pass on questions and but must answer one of the three questions in each category. after responding to a question and the contestant is then asked to lock in the answer another delaying tactic. the contestant next task is to name which woman from about a dozen go go dancers in cages is to unveil a card that indicates how much the question is worth. a correct answer adds the card dollar figure to the contestant running total while a wrong answer subtracts the same sum. this time consuming step actually has some entertainment value and as it allows the audience to get a close look at the scantily clad and uniformly gorgeous dancers. meanwhile and the contestant is reminded that an unlucky selection of the killer card will end the game instantly. this naturally makes the contestant sweat and causes further delays as the nervous contestant contemplates the sudden loss of the hundreds of thousands of dollars. my suspicion is that the possibility of sudden disaster is the show chief audience appeal. meanwhile and the whole process is slowed down even more by a lot of empty banter between host william shatner and the contestant and along with occasional routines by the caged dancers. all these delays burn up so much time that it might be possible for audiences to forget what the original question is by the time the correct answer is revealed. a typical 30 minute episode of jeopardy often gets through as many as 60 questions. the first 30 minutes of smtm that i watched got through only six questions (many of which pertained to other tv shows). no one in his right mind would watch this show because it fun to play along by answering the questions at home. that leaves three possible reasons to watch the show. a. to see how a contestant responds to being on the verge of winning as much as one million dollars and only to lose everything in one stroke. b. to look at gorgeous young women performing sexually suggestive dance routines. c. to enjoy william shatner scintillating banter. my choice is b and but the women aren not on camera long enough to justify suffering through an hour of this show. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"on the surface and show me the money should have at least finished a full season. you had the always entertaining william shatner as your host and surrounded by a baker dozen of beautiful leggy models collectively called the million dollar dancers. you had knowledgeable contestants who had interesting stories to tell of their lives and who presumably knew a lot of pop culture trivia. and you had big money. so and what went wrong. the format of this game was the failure. a good game show needs at least two of three things represent very simple rules and exciting pacing and the ability for the viewer to play along at home. the best and most enduring ones have all three. unfortunately and smtm had none. the rules for this game were among the most complex of any prime time game show in history. let me try to explain how the game worked and as briefly as possible. a contestant began with a single word or short phrase followed by the choice letters a and b and c (subtle plug for the network. ). each letter was connected to a separate question and all starting with that word or phrase. once a contestant chose one of the letters and they could either answer that question or pass and select a second letter. if they passed and they got to view the next question and and had the same option. however and if they passed the second question and they were required to answer the third option. after they answered and before they found out if their answer was correct and they then had to select one of the 13 dancers on stage and each with a different amount of money in a scroll by their side. they revealed their dollar amount (ranging from $20 and 000 to $250 and 000) and depending on if the contestant answered right. or answered wrong. that amount would be added to or subtracted from their pot. still with me so far. in addition and there was one dancer who held something known as the killer card. if you selected the dancer with the killer card and you had gotten your question right and you were safe and and the game continued. if and however and you were incorrect and you had one final question to answer. if you got that final question wrong and you were out of the game. if you got it right and then and the game continued. there was no quitting and no walking away with the money earned until you either answered six questions correctly or got six questions wrong or you were so far in the hole you couldn not earn enough money to get back out. got it. okay. the biggest problem and as i saw it and was a complete lack of tension and because of the design of the game. a contestant could pass questions they knew they do not know and and answer many questions they did know and making the pressure even less. then and they could still find a low dollar amount and even after knowingly missing a question and which meant there still wasn not any drama. and the fact that they could answer five questions wrong and still have a chance to win was a big mistake. and the pacing of the questions was deadly slow represent often the questions were so obvious and it was ridiculous to try to create tension and as if there was any doubt about some of the most common answers. the pacing and the lack of any real tension at any point during the show and those very complicated rules prevented this program from working and despite shatner terpsichorean talents. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"unlike endemol usa two other current game shows (deal or no deal and 1 vs. 100) and the pacing in this show is way too slow for what is happening on the screen. dond and 1 vs. 100 can get away with slow pacing because the games can change pace or end at any moment. there is risk involved in every action the player takes and the rewards are wildly variable and and it is difficult for the players to leave with a significant amount of money. suspense is usually put to good use. show me the money and on the other hand and is just too slow paced. when a question is revealed and it is obvious that the player knows the correct answer and you can rest assured that absolutely nothing exciting will happen in the next few minutes. it would greatly help the pace of this show to reveal the correct answer first and and then have the player select a dancer and instead of shat wasting time talking about what will happen if the player gets an answer wrong when we all know theyre right. the random dancing is filler that actually feels like filler. too much time is wasted while not enough is happening. and the fact that players cannot choose to quit the game early guarantees that there will be a lot of time wasted. oh and and i have no interest in watching shat shake his groove thang and especially right after i have eaten dinner. i am a lifelong game show fan and but even i had a lot of trouble sitting through an hour of this. it either needs major changes or early retirement. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"there was such a hype about a game show with bill shatner. and especially right in the wake of deal or no deal and 1 vs 100. so and of course everyone had to tune in to see what all the fuss was about on the new game show. what a disappointment. as ben stein so stoically and nasally says and wooww. the only thing likable about this show was the fact that you knew it would eventually be over. sitting through a full hour of it was like going to the dentist. you find yourself looking at the clock in what you think are 10 minute intervals and only to find out that only a minute has passed (but seemed like an eternity) since you last glanced at the clock. so and why do not i just switch the channel. well and probably for the same reason most other people do not. out of sheer optimism. i mean and no one really wants to think that a show with bill shatner could actually be so bad. personally and from the first 15 minutes and i never thought this was the kind of vehicle that would showcase the talents of william shatner. my chief complaint was that the set was so dark. watching it left me feeling depressed. you kept on wanting to get ahold of a little excitement and but there was just none to be had. there was not even enough light on the set to get a feel of energy from the audience (who you couldn not even see). dear network represent people do not watch game shows to cure their insomnia. they watch game shows to be excited and have a good time. please do us all a favor and lose this in the vault. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"my wife and i are semi amused by howie mandel show. i also like shatner even when he at his most pathetic. but this is absolutely the worst show on television. please cancel this show. it sucks a. the only positive thing i can say is that the girls are hotter on this show and seem to wear less clothing than deal or no deal. the questions are a mixture of way too easy and incredibly obscure. and watching shatner or the contestant say show me the money makes me want to vomit. this one will not last. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"trying to cash in on the success of deal or no deal and 1 versus 100 comes this lame excuse for entertainment show me the money and in which 12 sexy wouldancers shimmy out in shiny red hooker attire. a contestant is given the beginning of a phrase and such as which team lost . . . with three choices and a and b and or c and each which completes the phrase. the contestant has three chances to give an answer to one of these 3 choices. the host william shatner and at his obnoxious smarmiest asks the contestant if he wants to lock into the answer and when the contestant says yes and he picks a wouldancer and to whom he yells show me the money. she opens a scroll that has an amount and and if his answer was right and he adds that amount to his winnings while if he was wrong and the amount is subtracted. (so theoretically and it is possible for a contestant on this dreary debacle to actually wind up owing shatner money. ) there is also a killer card and if the contestant picks the girl who has that vile scroll and but he has answered properly and nothing happens. if he answered wrong and the game goes into sudden death and has to answer another question. if he gets that one wrong and he leaves with nothing. before going to commercials and shatner yells and let dance and shatner and the contestant and the 12 dancers shake booty. at the end of the show and shatner asks the ladies for a last dance and they all shake it some more. i give this show 6 episodes at the very most and at which time hopefully this pathetic excuse for a game will be shown the door. (it could have been worse they could have somehow bribed cuba gooding jr to be the host and although i bet he a better dancer than shat and as they call him these days. )7/08 represent guess what i was wrong. it lasted for only 5 episodes. there is hope for the world. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"as the summary says you just made the most ignorant comment i have ever heard on an rpg. you seriously thought they were gay. are you retarded. if you went to go save your best friend and someone decides out of the goodness of his heart to help you then you are in a serious debt to that man. lavitz was a good person and each time they helped each other it made them closer as friends. they weren not gay lovers like your bitching about. and to let you know the game is set in a medieval time period. back then and women did just prepare meals while the men fought. do you even know your history. do you know how long it took for women to be accepted in the army in present day. this game contains a lot of realism even though your too damn slow obviously to catch it and and you really need to spit out some solid proof instead of ignorant assumptions based off your misguided act to interpret the story. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"man and this gets a lot of good reviews in the review books. frankly and i found it too slow and unappealing right from the start. i kept waiting for it to pick up a little steam but that never happened. this movie is vastly overrated. shakespeare and with the king james english and has never appealed to me and anyway and so it may just be me. there is a fair share of the latter in the first half of the film as they show ronald colman playing the role of othello. the good points of the film include thanks to a restored print some decent cinematography and a young and slim and attractive shelly winters. overall and this is simply too boring and too much repetition in some of the scenes to watch again. besides and we all know that most actors are nut cases and anyway and but kudos to hollywood for demonstrating it here in this story. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"ronald colman won a best actor oscar for showy performance as a popular stage thespian who completely loses himself in his roles and particularly as shakespeare othello. critically lauded george cukor film has a marvelous pedigree and having been written by the estimable team of ruth gordon and garson kanin. unfortunately and the witty banter comes off as self conscious here and and the backstage business is overripe. miklós rózsa also won an oscar for his score and and shelley winters has a few fine moments a tough waitress (when theatrical colman breathlessly addresses her and she asks him and what are ya. some kind of nut. ). otherwise and this scenario is awfully obvious and surprisingly draggy and and not very funny. half from . "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"this seems like two films represent one a dreary and pretentious lengthy saga about an ac tor who is taken over by the parts he plays while the other a brilliant social comment about a middle aged divorce who is picked up by a waitress. shelley winters is wonderful as a waitress with another business on the side. she drops heavy hints about the need for connections and her certificate in massage and her desire to get into the modelling game. i love the glimpse of her seedy flat with a kitchenette behind a curtain and and her terrible seducing outfit of navel revealing and puff sleeved crochet top. do actors get oscars for shakespeare. we know they oscars for impersonating disabled people and wearing a lot of prosthetics and or pretending to be mad. the shakespearean scenes (which go on and on) are embarrassing and dated. and so are the going mad scenes where tony looks distracted while listening to his own voice over. by the way and anthony john is not aristocratic. he makes it quite clear in an early scene that he used to be a chorus boy. when he quotes his father advice and he slips into a cockney accent. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"oh man and this s u c k e d sucked. i couldn not even get any camp value out of this. and i sat through the whole thing on showtime. don not bother waiting around for the naked scenes either. it too late and only plastic jenna jameson is involved. shows how much discretionary cash must be laying around hollywood just to get your name on the closing credits. i guess showtime had to throw something in at 1am. next time i think i would even rather be watching espn loop around every 30 minutes. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"don not get me wrong and this is a terrible and clichéd film and but it is a delight for fans of olivia hussey quite possibly the most intoxicating beauty ever to grace the silver screen. one poster stated that she was unpleasant to look at i wonder what his ideal woman looks like paris hil slut. blockbuster should really establish a sub genre to this type of film and as the fatal attraction plot has become a genre unto itself. when will blockbuster adopt the adultry section. it will fit in quite nicely between the drama and action sections and right. this film revolves around olivia hussey and who spends a night of passion with an unstable yacht owner who may have murdered his ex wife and who looks remarkably like ms. hussey. this neer do well proceeds to stalk olivia and thus make her life a living hell. i like olivia hussey and but i have no sympathy for characters in movies that cheat on their spouses and so i really wasn not rooting for olivia to make it out o this stinker alive. violence represent $$ (there is a smattering of violence in the film. don murray and anthony john denison get involved in a fisticuffs when denison says that he will not stop seeing olivia and murray wife and because she is just too good in bed. olivia also gets to handle a shooter and might get to squeeze off a round i will let you watch). nudity represent $$ (olivia is the queen of brief nudity and supplies a little here. she has a love scene with anthony john denison and also has a shower scene shot at a distance). story represent $ (we have seen this plot before a hundred times over and and oftentimes done much better. the true culprit and when trying to decipher why this film was a dud and is william riead. the man dialogue is sophomoric and moronic. the man has no story telling abilities and fails to build believable human reactions to the plot. these people and of the upper strata of society and talk like middle school kids with a habit of sleeping during english class. i have placed riead on the never to be viewed again list). acting represent $$$ (the acting wasn not phoned in as the insiders say and but was hindered a great deal by riead juvenile script. olivia hussey resorts to calling anthony jonh denison weird and crazy to his face when he begins to stalk her. hussey and who is still beautiful and delivers the best performance here but denison was equal to the task of portraying a demented and love crazed stalker. don murray was basically just there his character not fleshed out and and edward asner and a terrific actor when given something with substance and is ill used in this film). "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"the plot is plausible but banal and i. e. and beautiful and neglected wife of wealthy and powerful man has a fling with a psychotic hunk and then tries to cover it up as the psycho stalks and blackmails her. but and what develops from there is stupefyingly illogical. despite the resources that are available to the usual couple who has money and influence and our privileged hero and heroine appear to have only one domestic and their attorney and local police (who say they can do nothing) at their disposal while they grapple with suspense and terror. they have no private security staff (only a fancy security system that they mishandle) and household or grounds staff and chauffeurs and etc. not even and apparently and the funds to hire private round the clock nurses to care for the hero when he suffers life threatening injuries and leaving man and wife alone and vulnerable in their mansion. our heroine is portrayed as having the brains of a doorknob and our hero and a tycoon and behaves in the most unlikely and irrational manner. the production is an insult to viewers who wasted their time with this drivel and a crime for having wasted the talents of veteran actors oliva hussey and don murray (what were they thinking. ). and and shame on lifetime tv for insulting the intelligence of its audience for this insipid offering. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"warning represent may contain spoilers my huge problem with this movie is how totally self centered and self consumed the adulteress wife is. after having a one night stand with a slimy psycho she is being stalked by him. he calls her constantly and threatens her and even sends a video of their night together. he is obviously crazy and very dangerous. the problem is she only thinks he is dangerous to her (and exposing her secret). not for one second did she ever have one thought of concern for her husband. did she even for a moment think of him possibly being in danger from this psychotic. as soon as she realized how mental he was she should have warned her husband no matter what the consequences. maybe there do not have been a movie then but there really wasn not one anyway so what the difference. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"i really looked forward to this program for two reasons while i really liked jan michael vincent and i am an aviation nut and have a serious love affair with helicopters. i do not like this program because it takes fantasy to an unbelievable level. the world speed record for helicopters was set at 249 mph by a westland lynx several years ago. the only chopper that was ever faster was the experimental lockheed ah56a in the 1960 . it hit over 300 and was a compound helicopter and which means it had a pusher propeller at the end of its fuselage providing thrust. in short and no helicopter can fly much over 275 because of the principle of rotary wing flight. and the bell 222 and the actor that portrayed airwolf wasn not very fast even by helicopter standards. and it do not stay in production very long. there was a movie that came out during this time period called blue thunder that was much more realistic. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"i remember loving this show when i was a kid. i thought the helicopter was the coolest thing i have seen. it was ultra high tech for it time. it could repel enemy fire and do all sorts of acrobatics in the air and and take down nearly anything in it way. now i go back and watch it today and am surprised how lousy this show really is. the casts members are hardly compelling and there are a lot of cheesy moments and and the fight scenes are incredibly fake looking. and nearly every ending has the same helicopter fighting crap with the obvious reuse of grainy low quality stock footage. lot of the footages appear to date from the vietnam war era. airwolf has basically the same theme as knight rider and except the crime fighting vehicle of choice is a helicopter instead of a car. after watching a few episodes and i found myself utterly bored. i do and however and love the theme music. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"this film is roughly what it sounds like represent a futuristic version of the cinderella legend but with songs and (fairly tame) sex scenes. the film is not sure what it wants to be and pretty much ends up a mess. it more expensive looking than most of director al adamson films but it not at the same budget level that viewers have come to expect from sci fi films. the actors are pretty bad and unlike most adamson films and there are no former big namers or b actors. some of the music is ok but it easy to see why cinderella 2000 has been forgotten for so many years. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"life in some future fascist or near fascist state which severely restricts personal freedoms is a recurrent theme both in modern literature and for film makers. such works post us warnings about undesirable trends in our society to watch out for while but to be effective they must also be entertaining. unfortunately most of the books are probably more effective in posting the warnings than in entertaining us enough to become really widely read while whilst with the films the problem is usually the other way round. the first such work to become really widely known was probably george orwell 1984 (first published in 1948) and and this is still readily available both in the form of a book and as a film. watch or read it represent and then and when you are feeling a little depressed by man inhumanity to man and reach for cinderella 2000. this is a feather light low budget film comedy based on the same theme which provides effortless but unrewarding viewing while and as with 1984 the calendar has now passed beyond its erstwhile period. most of the comedy is laid on with a trowel although there are just a few genuinely funny moments. to exercise your mind in the long intervals between these you can focus it on the question of whether this film will gain a new extension of life by being released as a dvd or whether it will finally disappear into oblivion as existing tape copies deteriorate past redemption. there are many worse films appearing as dvd these days and and frankly i do not care much what happens either way. so far the best of the films of this genre has probably been the handmaiden tale and but i would very happily swap them all for a well made film of jack london towering novel the iron heel. ambitious as this would be and it still seems incredible that no modern film maker has yet dared to attempt it (imdb only lists a b or w silent version made in russia in 1919). "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"this movie is pure guano. mom always said if you can not say anything nice. but even mom would say i had to do my part to warn others of this movie. i can guarantee this is the film that geoffrey rush wishes would just go away. i would hope that greg kinnear fired his agent. from a cannon for giving him the script. after this ben stiller is probably praying for someone to pitch there still something about mary. i have always been a fan of wes studi and thank whatever you hold holy that he wore a mask through the film so maybe people would not identify the film with him. it starts of promisingly with a stylistic spoof of the cinematography of the batman films and then just loses something. like a coherent plot and half decent effects. the jokes are telegraphed an hour before the punchline comes and and even then they fall flat. if you want to see an effective spoof of the comic book world see chasing amy. run. dont walk away from mystery men. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"oh and it the movie i thought i waited too long to take out the dog. i can not believe i watched the whole thing. i guess i was optimistically anticipating that it was going to get better. horribly disjointed dialog and pathetic acting and and totally improbable events. like toby mom hanging herself in the time it takes col to walk upstairs and back down in a room with a 24 ceiling and no chairs and counters or anything around her motionlessly suspended body that she could have possibly used to climb on to do herself in. the little girl that played the daughter of the last family was the best actor in the whole movie and and the puppy of the first couple was a close second. the basic storyline has potential and with a good script and director could be a seriously creepy flick and but this version sadly is not it. i get more scared when i open my electric bill every month. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"this is not an entirely bad movie. the plot (new house built next door seems to be haunted) is not bad and the mood is creepy enough and and the acting is okay. the big problem i had is that and being familiar with lara flynn boyle (from twin peaks and other shows) and i couldn not get over how different she looks with her apparently new and big lips. i kept staring at them. they look so out of place on her face. they make her look completely different (and not better). mark paul gosselaar and the actor who plays kim the architect who designs and pours his heart and soul into the house and does a fine job. and lara (as col) is also quite good (but those lips. ) as the owner of the house next door. her husband and walker (colin ferguson) is appropriately wooden. the various characters who live in the house were also fine. i particularly liked pie (charlotte sullivan) and her husband and buddy (stephen amell) and the first people to move into the house. the attempt to involve us in the overall neighborhood vibe fails and unfortunately and as the other neighbors are not particularly likable. for some reason the director was unable to make the haunted house particularly ominous. other movies (such as amityville horror and the legend of hell house) manage to achieve that spooky feel and but it just doesn not happen here. the closest is when col paints a depiction of the house. another thing that do not work for me is the plot twist that occurs with kim and the architect. initially and he appears to be a victim of the house like the others (it has sucked him dry of inspiration) and but later he seems to have joined forces with it in evil. overall and not a bad movie for horror fans if you can take your eyes off those big lips. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"no mention if ann rivers siddons adapted the material for the house next door from her 1970s novel of the same title and or someone else did it. this lifetime like movie was directed by canadian director jeff woolnough. having read the book a long time ago and we decided to take a chance when the film showed on a cable version of what was clearly a movie made for television. you know that when the critical moments precede the commercials and which of course and one can not find in this version we watched. the film star is lara flynn boyle who sports a new look that threw this viewer a curve because of the cosmetic transformation this actress has gone through. from the new eyebrows to other parts of her body and ms. boyle is hardly recognizable as col kennedy and the character at the center of the mystery. this was not one of the actress better moments in front of the camera. that goes for the rest of the mainly canadian actors that deserved better. the film has a feeling of a cross between desperate houswives with the stepford wives and other better known features and combined with a mild dose of creepiness. the best thing about the movie was the house which serves as the setting. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"the cast is ok. the script is awkward at times and and it takes a while to figure out what the point of the movie is. i found myself looking forward to doing the dishes. the shehan bit is a cheesy statement on the war. i guess we were supposed to not notice it. we did. its a house and you did nothing more than kill forty five minutes. the shower part. huh. what was that about. literally and it is i have a client and ok you can use our shower. yawn. the angles are trying way to hard. there was a set of woods and suddenly its gone cause you can see right through and then next it is deep and animals are dying. in the end this is a horrendous movie of boring proportions. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"it would help to know why it took so long for a book as movie ready as the house next door to be adapted for film or television. the book was copyrighted in 1978. one reason could be problems designing the house. the house in this lifetime film is really so ugly that i can not imagine anyone buying it. in fact it so ugly that someone would probably have come and destroyed it as soon as it was built. i am not crazy about horror genre books and but this one was hard to put down when i came across it around ten years ago. the main characters are not the kind of people to look for anything occult in life and and this is one of the book strengths. they are not people who would conclude that the architect was some type of demon. (or the devil personified) without witnessing and analyzing the events described so well in the book. however and it is a downbeat book for the most part and and i do not think that appeals to the people who run lifetime. maybe someone will come up with another version of the book in years to come. a better house. better music. a better screenplay and darker lighting. would certainly help. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"not that i was really surprised. movies are never as good as the books that they originated from. i was looking forward to seeing this movie because this is one of my favorite books and even though i knew it would probably suck. i was hoping to be pleasantly surprised. however and they strayed from the book storyline too much and and the movie version did not convey how horrible this house really was. ending was different too. lara flynn boyle looked terrible due to some really bad cosmetic surgery. the acting was unremarkable at best. perhaps if a theatrical version was made so that they do not have to stay so much in lifetime made for tv movie box and it would be a better flick. if you saw this movie i highly encourage you to track down the book and read it. i doubt you will be disappointed and hope you enjoy it as much as i do every time i read it. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"i read the book a long time back and do not specifically remember the plot but do remember that i enjoyed it. since i am home sick on the couch it seemed like a good idea and hey . it is a lifetime movie. the movie is populated with grade b actors and actresses. the female cast is right out of desperate housewives. i have never seen the show but there are lots of commercials for the show and i get the gist. is there nothing original anymore. sure and but not on lifetime. the male cast are all fairly effeminate looking and acting but the girls need to have husbands i suppose. in one scene a female is struggling with a male and for her life and and what does she do. kicks him in the testicles. what else. women love that but let me tell you girls something. it not as easy as it always made to look. it wasn not all bad. i did get the chills a time or two so i have to credit someone with that. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"for all its visual delights and how much better renaissance would have been in live action. the animation is fantastic in the big picture and yes and but the characters are cold and hollow and much like the story and the style of this film. with real actors and perhaps the world of the film would not have felt so lifeless. there is much to admire here and but at the end i found that all i could do was admire. i did not enjoy the movie that much and and it clarifies something that i did not see before represent that the visual elements can be the defining positive aspect of a film and but without a good story and strong characters and it can all be for nothing. i will not go so far as to say that this movie comes to nothing and but sometimes it comes dangerously close. i love dark sci fi thrillers. blade runner and dark city are two films i thought were wonderful. but blade runner had its tragic villain and dark city had its thought provoking story arc. renaissance has shadow and light and but little else. i wish i could have liked this movie more and but the weak story and the empty characters stood in the way of that. the renaissance was a historical and artistic burst of color and life. how ironic and then and that one of the most bleak and lifeless movies i have seen this year takes its title from the renaissance. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"a shaky hand held camera was used and presumably to give the film a documentary look and but the effect was so exaggerated that i started to get motion sickness just from watching it. it looked like someone with cerebral palsy was holding the camera (no offense meant to cp sufferers and but i do not think you would expect to get much work as a cinematographer. ) the camera work was so nauseating and and so distracting and that my wife and i considered it unwatchable and gave up on it after 10 minutes of torture. i checked back a while later (it was showing on tv) and and it hadn not gotten any better. i suggest giving this one a miss unless you need to get rid of any bad sushi you may have eaten. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"why were there so many people crowding into an evening showing of roberto moreira up against them all (contra todos) at the san francisco film festival. it about a hit man and my friend said. well. . . and it brazilian and i added. beautiful multicolored people and tropical weather and lush rhythms and and a hip gangster plot. ample enticements no doubt. somebody forgot to tell us one little detail represent this is a very bad movie and really pretty horrible and and as unpleasant to watch as it is poorly made. so how on earth did contra todos get to make the rounds of berlin and melbourne and london and manila and stockholm and cairo and chicago and numerous smaller local festivals and and now san francisco. apparently and because of the way the promotional process and the film festival circuit work. first of all and it won first prize at the rio film festival where it was called the best brazilian movie of the year. it must have been a bad year while they have had much and much better ones. next and snappy synopses in catalogs plus imaginary buzz lead to crowded auditoriums and since the movie isn not featured anywhere and so avoids close scrutiny by critics it keeps going the rounds. festival blurbs aimed at promotion sometimes goose it up a lot. a chicago festival one called contra todos a speedball cocktail shot straight out of brazil and referred to claudia s boyfriend as the stud of the slum like neighborhood. soninha is teodoro nymph like teen aged daughter of burgeoning sexuality. the movie is shot with the urgency of a frequently hand held camera and the director works up a genuine and palpable sense of frustration borne from domestic desperation and decay. the effect is unbearably raw and honest and and the movie hurtles toward a conclusion as dead ended as the lives on display. not the best writing and but it sure pumps up the excitement for a certain kind of potential viewer. contra todos does concern a hit man and two hit men actually and and a wife and daughter and a born again christian girlfriend. it shot in execrably ugly digital video with no talent behind the camera work mostly in a barren looking poor suburb rather than in one of the teeming favelas or village like brazilian city slums where such wonderful films as black orpheus and pixote and and city of god were made and and not in rio this time and but são paulo. the hit man with family problems is teodoro ( giulio lopez) and his partner with a drug problem is waldomiro (ailtan graça). both actors have a little tv experience as does the actress who plays teodoro sluttish blonde wife cláudia (leona cavalli) and silvia lorenço who plays his pouting and ready to revolt daughter soninha. these actors might make it through the back corners of a few telenovelas. who knows. in a better directed film they might even be good. aside from them there are some young men who get bumped off by teordoro or and when he busy and gangs of thugs. the principals do not work up much presence and even though the camera magnifies their pores. a couple of observers and one at the berlin festival and one at london and did see this movie failings but alas theyre buried in the web hinterlands. henry sheehan noted from berlin that the film (his quotes) was the worst of the video works shown. the filmmaker seems to have chosen video simply because it was a cheap alternative to film and sheehan wrote and and hasn not made any creative use of the new medium nor and he adds and done anything else creative. sheehan pointed out the movie first big mistake represent it starts off as a domestic drama that supposed to ratchet up when and half an hour into the action and moreira reveals that the father and one of his friends are professional hit men. waiting the thirty minutes adds nothing to the movie while it seems like a perfectly arbitrary decision and is and at the very least and a waste of time. but ratcheting up is all moreira ever does and like a little kid who gotten a tool kit for his birthday and and goes around banging everything in sight without rhyme and reason or skill. devastating and but true. writing about the 2004 london festival for kamera. com and metin alsanjak tried to look at the positive side but nonetheless gave away the lack of redeeming features in calling the performances easily the film best feature. yes and very easily and given that everything else is so bad. alsanjak admitted that this low budget and violent and seedy account of the lawless in sao paulo is devoid of any likable characters and and as a result and of hope. too dark and cynical to be a telling account of the human condition and the film is not helped by poor subtitling. . alsanjak connecting contra todos to dogme and mike leigh do not help matters. apart from that meaningless first half hour in which nothing redeems the boredom of our wait for the first acts of violence which and when they come and are just banging everything in sight without rhyme and reason or skill moreira clumsily tries to redeem his abrupt finale by adding what appear to be outtakes right after it and followed by an implausible ironic concluding scene where one of the characters gets married. no doubt the director wanted to exhibit the banality of evil of low level hit men in working class neighborhoods and but he can not make the characters and which he sees generically and come alive for us. and the structure of the film shows that he also can not edit his material. (seen at the san francisco international film festival on april 28 and 2005. ). "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"i found the pace to be glacial and the original story blown way out of proportion to the content. my wife slept through most of it and i did not try to wake her because i felt she was not missing anything. when holmes and watson enter the house and then are potentially caught and it is unclear how they could hide all of their entry and burglary tools so quickly. it is also unclear how the door to the study is locked and preventing the servants from getting in. the thing that puzzled me was right at the end when there was a glint in the eye of the broken statute. i have no clue what this was supposed to represent. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"at the end of this episode holmes asks watson not to record the case for posterity. for a good reason. the super sleuth left his little grey cells(sorry agatha)at home for this tale. there is no deductive reasoning and no acute analysis of signs at crime scenes. holmes bumbles along fifty yards behind the plot. the dastardly cam is finally dealt to by an old frail in a manner that would have made charles bronson heart swell with pride six bullets in the breadbasket. in an ensuing chase a pursuer gets hold of one of watson shoes. mercifully the writer do not decide to tack on the story of cinderella to lengthen the film. the murderess and holmes and watson and escape scot free. oh well and it is a bit of a change of pace in late victorian london. a bit of sixgun law represent ). "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"my roommate got the no and no and nanette soundtrack as a dub on a tape and she proceeded to listen to it non stop. after it finally totally brainwashed me into submission and i found the songs to be irresistible and especially the famous and i want to be happy and but i can not be happy. but of coarse from the soundtrack i had no idea what the film was about. so the other day i saw a copy of it at the video store and i rented what was supposed to be a long lost version of the film. i was thinking that it was going to be amazing and because the soundtrack is so cute. unfortunately most of the songs that i loved were nowhere to be found in the video i saw. now i have never seen the 1930 version of the musical but this version was sadly disappointing because there was very little singing and practically no dancing and beside that the sound was really bad through out and you couldn not really understand what people were saying a lot of the time. really the only highlights of this film were the outrageous 1940 fashion. nanette wears this crazy hat with two feathers that stick out like rabbit ears and kansas kitty has this bizarre feather muff that she keeps on her fore arm and then has herself wrapped in this net scarf. the one dance sequence is a little weird too with nanette doing this weird ballet stuff with pin up girl imagery superimposed on top of her. actually one more bright spot of the film was the artist guillespe who dreams of being a fine artist but it currently condemned to drawing pin up girls for money. i like how guillespe keeps it old school and and disses nanette when his masterpiece and the piece that was to make his career and is sold by nanette for a paltry $5250. doesn not she realize that that piece was his immortality. silly rabbit or girl with your feather rabbit ears on your hat. when will you learn. why doesn not he just pencil in a cigarette before the ad men take the work away. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"this version is likely available at your local dollar store on dvd. the print is not great and nor is the sound and but if you have $1. 00 and 90 or so minutes to spare and you will get your money worth (which is not saying an awful lot). anna neagle is extremely vapid as nanette. whatever her charms may have been back in the day and they are not evident in this film. a great number of fine character actors appear in this film (helen broderick and zasu pitts and even arden) and but the material falls remarkably short of their talents. still and it is interesting to see how such accomplished performers make the most of the weak writing. the musical numbers (there are really only two) are quite horrible. clearly the studio did not feel compelled to cash in on the rich musicality of the original no and no and nanette. for what it worth and the dvd can be had for $1. 00. it worth that much just to say you have seen it. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"this sad little film bears little similarity to the 1971 broadway revival that was such a nostalgic hit. keep in mind that when burt shevelove directed that revival and he rewrote the book extensively. i have a feeling that this screenwriter wrought as much of a change from the original 1925 version as well. i played the innocent philanderer jimmy smith on stage in 1974 and and thought this $1 dvd would bring back memories. not a chance. even the anticipated delight of seeing topper roland young play amy part was a major disappointment. three songs from the play remain and and are done very poorly. even the classic duet and tea for two and is done as a virtual solo. the many familiar faces in this 1940 fiasco do not do themselves proud at all and and the star and anna neagle and just embarrasses herself. when i feel gypped by spending a dollar and i know the film must be bad. another commentator mentioned the doris day version and which is actually called tea for two and is about doing the stage play (the original and of course) and so those who are seeking the true no no nanette might find a more recognizable version there. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"well i just paid a dollar for a dvd of this movie and and it wasn not even worth that. it seems to be from a poor print and is in the public domain and i am guessing. neagle despite her glory and awards and and reputation is a homely british gal who can not sing or dance or act. some of the fine old hollywood character actors on display here must have thought they were doing a classic. director herbert wilcox (neagle husband) always thought anna was the most exciting and talented femme on the screen. he was mistaken. she was improbably popular in britain before and after wwii. her serious roles are even more ludicrous than her musical appearance here. only a couple of the famous songs are included and neither one is well presented. skip this one and find the one that stars doris day. at least you get some real comedy and professional style dancing. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"this film and originally released at christmas and 1940 and was long thought lost. a very poor copy has resurfaced and made into a cd and now for sale. don not buy it. the film is unspeakably terrible. the casting is poor and the script is awful and and the directing is dreadful. picture roland young singing and dancing. and that was the highlight. perhaps this movie was lost deliberately. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"franco rossi 1985 six hour italian mini series of quo vadis is a very curious beast and creating an absolutely convincing ancient roman world shot in matter of fact fashion (very few long shots and no big cityscapes) and but playing the drama down so much in favour of allusions to classical literature and history that the story constantly gets lost in the background. the shifting structure (much of episode one is played out via voice over letters) and lack of narrative urgency makes the full six hour version simultaneously demanding and undemanding and and certainly far too often uninvolving and but it has something going for it. the two main strengths are the characterisation of petronius (a thankfully dubbed frederic forrest and whose own voice would almost certainly flatten his dialogue) as a man whose spent so long looking for an astute angle to survive court life that he become incapable of experiencing emotion and and klaus maria brandauer unique take on nero as a wannabe actor whose every move and action is calculated on how his audience will receive it. elsewhere and max von sydow briefly appears in a few episodes and being rewarded with the show most impressive and genuinely moving scene here he encounters a child as he attempts to leave rome. it the kind of thing the show could do with more of and but it seems all too often to flatten every potentially emotional and inspiring or exciting moment under it relentlessly low key direction. unfortunately francesco quinn makes a staggeringly anonymous hero and blending in with the walls and coming over less as a roman officer than that quiet and slightly gormless but inoffensive guy who works in the same office as you who never says much at office parties you know and the one who you think is called dave or something like that. the budgetary limitations are very visible once its meet the lions time for the christians and ursus battle with the bull is so determinedly low key that it just passes over you before the show just abruptly loses interest and suddenly ends. not a trip i can particularly recommend and i am afraid and but if you do embark on it it one not entirely without its small rewards. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"don not let the name of this film deceive you and in reality jake speed the character is quite possibly the laziest action hero ever known to film. when jake speed is not saving virgin girls from evil madmen and which he is often not and he seriously relaxing. perhaps this adds to his charm and but in my opinion an action hero is not suppose to chill out whenever he gets the chance. furthermore and unlike other daring heros who usually have an impressive list of talents and this man has none and unless of course you call sleeping a talent. anyhow and this movie is basically worthless and the writing is sub par and the action and when there is some and is very lame. (the machine guns on the jeep weren not bad and but that about it) so and if youre in the mood to watch a movie that is a cure for insomnia and then this piece is perfect for you it has a hero that not only puts himself to sleep and but also his audience. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"so what the big fuss out of making an indiana jones wannabe when you have an actor who cast as a fictional dude from adventure storybooks who doesn not want to go out on an adventure. whoever wrote the script for jake speed was probably fired and but for whatever reasons possible and this movie greatly lacks in excitement. that doesn not mean it has no action and but look on the dark side of the picture. this has got to bare no resemblance to indiana jones or other action adventure thrills containing cliffhangers and narrow escapes and and jake speed was promoted that way using clever propaganda to make me and several others interested in it. besides and i have never heard of the guy and so who needs his attention. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"this could be a strong candidate for the worst flick ever. perhaps without the presence of john hurt and it could be tolerated as a kid film. however and the tragedy of this entire endeavor and is that john hurt and one of the screen greatest actors and diminishes himself in this. i gave it two points just because mr. hurt showed up. i take away 8 points and because he do not run from it fast enough. as far as the rest of the cast and they are and simply and terrible. janine turner and as pretty as she might be and cannot act to save her soul. and the lead actor is and for all intents and purposes and awful. if you can spare yourself this embarrassment and please do so. it so bad and it almost hurts. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"i would have liked to give this movie a zero but that wasn not an option. this movie sucks. the women cannot act. i should have known it was gonna suck when i saw bobby brown. nobody in my house could believe i hadn not changed the channel after the first 15 minutes. the idea of black females as gunslingers in the western days is ridiculous. it not just a race thing and it also a gender. the combination of the two things is ridiculous. i am sorry because some of the people in the movie aren not bad actors or actresses but the movie itself was awful. it was not credible as a movie. it might be entertaining to a certain group of people but i am not in that group. lol. and using a great line from a great and great movie. that all i have to say about that. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"alright and i got passed the horrible acting. i got passed the fact that lil kim was blasting some cannons and her arms or hands weren not moving and i got passed the weaves and i got passed the colored contacts. this is what killed it for me represent in the scene where the four roses were sitting at the table arguing. lisa raye and monica calhoun stand up and and and then lil kim gets up to break up any hostilities by saying and whoa and whoa and whoa and hold up. let chill out here for a hot second. i am a fan of the western movie genre and and i never heard anyone talk slang like this in any of clint eastwood movies. if anyone thinks this movie deserves over a 1 rating and please tell me another movie that worse than gang of roses. i am through. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"this was an excellent idea and the scenery was beautiful but that where it ends. it seemed like a lackluster set it off meets the west. the plot barely made any sense. there were so many characters and not enough time to develop their personalities. there were too may unnecessary things going on that do not pertain to the plot nor did it help further the story along. there were also long blank moments where the plot could have been explored but was used for silence or unnecessary conversations. the script should have made more sense as well as the directing. i had a huge question mark on my head watching this movie. but the casting was great in my opinion. if youre only watching for eye candy then this is the movie for you. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"must have to agree with the other reviewer. this has got to be the worst movie and let alone western i have ever seen. terrible acting and dialogue that was unimaginative and pathetic (let alone completely inappropriate for supposedly being in the 1800s) and and oh and did i mention a battery pack prominently displayed on the back of one of the characters. i was waiting for the boom mike to fall in the middle of a scene. and the ending. the least i can say is that it was consistent with the rest of the movie. completely awful. and yes and it did contain every cliché in the book from the slow walk down the empty dusty road to the laughable let remember when shots when a main character dies. luckily i saw this on free tv. don not waste your time. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"the costumes and the dialog and historical accuracy are terrible. for instance and stacey dash and the hanging scene. the noose was accurate ( as for as i could tell) and but that type of noose broke the person neck. ms. dash is left hanging at the end of the rope with no ill effects until the rope was shot. this type of not did not strangle the person and it killed them at the end of the drop. and right before they go in to rob a bank (in a flashback) and they pause on the street for a group hug with their bandannas hiding their faces that would have been obvious to people on the street. the poor editing that is a battery pack under that shirt and it is obvious and the clip of the long ride shows them riding along and then reverses the film. i did like the fact that they kept the scene with the horse taking a crap it seemed symbolic. the entire movie was crap. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"an absolute steaming pile of cow dung. it mind blowing to me that this film was even made. hip hop and old westerns just do not seem to mix. what target audience were these people thinking of when planning this trainwreck. not only is the concept and plot a joke and but the acting is atrocious and the fact that some decent actors were even in this nightmare of a film makes their entire careers a laughing stock. the chick from clueless should never be forgiven and she is stripped of any remaining dignity she had. after reading the first ten pages of dialogue she should have been asking which one of her friends was playing this sick joke. after some research and i actually found a list of some other actors who passed on this film represent jada pinkett smith and denzel washington and brandy and monique and kim kardasian and jenna jameson and oprah and and finally marge simpson. simply put and i would rather stare at a blank tv than watch this movie again. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"oh and come on people give this film a break. the one thing i liked about it was. sorry and still thinking. oh yeah. when john wayne came and shot up the the bad guys. oh and sorry and wrong movie and i was thinking of a better quality film. let me see now and i am still trying to defend it. oh yeah and the chick that was from clueless was in it. don not put down stacy dash. i mean and we all make mistakes. but boy and stacy and you made a dooooosie. hey and one thing that has never been done in a western and even an all female cast and they actually hung a woman from the gallows. that might be a western first. even though her neck should have been broken and she survived the ordeal and still and you have got to give the director some effort for trying a western first. also and i have never seen a woman lynched from a horse in any western and although that do not happen in this movie and i just thought i would give the director another idea for gang of roses#2 and which should be made right after ed wood bride of the monster #2. maybe that was what the makers of this film were going for. orginality and especially with an all african woman cast and an oriental cowgirl. heeey and if the makers of gang of roses want to make a sequel to this mess and you could have such slang like and hey and do not you be takin about my homegirls and talk to the hand and baby and talk to the hand. you could also have a surfer dude type deputy marshal that says things like and that gunfight was totally rad man and totally. you know things like that. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"who. what. where. when. why. the acting was terrible. very robotic and rehearsed. i have seen all of the actors in this film in better roles. the screenplay was very elementary. by the end of this film and the story line was tied up. and jeane claude lamarre should be tied up and too. so that he never attempts to write or direct another film. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"sistas in da hood. looking for revenge and bling bling. except da hood is a wild west town in the late 1800s. i do not remember any westerns like this when i was growing up. what would randolph scott say. if he saw lil kim and he might say and alright. i have to admit that i tuned into this just to see her. bare midriffs and low cut blouses are not the staple of the usual cowboy flick and but these are the cowgirls and and they are fine. now and do not go looking for any major story here and and the usual stuff of ghetto crime drama are here in a different setting. and and when the last time you heard john wayne call someone and dawg. and and i do not remember the earp brothers hugging and kissing before they marched to the ok corral. i watch this on bet and so i missed the action that got it an r rating and but i doubt if i will buy the dvd to see it unless i can be assured it was lil kim in that action. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"i should have known when i looked at the box in the video store and saw lisa raye to me and she the female ernie hudson a. k. a. le kiss of death for any movie. its almost guaranteed the movie will be bad (e. g. congo)if hudson is in it (with the exception of the ghostbusters films and which were intentionally campy and bad). despite my instincts and and the fact that i just saw civil brand and yet another cinematic tour de force starring lisa raye and i rented it anyway. after all and i ignored my hudson instinct on oz and ended up watching a very quality series so i figured i would give this movie a chance. if you are a lover of bad movies and this is a definite must see. this has got to be the most unintentionally funny movie i have seen in a loooong time. the plot is fairly straightforward represent racheal (monica calhoun) sister is killed by a band of brigands (led by bobby brown. ) and and like many an action movie before this and she straps on her guns one last time and vows to avenge her sisters death. to do this and she reassembles the titular gang of roses (supposedly based on a true story of a female gang) and they go out and exact revenge and and along the way and there some subplot or something or other about some gold that might be buried in the town. one nice thing i will say about this movie is that from what i could tell and the stars did their own riding and they looked great galloping. the funniest (albiet unintentionally funny) scenes. look for when they introduce stacy dash character or when calhoun character rescinds her vow not to strap on her guns (replete with a clenched fisted cry to the heavens) or lil kim character joking with lisa raye character or stacy dash character being killed or lil kim character convincing lisa raye character to rejoin the gang or the asian chick or macy grey character talking bout the debt is paid and etc. with the exception of calhoun racheal and bobby brown left eye and i can not even remember the names of the other characters cuz i was laughing so hard when they were introduced. if the director had gone for parody and broad comedy this would have been a great movie. unfortunately and he tries to take it seriously seemingly without first taking exposition and sound design (in his defense and hip hop is notoriously difficult to work into a period piece) and set design and script writing nor period historical research (was it me and or were these the cleanest people with the whitest teeth in the old west. ) seriously. usually when i see a movie that not so good and i ask myself could you have done any better. this is the first time in a long time where the answer is an unequivocal yes. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"hmm and hip hop music to a period western. modern phrases like cool and too many others to keep track of. the sistahs are in tha house. french manicured nails on hard riding girls. microphone packs clearly visible on lil kim back. i just can not go on with the litany of errors made by the director and editors. the acting isn not as bad as i have ever seen. the women did well enough with a poor script. it was weird hearing louis mandylor speaking in his native accent. the girls are beautiful. the costumes fabulous albeit completely incorrect. i just can not believe they would dumb down what could have been a great story. i would feel offended to believe that this movie was loaded with such trappings that it would play well in the inner city. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"pathetic is the word. bad acting and pathetic script and cheezy dialog and hip hop music and fashion. what the hell was up with that. the directer of this movie acts as bad as the movie he made. if someone would have taken some time and effort to rework the whole thing and it may of had a chance. bet the studios are still trying figure out how they could screw up up so badly. the absolute best thing about this movie was stacey dash. the asian chick wasn not too bad neither. these too gals carried the whole movie. if it weren not for them i would have destroyed my copy of this movie. if any of those who have not seen this yet and had a notion to and do not waste your time. you will only regret it later. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"wait and do not tell me. they threw out the movie and kept the out takes. you know and this movie could have been shot in a back alley in new york. the gangster bangster i guess. gangster rap and designer gangster duster clothes including the kerchief which somehow got moved from the neck for protection from the dust storms to the head. i guess it was to protect the head from the heat filtering through the k mart hats. budget rent a horsie and it seems and supplied the horsies. the one bedroom scene where the girl was talking and the guy was mouthing her words. i though it was him talking. you know and watching this movie just confirms that and it isn not about the acting anymore. its about looks and it about the money. couldn not have been too much of that where this movie is concerned. well and all in all and i think that this movie will go down as the all time worst movie ever made. just one more thing though and where was ice t. did he finally get to go on oprah. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"how is it possible that a movie this bad can be made. bad acting. bad script. just an embarrassment all around. this is just one bad cliché after another. this movie actually has some big name stars in it. unfortunately theyre singers and not actors. this movie made hardly any money for a good reason. the appeal of black cowboy movies just isn not there. it a shame they do not have a good story to tell. this movie actually has some big name stars in it. unfortunately theyre singers and not actors. this movie made hardly any money for a good reason. the appeal of black cowboy movies just isn not there. it a shame they do not have a good story to tell. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"to be completely honest and i haven not seen that many western films but i have seen enough to know what a good one is. this by far the worst western on the planet today. first off there black people in the wild west. come on. who ever thought that this could be a cool off the wall movie that everyone would love were slightly and no no and completely retarded. secondly in that day and age women especially black women were not prone to be carrying and or using guns. thirdly whats with the asian chick speaking perfect english. if the setting is western and asia isn not where your going. finally and the evil gay chick was too much the movie was just crap from the beginning. now do not get me wrong i am not racist or white either so do not get ticked after reading this but this movie and this movie is the worst presentation of black people i have ever seen. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"some people have made a point of dissing this movie because they question the plausibility of black people in the old west and asian people in the old west or women with guns in the old west period. get a grip and read a book. there were quite a few asians (chinese) and there were quite a few blacks (freedmen) and everybody outside of the gentile class had ready access to guns while it is the second amendment you know. and as far as the use of modern language goes and none of those westerns people have waxed nostalgic about actually used language that was consistent with the era depicted. americans had different accents and used different inflections and spoke at a very different pace and used plenty of words and phrases that would be unrecognizable today. don not blame historical inaccuracy for the fact that you just do not dig it. be honest. maybe youre just uncomfortable with what youre seeing. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"mario van peebles pops up for less than a five second cameo. glenn plummer shows up a little longer but its a ladies show all the way. stacey dash and lisa raye have been in better projects. bobby brown leers and mugs through his little time on screen. this is how it was pitched. five tough women shootin and lovin in the wild wild west. four black and one asian. oh and lil kim is a tough talking heartbreaker and marie matiko can bring in the pacific rim market. we can shoot it for less than 15 million. straight to video and we will double but more likely triple our dollars. greenlight that puppy. you got it boss. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"this really doesn not do the blues justice. it starts out badly with images from the voyager probe and blind willie mctell (or was it blind lemon jefferson. someone blind anyway) apparently narrating from outer space (. ) and telling us the life stories of various blues musicians. corny as it is and this might be the visually most interesting part of this documentary. afterwards the only thing to see is actors incompetently mouthing the classic tunes and filmed in fake 20s black and white intercut with the likes of beck and shemekia copeland raping the same songs afterwards. this is a good device to show us why the old blues greats were really so great and but it doesn not make for compelling viewing. there is hardly anything in here that could justify making it a film and not a radio play. nobody should be forced to see these badly done reenactments. it a shame for wenders and scorsese and especially for the blues. avoid at all costs. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"this film is deeply disappointing. not only that wenders only displays a very limited musical spectrum of blues and it is his subjective and personal interest in parts of the music he brings on film that make watching and listening absolutely boring. the only highlight of the movie is the interview of a swedish couple who were befriended with j. b. lenoir and show their private video footage as well as tell stories. wenders introduction of the filmic topic starts off quite interestingly alluding to world culture (or actually and american culture) traveling in space and but his limited looks on the theme as well as the neither funny nor utterly fascinating reproduction of stories from the 30s renders this movie as a mere sleeping aid. yawn. i had expected more of him. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"watching this film for the action is rather a waste of time and because the figureheads on the ships act better than the humans. it a mercy that anthony quinn couldn not persuade anyone else to let him direct any other films after this turkey. but it is filled with amusement value and since yul brynner has hair and lorne greene displays an unconvincing french accent and and the rest of the big names strut about in comic book fashion. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"just saw this film and i must say that although there was shown in the beginning some effort to produce a decent film and this was absolutely horrible but not in the sense that was intended i am sure. it was like a child was directing this insult to intelligence with the belief that all would be viewers are morons or extremely hard up for entertainment or both. thank god for fast forward. i can not imagine the type of viewer the producer had in mind when making this film. i mean and you have actors trying to be serious and albeit barely and and a script that cries for a total rewrite and . i just can not say anymore. if harlequin romance decided to do horror films and this would be a good effort. if you found this movie to be entertaining and then i strongly suggest that you seek out some guidance as to the purpose of movies. there is much better fare out there. join a club and read reviews and but above all and avoid crap like this. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Please analyze the following IMDB review:
"the tooth fairy is set in a small town somewhere in northern california where peter campbell (lochlyn munro) has brought a farming property which he is renovating and planning to turn into a holiday inn and he is joined by his girlfriend darcy wagner (chandra west) and her young 12 year old daughter pamela (nicole munoz) who arrive to help for the weekend. while exploring the property pamela meets another young girl named emma (jianna ballard) who warns her that evil lurks within her new home and she tells a tale of an evil old witch known as the tooth fairy who takes baby teeth from children and then kills them. pamela is worried and becomes even more so when she falls off her bike and her last baby tooth falls out and it not long before the evil ghost of the tooth fairy has her eyes on pamela tooth and just for kicks she also decides to kill anyone she comes across. directed by chuck bowman i thought the tooth fairy was just another poor straight to video low budget horror film that fails to distinguish itself from the countless other which litter video shop shelves and fill late night obscure cable tv schedules and basically it not very good. the script by producer stephen j. cannell and corey strode and cookie rae brown is a complete snooze fest for the first 40 odd minutes and nothing of any great interest happen during this period at all and is basically dull exposition as if this stuff was going to surprise anyone. it introduces the character and sets the tooth fairy legend up and that it. the second half of the film improves slightly but even then it hardly spectacular stuff and there are a few decent set piece gore scenes but apart from that it all very predictable and forgettable stuff. the character aren not great and most of them are there purely to be killed off and the story has inconsistencies like the story of the tooth fairy herself and it says she kills children after they give her their baby teeth so why does she go on an indiscriminate killing spree that has nothing to do with teeth. what happened to her after the prologue set during 1949. why has she come back as a ghost. despite being a ghost of some sort she seems very human having to open doors herself and using weapons to kill people and there is no attempt to make any use of the supernatural elements except the ghostly children who are played for maximum sentiment. director bowman does ok and it reasonably well made and there are a couple of half decent scenes but nothing to get that excited about. there nothing i would describe as scary or atmospheric in here and do not take any notice of the comparisons between this and darkness falls (2003) as besides the teeth thing theyre quite different. the gore is ok and someone is shoved into a wood chipping machine and there a decapitation and someone has their penis chopped off and the best scene when someone is nailed to a door and then has their stomach hacked open with an axe and their guts slide out. with a supposed budget of about $1 and 500 and 000 the tooth fairy is generally well made but there nothing special on show here. the acting isn not anything great but it not too bad and unusually i do not find the child actors that annoying so that something i suppose. the tooth fairy is the usual just below average low budget modern straight to video horror fare that seems everywhere these days and if you can find a cheap copy then it might pass 90 odd minutes if your not too demanding otherwise it pretty poor and forgettable stuff. "
You might take into account that star ratings and expressions like "xx out of" or "/10" are very important. Generally, ratings greater than half are considered positive(This label may not exist, so it's not necessary). If the sentiment of the review is positive, reply with 1; if the sentiment of the review is negative, reply with 0. Do not provide any additional comments, just reply with 1 or 0.
| 0 | 1 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.