text large_string | label int64 | split large_string | FILE_NAME large_string | projection_x float32 | projection_y float32 | __neighbors dict | __row_index__ int64 | __index_level_0__ int64 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Dumb is as dumb does, in this thoroughly uninteresting, supposed black comedy. Essentially what starts out as Chris Klein trying to maintain a low profile, eventually morphs into an uninspired version of "The Three Amigos", only without any laughs. In order for black comedy to work, it must be outrageous, which "Play Dead" is not. In order for black comedy to work, it cannot be mean spirited, which "Play Dead" is. What "Play Dead" really is, is a town full of nut jobs. Fred Dunst does however do a pretty fair imitation of Billy Bob Thornton's character from "A Simple Plan", while Jake Busey does a pretty fair imitation of, well, Jake Busey. - MERK | 0 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 2.466311 | 5.177471 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.5069484638574777,
0.5559847933140889,
0.5703762742701382,
0.5732409792448585,
0.5735516734683066,
0.5794722616501453,
0.5844383952353756,
0.5866588626832334,
0.588621844663053,
0.6037158837061478,
0.6077286377134766,
0.6088310152464576,
0.6096087518826709,
0.6115488065462045
],
"ids": [
0,
144,
157,
5,
77,
135,
176,
29,
44,
69,
27,
149,
96,
34,
17
]
} | 0 | 6,868 |
I dug out from my garage some old musicals and this is another one of my favorites. It was written by Jay Alan Lerner and directed by Vincent Minelli. It won two Academy Awards for Best Picture of 1951 and Best Screenplay. The story of an American painter in Paris who tries to make it big. Nina Foch is a sophisticated lady of means and is very interested in helping him, but soon finds she loves the guy. Meanwhile Gene Kelly falls for lovely damsel, Leslie Caron. His main dancing partner, and I must say they are fantastic together on the floor and otherwise. Famous French singer Georges Guietary sings, too. So if you like good smooth dancing and fun filled scenes filled with Oscar Levant's nimble piano fingers, the songs of George Gershwyn will live on forever in this colorful gem. 8/10 | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 3.165163 | 5.015013 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.5833371025661866,
0.5952166367806331,
0.6078847735213252,
0.6107675055043618,
0.6279487909155699,
0.6317837754491473,
0.6404912588949356,
0.6531969545506697,
0.6573786970419733,
0.6600892797735668,
0.6612200743353195,
0.6635509385060656,
0.6654465862067426,
0.6765420983716979
],
"ids": [
1,
42,
82,
144,
124,
126,
49,
5,
35,
199,
29,
85,
64,
185,
105
]
} | 1 | 24,016 |
After watching this movie I was honestly disappointed - not because of the actors, story or directing - I was disappointed by this film advertisements.<br /><br />The trailers were suggesting that the battalion "have chosen the third way out" other than surrender or die (Polish infos were even misguiding that they had the choice between being killed by own artillery or German guns, they even translated the title wrong as "misplaced battalion"). This have tickled the right spot and I bought the movie.<br /><br />The disappointment started when I realized that the third way is to just sit down and count dead bodies followed by sitting down and counting dead bodies... Then I began to think "hey, this story can't be that simple... I bet this clever officer will find some cunning way to save what left of his troops". Well, he didn't, they were just sitting and waiting for something to happen. And so was I.<br /><br />The story was based on real events of World War I, so the writers couldn't make much use of their imagination, but even thought I found this movie really unchallenging and even a little bit boring. And as I wrote in the first place - it isn't fault of actors, writers or director - their marketing people have raised my expectations high above the level that this movie could cope with. | 0 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | -0.349735 | 4.16744 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.4103355271483623,
0.41992957234916883,
0.42359422944035385,
0.44782764588466006,
0.4592338744472181,
0.4703396496702571,
0.5011244790858732,
0.5055143894866847,
0.5134713457278035,
0.5192597269001644,
0.521749039139735,
0.5227212120227009,
0.5285700384820152,
0.5308803725013144
],
"ids": [
2,
118,
171,
198,
33,
120,
93,
170,
49,
79,
77,
85,
60,
160,
80
]
} | 2 | 9,668 |
This movie was nominated for best picture but lost out to Casablanca but Paul Lukas beat out Humphrey Bogart for best actor. I don't see why Lucile Watson was nominated for best supporting actor, i just don't think she did a very good job. Bette Davis and Paul Lukas and their three kids are leaving Mexico and coming into the United States in the first scene of the movie. They are going by train to Davis's relatives house. Davis and Lukas were in the underground to stop the Nazis so they are very tired and need rest. But when they arrive home, their is a Nazi living there and their's not much either can do about it. It turns out the Nazi only cares about money and is willing to make a deal with Lukas. Their is more to the plot but you can find that out for yourself. | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 0.395748 | 3.9783 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.5120413658222567,
0.526367001974216,
0.528477903125286,
0.5290632114346665,
0.5334332811112829,
0.5440075379919822,
0.5574909860279885,
0.5760354388836801,
0.5781492035416744,
0.5794988778000465,
0.5835909367415822,
0.5927088649855619,
0.5983184140674973,
0.5992357870338689
],
"ids": [
3,
198,
93,
27,
17,
196,
59,
2,
35,
128,
68,
24,
33,
8,
65
]
} | 3 | 13,640 |
Just like Al Gore shook us up with his painfully honest and cleverly presented documentary-movie "An inconvenient truth", directors Alastair Fothergill and Mark Linfield also remind us that it's about time to improve our way of life in order to save our beautiful planet. "Planet earth" is also a wake-up call that the global warming of our planet has disastrous consequences for all living creatures around the world. Al Gore showed us the bleak future of planet Earth by presenting hard facts backed up by documented examples through long yet always interesting monologues. The creators of this documentary choose a different yet equally powerful way to accomplish this. They do not present us with a future representation of what might occur to our planet if we don't radically change things around, but they rather show us the genuine beauty of planet Earth in all of its amazing glory. We see places that we knew that existed but never thought they could be so beautiful. In this movie, we see a wide array of the most extraordinary places such as forsaken deserts, giant forests full of fauna and flora and icy-landscapes as far as the eye could see. And in all of those immensely different environments, we see the most beautiful animals trying to survive.<br /><br />This is exactly the kind of movie that had to be made, in combination with the one from Al Gore, in order to make us realize that our planet is too precious to meddle with. The voice-over by Patrick Stewart is always relaxing and thus very well done although at first it sounded as though I was watching an X-men movie instead! The cinematography is probably the most remarkable thing of this documentary. At times: what you see is so unreal that you tend to forget that a man with a camera actually had to film all of that delightful footage.<br /><br />In short: This is definitely a must-see for everyone since it concerns every single person on this beautiful planet Earth! The truth is: I never thought our planet was so astonishingly beautiful! | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 0.435703 | 6.465737 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.6425779415674697,
0.6451472441760044,
0.6453790708566423,
0.6542209303169819,
0.669271739520398,
0.6698068790412743,
0.6735031416176436,
0.6738290385848809,
0.6767171408232259,
0.6825463559936664,
0.6843935558093609,
0.690637510175707,
0.6913775269876208,
0.6954321726200585
],
"ids": [
4,
174,
22,
182,
20,
24,
168,
119,
160,
133,
89,
34,
16,
106,
195
]
} | 4 | 14,018 |
Unfortunately, this movie is so bad. The original Out of Towners was manic and very funny, of course they used the script written by Neil Simon. For some reason Neil Simons script is not used in this film so it falls flat time and time again. Even the audience I was with never laughed. The direction is very slow and tedious and when there is a joke it is given away so the joke dies i.e. The couple having sex in the park. They announce it is a lighting ceremony for New York, well we all know the lights are going to come on and we will be able to see cute and mugging Goldie & Steve do a bit of slap stick. The whole movie winds up being like this...a joke is set up and given away. Why isn't Goldies hair ever even messed up in the movie. You will also notice every close up of Goldie (they use a very intense soft lens). I suggest you rent the original with Jack Lemmon and Sandy Dennis, that's if you want to laugh. | 0 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 2.396044 | 5.645542 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.3963363941682213,
0.40904925716879026,
0.4390019041768064,
0.4580835999211389,
0.47957331096974554,
0.48454159891152204,
0.4871572934878534,
0.49176811443969604,
0.49784167689641656,
0.5056400970784276,
0.5066109343747901,
0.5084465796497504,
0.5094881093095249,
0.5125674975222074
],
"ids": [
5,
144,
8,
69,
128,
121,
132,
118,
34,
54,
29,
143,
140,
157,
170
]
} | 5 | 7,488 |
Altered Species starts one Friday night in Los Angeles where Dr. Irwin (Guy Vieg) & his laboratory assistant Walter (Allen Lee Haff) are burning the midnight oil as they continue to try & perfect a revolutionary new drug called 'Rejenacyn'. As Walter tips the latest failed attempt down the sink the pipes leak the florescent green liquid into the basement where escaped lab rats begin to drink it... Five of Walter's friends, Alicia (Leah Rown in a very fetching outfit including some cool boots that she gets to stomp on a rat with), Gary (Richard Peterson), Burke (Derek Hofman), Frank (David Bradley) & Chelsea (Alexandra Townsend) decide that he has been working too hard & needs to get out so they plan to pick him up & party the night away. Back at the lab & the cleaner Douglas (Robert Broughton) has been attacked & killed by the now homicidal rats in the basement as Walter injects the latest batch of serum in a lab rat which breaks out of it's cage as it grows at an amazing rate. Walter's friends turn up but he can't leave while the rat is still missing so everyone helps him look for it. All six become potential rat food...<br /><br />Also known as Rodentz Altered Species was co-edited & directed by Miles Feldman & has very little to recommend it. The script by producer Serge Rodnunsky is poor & coupled together with the general shoddiness of the production as a whole Altered Species really is lame. For a start the character's are dumb, annoying & clichéd. Then there's the unoriginal plot with the mad scientist, the monster he has created, the isolated location, the stranded human cast & the obligatory final showdown between hero & monster. It's all here somewhere. Altered Species moves along at a fair pace which is just about the best thing I can say about it & thankfully doesn't last that long. It's basically your average run-of-the-mill killer mutant rat film & not a particularly good one at that either.<br /><br />Director Feldman films like a TV film & the whole thing is throughly bland & forgettable while some of the special effects & attack scenes leave a lot to be desired. For a start the CGI rats are awful, the attack sequences feature hand-held jerky camera movement & really quick edits to try & hide the fact that all the rats are just passively sitting there. At various points in Altered Species the rat cages need to shake because of the rats movement but you can clearly see all the rats just sitting there as someone shakes the cages off screen. The giant rat monster at the end looks pretty poor as it's just a guy in a dodgy suit. There are no scares, no tension or atmosphere & since when did basements contain bright neon lighting? There are one or two nice bits of gore here, someone has a nice big messy hole where their face used to be, there's a severed arm & decapitation, lots of rat bites, someone having their eyeball yanked out & a dead mutilated cat.<br /><br />Technically Altered Species is sub standard throughout. It takes place within the confines of one building, has cheap looking CGI effects & low production values. The acting isn't up to much but it isn't too bad & a special mention to Leah Rowan as Alicia as she's a bit of a babe & makes Altered Species just that little bit nicer & easier to watch...<br /><br />Altered Species isn't a particularly good film, in fact it's a pretty bad one but I suppose you could do worse. Not great but it might be worth a watch if your not too demanding & have nothing else to do. | 0 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 2.165982 | 3.297307 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.5944477283144289,
0.6016963940724498,
0.6107514562762654,
0.6162346439966634,
0.6209326838644513,
0.6230355945373871,
0.624680990006933,
0.6465132109826222,
0.6481390882730007,
0.6612206341997362,
0.6663962174403322,
0.6672270540336649,
0.6766405730793799,
0.6773770987494416
],
"ids": [
6,
114,
193,
134,
44,
96,
47,
27,
181,
169,
112,
40,
65,
190,
25
]
} | 6 | 5,804 |
'The Luzhin Defence' is a movie worthy of anyone's time. it is a brooding, intense film, and kept my attention the entire time. John Turturro is absolutely stunning in his portrayal of a tender, eccentric chess Grandmaster, and Emily Watson is spell-binding as the gentle but rebellious daughter of a highly respected Russian family. The chemistry between Watson and Turturro on screen is obvious from the moment their characters meet in the story. All in all, this movie is one of the best in-depth looks at the life of a chess Grandmaster, and Turturro and Watson add a whole non-mainstream, non-cliche feel to the film. Most people will come out of the theater thinking, and feeling somewhat touched by this brilliant look at the most unlikely of love stories. | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 0.026287 | 3.546861 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.5016306328924898,
0.5215091857472469,
0.5231270468715788,
0.5501108533833986,
0.5532595119949876,
0.5533685056804967,
0.5549647022015158,
0.5565171584729154,
0.5756639719181122,
0.577673236902349,
0.5839327057975507,
0.5844038844319581,
0.590550232103394,
0.5923483353029282
],
"ids": [
7,
123,
170,
32,
45,
169,
35,
177,
118,
49,
101,
14,
80,
172,
17
]
} | 7 | 12,909 |
This film's trailer interested me enough to warrant renting the DVD. However, the resulting movie is absolutely dire! Admittedly, this is not the worst film ever made, or the worst film this year, but it came damn close!<br /><br />The main issue is the film not knowing what it wants to be: comedy, adult drama, thriller, teen-porn? The story is interesting, as it deals with the pitfalls of mail-order brides, but the film is a mess. What starts out as a mildly interesting "comedy" (a word I use in the loosest possible terms), then goes totally in reverse, and degenerates into a very dark and distasteful misogynistic thriller. Nicole Kidman should know better, and Ben Chaplin is wasted! As are Matthieu Kassovitz and Vincent Cassel, whom I can only presume did this for the money.<br /><br />This is a bad film in pretty much every single aspect. It's not funny, it's almost so sexist that you could almost forgive Benny Hill for everything he did, and the dramatic elements are just downright nasty. A film to be avoided, unless you absolutely have to see Kidman or Chaplin in every one of their films! | 0 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 1.282035 | 6.157378 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.21279083501732254,
0.3098087438490451,
0.3171583944958286,
0.330819275896994,
0.33967830820881384,
0.34033948794143787,
0.35446081069090485,
0.35732100790026355,
0.35814452575831335,
0.3591381590319398,
0.35996913231289795,
0.36346864063122863,
0.36350569366071694,
0.36445114350897656
],
"ids": [
8,
129,
50,
45,
170,
80,
118,
139,
120,
144,
79,
143,
132,
128,
41
]
} | 8 | 3,386 |
The only reason I watched this film was because I had recently read Robert Hough's less than perfect, but interesting, fictionalised account of the life of Big Cat trainer Mabel Stark. Beaty appears as a character in the book, in a less than flattering light.<br /><br />I hadn't realised until checking the movie out later on the IMDb that it was originally a serial. Whoever edited the original running time of 233 minutes down to the 68 minuted version available on DVD has done a hell of a good job. The shortened version plays just as well as any B movie of the period despite the many 'duh-what?' moments. For instance are we really expected to believe our hero dug that twenty foot deep tiger trap in a morning without even getting his jodhpurs dirty? Looking over the chapter titles I see that number five is titled "Gorilla Warfare" and number eleven is called "The Gorilla". There were no gorillas at all in the movie. I guess that's where some of the cuts were made.<br /><br />Historicaly interesting. | 0 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 0.2349 | 4.342577 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.5030614350026209,
0.5176092543060593,
0.5311503577112342,
0.5336208770097574,
0.5545615234870471,
0.5615422301786513,
0.5832656569274575,
0.5917416718202653,
0.5932866356098276,
0.593319333474055,
0.5951565613665102,
0.595485662551098,
0.5968929687884286,
0.6014933102809374
],
"ids": [
9,
133,
125,
118,
170,
171,
120,
17,
169,
11,
44,
33,
156,
96,
26
]
} | 9 | 9,567 |
I have to say that Higher Learning is one of the top 3 movies I have ever watched. It has a brilliant cast, and an equally brilliant director. Singleton shows how life in University can be. There are 3 main story lines, the skinheads, the African-Americans, and the homosexuals. I was intrigued by all of the stories, but the one that got to me the most was the storyline about Kristen, battling her feelings towards another girl. The end was great. After seeing the movie 25 times plus, I still cry. I would have given this movie an 11, but I have to settlefor 10/10. | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 0.124284 | 5.480981 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.5029686266096267,
0.5258773129736141,
0.5308300164550926,
0.5371967540644349,
0.5429917270971598,
0.5452501731148929,
0.5509443055709182,
0.551636638301036,
0.5570039737976985,
0.5580293240895948,
0.5635500274160214,
0.5719959017341485,
0.5877202739778573,
0.595912105835507
],
"ids": [
10,
46,
59,
45,
80,
83,
78,
170,
120,
118,
33,
109,
185,
68,
97
]
} | 10 | 21,423 |
I don't think I've ever felt this let down by a film before. After loving Guy Ritchie's two previous films (I don't count Swept Away - he was pussy blind), I was so looking forward to seeing this. <br /><br />The reviews were poor, then again, I don't trust the press anyway. More worrying was the fact that the internet buzz was that this was a bit of a stinker, so it was with some trepidation I handed over my £4.80 yesterday afternoon.<br /><br />I'm not even going to try to explain this film, mainly because I haven't got a clue what was going on and at one point I was honestly close to standing up and asking if it was just me who didn't get it! <br /><br />Unfortunately I think Ritchie seems to have fallen into his wife's trap of taking himself far too seriously.It seems it wasn't good enough for him to make films with good plots, laughs, snappy dialogue and good characters. It's almost as if he had a checklist of films he wanted to rip off, here are some of the ones I noticed:<br /><br />The Matrix, Fight Club, Kill Bill, The Usual Suspects, Vanilla Sky...<br /><br />I think the most frustrating thing is that the performances from the two main actors, Jason Statham and Ray Liotta, were actually very good and it was really the self indulgent story and editing / direction that let the film down.<br /><br />So a big, big thumbs down from me. | 0 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 1.156704 | 6.400598 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.42597698622342905,
0.4464047783057371,
0.4574334319205089,
0.45849837946431404,
0.4781852084410203,
0.4802389957609353,
0.49784570171416975,
0.5041642388463413,
0.5056632986254369,
0.5071098518653498,
0.5141065189920053,
0.5146404503494432,
0.5149049112311151,
0.5160064678397911
],
"ids": [
11,
8,
118,
129,
120,
170,
16,
172,
49,
131,
34,
79,
50,
106,
76
]
} | 11 | 3,503 |
Not one of Keaton's best efforts, this was perhaps a veiled attempt to revenge himself on the family he married into - the Talmadges. A Polish/English language barrier and a series of coincidences leads Buster into a marriage with a large Irish woman, who (along with her father and brothers) treat him shabbily until they think he may be an heir to a fortune. Mistaken identities abound here - gags are set up and but for the main fail to pay off.<br /><br />This Metro short does have at least two real laughs - Buster's cleverly turning around his lack of dinner by using the calendar on the wall and the basic ignorance of his adopted family to literally bring the meat to his plate. The other is a family photo, with the entire group slowly collapsing to the floor as the tripod of the camera loses its stability.<br /><br />The yeast beer overflow could have been the catalyst for a massive series of gags built upon gags, but stops short (for all the buildup) of development.<br /><br />Kino's print is crisp and clear and the score is one for player piano, drums and sound effects. Not one of Buster's best efforts, but worth a few laughs. | 0 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 1.986304 | 6.243079 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.47590231868896293,
0.5933757504311041,
0.6092933038651469,
0.6237683331174493,
0.6275070059592447,
0.6281095391207279,
0.6445624766338194,
0.6483109324958654,
0.6569062064376945,
0.6605113569265961,
0.6681799940427771,
0.6725553158033905,
0.6738304131018809,
0.6741153520138832
],
"ids": [
12,
36,
5,
11,
62,
93,
8,
77,
16,
131,
117,
96,
114,
198,
159
]
} | 12 | 6,657 |
'Where the Sidewalk Ends (1950)' opens, appropriately, with Dana Andrews' and Gene Tierneys' names inscribed on the sidewalk, as dirty water streams down between the bars of a sewer grate. The sidewalk represents respectability, integrity and morality only crooks and delinquents walk in the gutter. But even the most honourable of men have a tendency to misstep on occasion, and, when the sidewalk abruptly comes to an end, sometimes it proves impossible to avoid getting one's shoes wet. Mark Dixon (Dana Andrews) was born in the gutter, his father a professional criminal, and has spent his entire life clawing his way back onto the sidewalk, perpetually balanced on the edge of the kerb. As a police detective, Dixon wants nothing more than to display the decency and integrity that his father lacked, but he possesses a mean-streak that he can't escape. When his quick temper leaves a murder suspect dead, Dixon finds himself becoming the very father whom he despised, a cheap criminal who'll cheat and lie to cover up his offence.<br /><br />'Where the Sidewalk Ends' was the only film to reunite Dana Andrews, Gene Tierney and director Otto Preminger after the superb 'Laura (1944),' though the two films, as far as noir goes, couldn't be further apart. Whereas the earlier picture had the strong intimacy of a country-house murder tale, this film is more conventional as a gritty urban police drama. Given her ravishingly memorable performance as Laura Hunt, it's unfortunate that here Tierney is grossly underused, occupying the typical niche of the pretty, helpless romantic interest {much as she did that same year in Jules Dassin's 'The Night and the City (1950)'}. Andrews, on the other hand, has rarely been better, exhibiting a toughness and unhinged anger that I hadn't expected of him. Gary Merrill is suitably smug as the crime boss Scalise, but he doesn't seem mean enough for the role, and I think that an actor like Richard Conte (who played Mr. Brown in 'The Big Combo (1955)') would have better suited the character; I hadn't realised this, but Conte appeared just one year earlier in Preminger's 'Whirlpool (1949).'<br /><br />The tension, as Dixon attempts to cover up his accidental crime, is absolutely riveting certainly among the most suspenseful sequences of its era though I feel that the situation still wasn't exploited to its full potential. The taxi driver is the only person who could have decisively identified Dixon as the perpetrator, but Preminger hurriedly skims over the moment when he passes Dixon on the stairs. Had the witness been brought in as Dixon was re-enacting his own movements outside the apartment entrance, we could have had some genuine fireworks. And why, for that matter, couldn't the taxi driver's testimony have immediately absolved Jiggs Taylor (Tom Tully) from suspicion of murder? Niggling inconsistencies such as these tarnish an otherwise excellent screenplay from Ben Hecht, who infuses his gritty criminal underworld with hard-hitting cops and wise-cracking felons. Andrews' seething and implosive law-enforcer, tormented by rage and remorse, has rarely been done better, at least the equal of Robert Ryan in Nicholas Ray's 'On Dangerous Ground (1952).' | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 1.592674 | 3.211825 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.5966330782324898,
0.6061171873814271,
0.6648998667116601,
0.6799752713977145,
0.6919495524385573,
0.6920737941960622,
0.7024637945436265,
0.7040783884823341,
0.7065763529391849,
0.7078361510372262,
0.708247929745609,
0.7096570139620955,
0.7107326168387149,
0.7126150135635149
],
"ids": [
13,
85,
130,
60,
114,
193,
96,
167,
44,
27,
68,
51,
84,
155,
110
]
} | 13 | 19,192 |
if my grandma did films they would probably do much better figure than this one... incredible bad... the main characters (the mom, the dad and son) are OK. Specially the mother she's a nice actress and the kid also proves to be a nice one specially on the scenes where he is supposed to be scary. But does the the director know the meaning of the words Plot Point, Triller and Good Script. the script hasn't any evolving atmosphere to become a suspense thing. If you like being chased by trees you can probably enjoy it, otherwise just stay at home and sleep. oh... actually there was something funny: the movie's from 2001 but we couldn't realize it since the image is so bad (like on mini-dv) and the cars are so old (like 70 and 80's). | 0 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 0.305817 | 5.541985 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.37903299727542117,
0.3921278666755941,
0.4099591868268758,
0.42176985669792777,
0.43211530922865016,
0.43630159575986704,
0.4367969929009845,
0.44641422422533206,
0.45254110967227257,
0.4561271371955453,
0.45765422965600977,
0.4614345266569698,
0.4634802122197015,
0.47436500159058936
],
"ids": [
14,
170,
120,
80,
122,
118,
195,
116,
140,
8,
187,
97,
185,
35,
136
]
} | 14 | 2,518 |
I know I know it was a good ending but sincerely it was awesome. I love when a movie ends on a terrific dark nature but this time I was impressed with Darth Vader turning against the Emperor I really stayed astonished. The anguishing sequence in that film was when Luke is tortured and defeated by the Emperor/Darth Sidious. He is about to be destroyed when Darth Vader, Dark Lord of the Sith, eliminates his dark master. A nice sacrifice. The cinematography of this film is impressive. I was surprised with all the vessels of the Rebel Battle ships and all Imperial War Ships and Super Star Destroyers. I loved the new race they brought on screen the Mon Calomari, the ewoks, the sullesteian (Lando's co pilot) and many more... Most of my favorite scenes are in that film:1-When Vader destroys the Emperor and is fatally wounded. 2- When Luke sees the spirits of Obi-Wan and Yoda and then it shows up Anakin Skywalker (Sebastian Shaw)(the greatest scene in Star Wars) 3- When LEia slays Jabba strangling the Hutt crime lord.<br /><br />I personally like the script and the battle of Endor presenting a ground and space combat as well the best duel of Star Wars between Darth Vader V.s Luke Skywalker on the Death Star. Post-script: The scenes with Leia in the slave bikini are memorable. 9/10. | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | -0.059384 | 5.060668 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.43885027953615885,
0.48291598327440344,
0.49899303417896046,
0.5040634406748263,
0.5042675561915586,
0.5154278352501641,
0.521308767754093,
0.5321475699361264,
0.5325180803777376,
0.5472046365636123,
0.557333585141775,
0.5575412225728491,
0.561096887511271,
0.56588651964331
],
"ids": [
15,
59,
68,
118,
120,
106,
153,
170,
85,
143,
53,
80,
168,
128,
49
]
} | 15 | 13,361 |
**** = A masterpiece to be recorded in the books and never forgotten<br /><br />***1/2 = A classic in time; simply a must see<br /><br />*** = A solid, worth-while, very entertaining piece<br /><br />**1/2 = A good movie, but there are some uneven elements or noticeable flaws<br /><br />** = May still be considered good in areas, but this work has either serious issues or is restrained by inevitable elements deemed inescapable (e.g., genre)<br /><br />*1/2 = Mostly a heap of nothing sparked by mildly worthwhile moments<br /><br />BOMB = Not of a viewable quality<br /><br />- Kalifornia = ***<br /><br />- Unrated (for strong violent material, considerable sexuality, and language)<br /><br />I rented this film expecting an in-your-face summer-Blockbuster-quality celebration of Brad Pitt's face, but was happily surprised and disappointed. This really is more of a drama, and very grim at that... I remember some emotionally intense Duchovny voice-overs.<br /><br />Pitt plays out his possibly un-sexiest film ever with startling talent. Who started out as a hopeless yet harmless "white trash" husband became realized as a violent, disturbing alcoholic with a messed mind. During some of the latter stages in the film, I found it hard to keep watching him - he was unpredictable and scary. This proves very good writing and acting.<br /><br />The whole movie is filled with bizarre, sensational scenes that made me hold my breath not fewer than once, and I don't mean action scenes. I mean dialogue scenes so brilliantly crafted I actually winced and gasped at what I was seeing. It was like watching a rhino and a lion put in a cage and watching as they gnawed each other to death. Again, I am very impressed with the screenwriter(s); whoever they are did the impossible: mixed oil and water.<br /><br />I also very much enjoyed Juliette Lewis's performance. It is so rare for this talented young actress to make an appearance these days that when she does it is such a joy. Some of her moments in this film brought me to tears. I mean that. The emotions this girl can arouse in your head are incredible, and I clearly remember getting blurry-eyed on a few occasions.<br /><br />I almost feel like I'm cheating the quality craftsmanship the film makers have displayed by only giving "KALIFORNIA" a *** rating. But the dark feelings that it stirs are too potent and depressing to raise it. I do believe that everyone should see this movie though. I truly do. | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 0.869547 | 6.581178 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.3620531221547395,
0.38880993478290826,
0.4315946122797072,
0.44807620475183196,
0.4525152338973,
0.45567251413482424,
0.46517791214949045,
0.4660176097443297,
0.467190602166752,
0.4802389957609353,
0.4886680980654047,
0.4929660143815595,
0.49566103516787374,
0.5033775515395982
],
"ids": [
16,
129,
8,
118,
170,
122,
50,
182,
49,
198,
11,
45,
113,
46,
53
]
} | 16 | 21,135 |
This movie is outrageous, funny, ribald, sophisticated & hits the bullseye where 99 % of Hollywood movies don't even make the target. Paul Bartel should be recognized as one of the great directors of this or any era. He's the American Renoir & Bunuel _ combined!!! Glad I have the videodisc. | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | -0.107411 | 5.651925 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.44810149227422447,
0.4635723713763211,
0.4665559224755087,
0.48379124044023414,
0.48930577685545695,
0.4899067508931909,
0.4916500738180456,
0.4983370056713362,
0.5016760935973921,
0.502782259378916,
0.5126392646840796,
0.5152972472305817,
0.5154777225168806,
0.5161776840788067
],
"ids": [
17,
168,
196,
8,
113,
41,
24,
59,
198,
128,
170,
80,
53,
46,
116
]
} | 17 | 21,080 |
I find it hard to believe that anyone would put this movie in the same context as the Exorcist. Where the Exorcist was subtle and creepy, Stigmata was blunt, clumsy, and way too formulaic.<br /><br />This is one of the most visually beautiful films I've seen in a while, but the imagery does not make up for the downward spiral of patronizing exposition that makes it unbearable. <br /><br />My interest in this movie was peaked when it was compared to The Exorcist, and my visit to the official web site increased that interest. The web site had many tales of "actual" stigmata throughout history. However, scene by scene, the movie is so obsessed by its quest for "genuineness" that it becomes comical at first, then outright hard to watch toward the end. I began getting suspicious when the priest charged with investigating potential miracles walks into the beauty parlor where our would-be heroine cuts hair and, evidently, flirts with priests.<br /><br />The plot: A woman without faith in God begins receiving the wounds of Christ (the Stigmata) and is baffled and upset about the ordeal. A priest is sent straight from the Vatican to investigate the case. Is Frankie possessed by Satan, or a vessel for Jesus Christ?<br /><br />The only miracle in this film is that it finally ends. | 0 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | -0.014667 | 7.425621 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.4585711731454203,
0.46056611593691676,
0.49587317024149946,
0.4987261323234321,
0.5014365135070806,
0.5267029053352108,
0.5268889071577676,
0.5278249603010213,
0.5285662988773165,
0.5322926712560894,
0.533430081266598,
0.5411778829878928,
0.5421981416957976,
0.5460700507842802
],
"ids": [
18,
163,
107,
192,
112,
172,
187,
195,
41,
122,
45,
186,
46,
8,
169
]
} | 18 | 6,492 |
This has to be one of the 5 worst movies ever made. The plot looked intriguing like that of Passenger 57. But with the latter movie it somehow worked a lot better. The plot has been worked out in the worst possible way. Just a few of the awful moments in the movie, A flight attendant is standing in the opened doorway of a flying 747 and trying to close the door without being sucked out by the 250 mile per hour winds?!? Thereafter the lands the aircraft from a few miles out starting at 8000 feet, thats impossible even for 747 pilots with thousands of hour experience. When on the runway (perfectly straight of course) she is instructed to pull on the flaps, HUH!! Come on flaps are there to ensure lift at low speeds, when on the runway you use thrust reverse on the engines and give maximum power! I can go on and on about little and mostly big mistakes in the movie, but then my reply would become the size of the English dictionary. This is a movie you want to miss, take my word for it! | 0 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 1.551227 | 5.351829 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.4843617436411437,
0.5478379165758629,
0.5487161522299621,
0.5581041834470618,
0.5582975540201481,
0.5607072136970032,
0.5673054968985307,
0.5683109272278256,
0.5687042625420698,
0.5778591603958653,
0.5860982856132728,
0.5861595000277566,
0.5868126304631052,
0.594576388663421
],
"ids": [
19,
139,
170,
122,
79,
8,
34,
80,
129,
53,
181,
75,
14,
27,
120
]
} | 19 | 6,891 |
The funny sound that you may hear when you eyeball this execrable version of Jules Verne's classic "Journey to the Center of the Earth" is Verne spinning in his grave. The only thing about this 80 minute opus that has anything to do with "Journey to the Center of the Earth" is the title. Otherwise, everything else in this lackluster production is new and not worth watching. In fact, the director has written here at IMDb.COM that he directed only eight minutes of "Journey to the Center of the Earth" and the studio tacked on part of "Dollman" helmer Albert Pyun's sequel to his own "Alien from L.A." with Kathy Ireland. Evidently, the producers ran out of money and to satisfy overseas contractual obligations, they grafted Pyun's sequel onto director Rusty Lemorande's movie. Please, don't rent or buy this wretched piece of garbage.<br /><br />Unlike director Henry Levin's period piece "Journey to the Center of the Earth" (1959) with James Mason and Pat Boone, Lemorande's "Journey to the Center of the Earth" takes place in contemporary times in Hawaii. Two fellows, a British nanny, and a dog are brought together for the adventure of a lifetime purely by coincidence. Richard (Paul Carafotes of "Blind Date") and his comic book obsessed brother Bryan (Ilan Mitchell-Smith of "Weird Science") are going out to explore a cave. The heroine, Crystina (Nicola Cowper of "Underworld"), works for a domestic service called 'Nannies R Us.' Being a nanny has been Crystina's life-long dream, but she has made a less of all five of her nanny jobs. Nevertheless, her sympathetic supervisor, Ms. Ferry (Lynda Marshall of "Africa Express"), sends her to Hawaii. Crystina's new client, rock star Billy Foul (Jeremy Crutchley of "Doomsday") who is scheduling one last concert to revive his flagging career, has a dog named Bernard. Foul wants Crystina to take Bernard to a doggie day spa. Crystina is waiting on the arrival of her taxi when a careless motel attendant accidentally puts the basket that conceals Bernard in Richard's jeep. You see, Foul has hidden his canine in a basket because motel management strictly prohibits pets on their premises. Foul has disguised the dog as a human baby. Anyway, Crystina catches a cab and tells the driver follow Richard.<br /><br />After she catches up with them to get her dog, the cabbie cruises away and abandons her. Crystina demands that Richard drive her back to town, but he has other plans. Unhappily, Crystina joins the guys and they get lost, and then find themselves in the lost city of Atlantis, a police state ruled by a dictator, at the center of the Earth. The rulers of Atlantis repeatedly notify their citizens that life on the surface does not exist. Our heroes and heroine stumble onto Atlantis quite by accident. Atlantis resembles a disco and everybody looks like they are straight out of a punk rock opera. The ruler of Atlantis, General Rykov (Janet Du Plessis of "Operation Hit Squad"), is orchestrating a raid on the surface with clones of the first human, Wanda Saknussemm (Kathy Ireland of "Necessary Roughness"), to visit Atlantis. Predictably, General Rykov machinations to rule Atlantis and overthrow the Earth fails, and our heroes and heroine save the day.<br /><br />"Journey to the Center of the Earth" is an abomination. The movie seems to be a comedy despite its superficial satire about dictatorships. Albert Pyun is one of my favorite low budget action directors, but he blew it on this lightweight shambles of a science fiction saga. | 0 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 0.112797 | 6.054667 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.564301631793096,
0.637279017083056,
0.6487992357602221,
0.6532424575965707,
0.6542209303169819,
0.655231228292702,
0.6612777914872564,
0.6615044502526719,
0.6623359468061409,
0.6642063667002462,
0.6703246995594063,
0.6748491127037857,
0.6807265737597756,
0.6812336175175695
],
"ids": [
20,
24,
196,
59,
190,
4,
22,
34,
129,
170,
120,
26,
80,
168,
46
]
} | 20 | 7,752 |
This is a low budget Roger Corman horror/creature flick. A DinoCroc is created when manipulation of prehistoric genes runs amok. An engineered croc first kills one of its own then gets the taste of human and becomes a fast growing terror after escaping. None of the characters have any depth, but then they are not the focal point. We only get a few glimpses of the huge two-legged dinosaur descendant and some of the best "kill" scenes in a small budget film.<br /><br />My favorite scene is of a moronic character trying to use a three legged dog for bait and becomes croc food himself. Nothing left on the pier but ankle top feet. With no real stand out roles: Jane Longendecker, Bruce Weitz and Charles Napier. Most pathetic is Matt Borlenghi and an obnoxious professional croc hunter Costas Mandylor. I was most impressed with the alluring Joanna Pacula as the respectfully feared Dr. P. DINOCROC is redeeming as a crock of pickles. | 0 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 0.045775 | 6.682545 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.520791398183204,
0.5510660686042499,
0.5639274868858319,
0.5656228264324807,
0.5872559247222601,
0.5915943954119824,
0.5927175813551175,
0.5936853162880744,
0.6021124433146294,
0.6025208324586575,
0.6058268644345124,
0.6111532275185694,
0.6170097495513136,
0.6183026565062181
],
"ids": [
21,
26,
22,
169,
195,
133,
173,
97,
112,
72,
168,
140,
116,
163,
46
]
} | 21 | 8,614 |
This sci-fi adventure is not the best and by no means the worst. I agree with the statement that bad sci-fi is comical. Bizarre pink tinting and unusual special effects make this a favorite for the late, late, late show viewers. Space explorers on the planet Mars fight off strange giant amoeba-like monsters and other strange creatures. Pretty cool.<br /><br />The cast includes Les Tremayne, Naura Hayden, Gerald Mohr and Jack Kruschen. Get comfy and enjoy. Don't feel bad if you nod off for a moment. I agree with adding this to the list of cult classics to not miss. | 0 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 0.745051 | 6.431019 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.41244261160029805,
0.4839459663746626,
0.48656763201465125,
0.49622714095402454,
0.49923714007589615,
0.4995919326353456,
0.5008275107793216,
0.5162024298503556,
0.5177328435442445,
0.5241337746481032,
0.5266721260696475,
0.5315085349523555,
0.5330411174849585,
0.5356734367100731
],
"ids": [
22,
190,
8,
97,
53,
129,
45,
106,
170,
26,
29,
152,
122,
24,
195
]
} | 22 | 6,649 |
So I had heard from a few people that this film had brought them to tears in the theater. As I watched it for the first time I was expecting another romantic, tear-jerking Barbra Streisand film; Something like The Way We Were. I was certainly wrong. The chemistry between the two main characters, Esther Hoffman and her John Howard, was nonexistent, making it impossible to get attached to the characters. There wasn't anything romantic about it. Streisand's character fell for an alcoholic drug addict who couldn't sing a single note without making me want to hit the fast-forward button. At one point her character finds her husband in bed with another woman and she forgives him about five minutes later. There's nothing romantic about a deadbeat rock star and a woman who can't seem to realize it until he actually dies. Parts of the movie seemed to drag on and on, and I kept asking myself when it was going to end.<br /><br />The death of John Howard was completely predictable. There was totally obvious foreshadowing of his reckless behavior early on in the movie, and when he died I felt no emotion whatsoever. It wasn't a tragic accident, it was him basically being an idiot. Not to mention throughout the movie I was distracted by his hideous beard.<br /><br />The only parts of this movie worth seeing are the Streisand songs. The ending of the movie when she sings "With One More Look At You/Watch Closely Now" was my reason for giving this film a whopping 3/10. Those 7 minutes were the only part of the movie I actually felt an emotion other than irritation and anger. | 0 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 2.988954 | 3.832057 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.48908566451393964,
0.5377702846722734,
0.5447362594925435,
0.554622397105403,
0.5549391809515138,
0.5593950970836225,
0.5596815634099715,
0.5627468002161985,
0.5631936088770639,
0.5664647989148462,
0.5700858246664021,
0.5751183963654575,
0.5757889520669222,
0.5821373292552307
],
"ids": [
23,
114,
44,
78,
158,
139,
80,
45,
83,
144,
121,
193,
181,
27,
60
]
} | 23 | 2,227 |
Kevin Spacey is very talented, but unfortunately directing is not his forte. I had high expectations about the film before I rented it and maybe that is why I disliked it so much. I admire Spacey's attempt at making a film that takes place mostly in one small setting, but it's not the attempt that counts. I found the film dull, boring, and stretched out. The acting was nothing spectacular. Gary Sinise has done much better, especially since he is conscious in most of his other films. Skeet Ulrich was disappointing, but this was one of his first films (I did get a kick out of how young and chubby this Scream star looked). The only thing that impressed me about this film was the one shot of the car wreck from above. The center line of the road was perfectly centered and the camera moved on along the line and past the wreck. However, that shot was very "Usual Suspects"ish and my guess is Spacey got the idea from that earlier film of his (which is very good mind you). If you want to see a fabulous film that takes place in one small setting, watch Hitchcock's Lifeboat. Maybe Spacey should have watched it before filming this. | 0 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | -0.229112 | 5.784226 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.444304960398086,
0.47104306453920186,
0.4779218244054847,
0.4806060469011152,
0.48180692045169016,
0.4852799150222148,
0.4874753960178104,
0.48866737979548946,
0.48944307215536786,
0.4899067508931909,
0.4920840285040987,
0.4926648812371185,
0.4976062934436729,
0.5052264939305012
],
"ids": [
24,
196,
174,
116,
62,
8,
118,
59,
80,
168,
17,
120,
122,
45,
170
]
} | 24 | 12,060 |
Honestly, this is the best reality show anyone has ever come up with. In order to win the money you have to actually be INTELLIGENT. Not only that you've got to be brave, athletic, cunning, etc. It actually requires skill. Not like some lame-ass shows that are on these days. And yet, they only have two seasons of it! Bull..they need to bring this show back!! <br /><br />Although, they'll have a hard time pulling Anderson Cooper away from CNN. He was great.<br /><br />But seriously, it was an amazing show. You never knew who would be going when. And it was so much fun trying to figure out the mole yourself! It was a show you could actually play yourself if you wanted to!<br /><br />BRING BACK THE MOLE!!!! BRING BACK THE MOLE!!!! | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 2.7208 | 6.532078 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.5133957205288108,
0.5782361636791482,
0.600231012110459,
0.6154146586161325,
0.6179834380536673,
0.6182414965312808,
0.6444321395864909,
0.6520639045222245,
0.6586019349263319,
0.6592076771935601,
0.6679467756043607,
0.6736610343908895,
0.6754887789759294,
0.6768833046979224
],
"ids": [
25,
127,
57,
36,
138,
22,
98,
157,
179,
174,
152,
47,
65,
34,
190
]
} | 25 | 19,122 |
I saw the movie as a child when it was released in the theater and it was so bad that it became the makings of a family joke. If the ranking had a zero, this movie would get it. The dinosaurs were awful. The storyline was ridiculous. The acting really doesn't qualify to be called acting. The only reason I even remember the name of the movie so well is because my family still talks about how BAD it really was. | 0 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 0.159964 | 6.789178 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.43976475981068786,
0.44446539366461224,
0.45956505482737886,
0.4668371778093007,
0.4888544127742154,
0.4937721433272133,
0.501567994095813,
0.5115922787542546,
0.5122849576635917,
0.5176206540587536,
0.5177328435442445,
0.5180345694894224,
0.5198644919797668,
0.520791398183204
],
"ids": [
26,
97,
128,
122,
80,
107,
106,
143,
190,
46,
45,
22,
116,
8,
21
]
} | 26 | 9,622 |
This movie was bad from the start. The only purpose of the movie was that Angela wanted to get a high body count. The acting was horrible. The killings were acted out very badly. Like when Ally got stuffed down that toilet I guess it was in the abandoned cabin. But when the end of the movie comes and Molly and the other guy are in the cabin you see Ally so Angela must have gone in to get her. The part that really got me was when the black girl and Angela were in the cabin and Angela took the guitar string and chocked her. One it was horrible acting and two why wouldn't you just turn around and punch the bitch?!?!? Then when Molly is getting chased by Angela if you have the neigh why not just turn around and stab her??? So stupid. This movie sucked... | 0 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 1.762706 | 5.008152 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.39311094127439383,
0.43512559960818353,
0.44482676687122513,
0.4453749165601105,
0.45210223221499823,
0.4549307341113358,
0.45918572607026076,
0.4607876437989674,
0.46400606918002685,
0.4765864525994591,
0.4782792819929723,
0.48004107685957553,
0.48221826024432113,
0.4831099462722621
],
"ids": [
27,
139,
143,
8,
34,
80,
144,
105,
33,
53,
120,
170,
190,
45,
135
]
} | 27 | 12,279 |
In Holland a gay writer Gerard (Jeroen Krabbe) gives a lecture. He stays overnight with a beautiful woman Christine (Renee Soutendijk) and has sex with her (by imagining she's a boy). He plans to leave the next day, but gets a look at a picture of Christine's hunky boyfriend Herman (Thom Hoffman) and decides to stay to have a try at him. Then things get strange.<br /><br />A big X-rated art house hit in the US in 1983. Why was it X rated? Let's see...there's strangulation, full frontal male and female nudity, castration, mutilation, simulated sex, a scene in a church with a cross that will shock most people, a gay sex scene in a crypt...and it's all a comedy!!!!! Paul Verhoeven made this after "Spetters". "Spetters" was attacked by the critics for it's extreme sexual sequences and denounced as trash. So, Verhoeven filled this film with very obvious symbolism thinking the critics would think it was art and praise it. He was right! Critics loved the film not realizing that Verhoeven was playing a big joke on them. Still, it's a great film. <br /><br />It's beautifully shot by Jan de Bont (now a director himself) and there's so much symbolism and obvious "hidden" layers in the dialogue that you're never bored. All the acting is great--Krabbe plays a thoroughly despicable character but (somehow) has you rooting for him; Soutendijk is just stunning to look at and plays her part to perfection--the little smile she gives when Gerard agrees to stay with her is chilling; Hoffman is extremely handsome with a great body--he deserves credit for doing the church sequence and going at with Krabbe in the crypt.<br /><br />This is not for people easily offended or the weak of heart, but if you like extreme movies that playfully challenge you (like me) this is for you! A 10 all the way. | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 1.042059 | 7.124909 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.47903707148599894,
0.5330638432717704,
0.5372531182184801,
0.562848566721327,
0.5726868862145222,
0.5734351632154734,
0.5780645962567987,
0.5809020351672256,
0.5963153178509621,
0.5996718064173171,
0.6029257839191828,
0.6048342400207193,
0.6059162925019836,
0.6193461938760788
],
"ids": [
28,
182,
8,
129,
41,
107,
151,
192,
193,
34,
50,
172,
16,
113,
79
]
} | 28 | 16,447 |
The only thing I remember about this movie are two things: first, as a twelve year old, even I thought it stunk. Second, it was so bad that when Mad magazine did a parody of it, they quit after the first page, and wrote a disclaimer at the bottom of the page saying that they had completely disavowed it.<br /><br />If you want to see great sophomoric comedies of this period, try Animal House. It's so stupid and vulgar it lowers itself to high art. Another good selection would be Caddyshack, the classic with the late Rodney Dangerfield and Bill Murray before he became annoyingly charming, with great lines like greens keeper Carl Spackler's "Correct me if I'm wrong Sandy, but if I kill all the golfers they'll lock me up and throw away the key." | 0 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 2.319688 | 5.768374 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.4251013779325471,
0.43510620567310443,
0.44414631800126636,
0.4717839117078584,
0.4718524973760475,
0.479836807424189,
0.48099839885400486,
0.49382758515630176,
0.5003246288314737,
0.5005281370576327,
0.5041210128714999,
0.5056400970784276,
0.5070274536358829,
0.5076946339129476
],
"ids": [
29,
132,
8,
128,
97,
144,
55,
77,
54,
122,
129,
168,
5,
75,
118
]
} | 29 | 423 |
Every one should see this movie because each one of us is broken in some way and it may help us realize 1) My life isn't as bad as I thought it was and 2) How important it is to adopt a child in need. There are so many out there. To think that the movie was actually based on a real person made us think deep about life and how the world has and always will be. Corrupt, but that corruption doesn't have to reach your home. We all have a choice! Definitely recommend this one... and while you're at it, I'd like to throw in "The Color Purple" and "Woman, Thou Art Loosed" by T.D. Jakes.<br /><br />These are all movies that are based on life and give us a glimpse of life. | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 0.353428 | 4.885165 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.43732120010266984,
0.43786164137455297,
0.4463947146789625,
0.4525756238810026,
0.45821547843145405,
0.462165122574547,
0.4630105487539009,
0.4694686989114111,
0.48204743798824223,
0.48455823086320315,
0.48731952544575097,
0.49015138702628636,
0.4909029119805822,
0.49123157641974413
],
"ids": [
30,
118,
170,
59,
83,
120,
8,
122,
35,
114,
180,
53,
14,
185,
136
]
} | 30 | 14,337 |
Bette Midler showcases her talents and beauty in "Diva Las Vegas". I am thrilled that I taped it and I am able to view whenever I want to. She possesses what it takes to keep an audience in captivity. Her voice is as beautiful as ever and will truly impress you. The highlight of the show was her singing "Stay With Me" from her 1979 movie "The Rose". You can feel the emotion in the song and will end up having goose bumps. The show will leave you with the urge to go out and either rent a Bette Midler movie or go to the nearest music store and purchase one of Bette Midler's albums. | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 3.55762 | 4.357646 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.6116495156327568,
0.6148568661666178,
0.6692613547408333,
0.6867917756324545,
0.6887759412035088,
0.6909287598544903,
0.692942896490632,
0.7066673078561398,
0.7272699860983097,
0.7284330835362939,
0.7309980210832917,
0.7403346301227118,
0.7519760850623844,
0.7549515857875914
],
"ids": [
31,
78,
158,
42,
127,
179,
1,
82,
185,
147,
154,
183,
123,
64,
104
]
} | 31 | 22,163 |
The three main characters are very well portrayed, especially Anisio by rock musician turned into first time actor Paulo Miklos. He is extremely convincing as the lower class trespasser/invader. The film shows very well the snowball effect of getting involved in ever more shady business, the contrast and similarities between the lower and higher classes. How everyone gets carried away by greed and ambition. 9-9,5 out of 10. | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | -0.166613 | 3.864893 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.47746249299925625,
0.4809139301983343,
0.48899362395258983,
0.5120562032898544,
0.5193071145428076,
0.5193179578310803,
0.5231270468715788,
0.5347322212780296,
0.5367842532997018,
0.5369765086189676,
0.5394929321120061,
0.5401612399900029,
0.5414232235600379,
0.5463391661995416
],
"ids": [
32,
170,
118,
80,
35,
114,
165,
7,
65,
45,
191,
135,
92,
77,
96
]
} | 32 | 19,839 |
Considering how much money was budgeted for this film, you would expect more from the story as a whole. This could be quite possibly the most worthless movie I have ever watched. There was no real advancement of anything. Character development, minimal. Plot advancement, maybe. Enjoyment, none. I'm not sure what points were even trying to be made. If you want to see a movie where terrorists are kinda good guys, American CIA bombs everything that doesn't agree with our opinions, all capitalists are corrupt, and you like to see anything resembling a storyboard advancement accompanied by a death, have at. For those of us who realize that it doesn't take killing off a good guy to make a point, we'll stick to other movies. In summary, this was a horrible attempt at an 'Ocean's 11' style hide-the-plot-so-person-has-to- think movie because not only do you not know what's going on, nobody who made the movie did either. Home Alone 3 was a better cinematic piece. | 0 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | -0.128397 | 5.020754 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.3683761383192212,
0.39807033811779813,
0.4006220031181599,
0.4050100916093945,
0.4070644093787886,
0.41935109271239623,
0.4301573191732925,
0.43287639995969207,
0.43741108890578817,
0.4419417059206413,
0.442025877254813,
0.4462655409362831,
0.44782764588466006,
0.4541590332218878
],
"ids": [
33,
118,
120,
72,
143,
170,
80,
45,
34,
8,
116,
68,
60,
2,
169
]
} | 33 | 12,456 |
Wow, here it finally is; the action "movie" without action. In a real low-budget setting (don't miss the hilarious flying saucers flying by a few times) of a future Seattle we find a no-brain hardbody seeking to avenge her childhood.<br /><br />There is nothing even remotely original or interesting about the plot and the actors' performance is only rivalled in stupidity by the attempts to steal from other movies, mainly "Matrix" without having the money to do it right. Yes, we do get to see some running on walls and slow motion shoot-outs (45 secs approx.) but these scenes are about as cool as the stupid hardbody's attempts at making jokes about male incompetence now and then.<br /><br />And, yes, we are also served a number of leads that lead absolutely nowhere, as if the script was thought-out by the previously unseen cast while shooting the scenes.<br /><br />Believe me, it is as bad as it possibly can get. In fact, it doesn't deserve to be taken seriously, but perhaps I can make some of you not rent it and save your money. | 0 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 1.618765 | 4.660746 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.3662813863972306,
0.36770727225134237,
0.37192574914312126,
0.3930975017323155,
0.39528309812143836,
0.4142103091139171,
0.4182287453852477,
0.4201754301122682,
0.421901114368574,
0.42213116737425393,
0.425193907563273,
0.43287639995969207,
0.4445564818761394,
0.4453749165601105
],
"ids": [
34,
8,
129,
118,
121,
80,
170,
144,
79,
120,
174,
143,
33,
72,
27
]
} | 34 | 10,277 |
Whether it's a good movie or not, films of this kind has to be made, i think. It remembers me of "I love Huckabees", a overwhelmingly puzzling movie with Isabelle Huppert being sodomized by a young American in a mud pond, in a merry sadistic-masochist way (??!!!!). I hope the director will go on stepping across the border, as though i felt the choices Vincenzo Natali made, were not always subtle (some of the scenes were unhappily kind of "tarte-à-la-crème", like a childish slapstick), speaking about script and cinematography
The color of "Cube" was black, "Nothing" is white, more cheerful, surprisingly, than the former films of Natali. | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 0.28385 | 4.720141 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.4184361850571804,
0.44188835164269813,
0.44791412276185794,
0.45765089101727474,
0.46116767443237217,
0.4634802122197015,
0.46353077094675543,
0.4683095085178771,
0.4694686989114111,
0.47174530516676905,
0.4720007891595437,
0.4725454915904772,
0.4748972639434994,
0.4751999235738731
],
"ids": [
35,
170,
83,
8,
112,
113,
14,
41,
45,
30,
185,
129,
118,
49,
120
]
} | 35 | 23,085 |
They played this on the July 4th Twilight Zone marathon and this is, hands down, the worst Twilight Zone episode I've ever seen. It's completely out of sync with the rest of the series in its tone. Even though Twilight Zone is a pretty uneven series and many episodes end up being groaningly predictable, this one was completely out of place. Compare this to legendary episodes like "A Stop at Willoughby" or "Midnight Sun", and you realize there is no comparison.<br /><br />Buster Keaton did what he could with such terrible material, and frankly it surprises me that someone of his historic comedy stature would stoop to the level of this episode. Even though he seemed to be giving it some effort, he MUST have needed the money... there's no other explanation. | 0 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 2.14011 | 6.212366 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.4330265233283075,
0.47590231868896293,
0.5465926493446368,
0.5555125043209461,
0.5756509283898867,
0.5773449060249161,
0.5836392079567521,
0.5840332192160971,
0.5854758130423229,
0.5895077408310347,
0.5899302194119742,
0.600231012110459,
0.6022314084129963,
0.6048817463806377
],
"ids": [
36,
152,
12,
140,
8,
27,
157,
143,
138,
120,
80,
5,
25,
121,
34
]
} | 36 | 1,805 |
I like a lot of the actors/actresses involved in this project so being insulted by the movie felt even worse than if they used a unknowns .The main problem was this movie was clearly just a concept created to appeal to baby boomers .In 20 or 30 years Nbc will probably do a movie just like this about the early 90's . I can see it now a black family where the kids are involved with the la riot's and the white family has the kids rebel and listen to grunge rock music .The soundtrack will feature bands like Nirvana , N.W.A , Public Enemy , Soundgarden etc .The movie like this will be just as cheesy as The 60's and I gurantee you NBC will do it .See the biggest problem with period pieces when done buy networks is that when you are living in a certain time period you aren't thinking i am living in the 60's or whatever decade is trendy retro at the time .Next time someone does something like this they should put more weight into there project | 0 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 1.251828 | 6.001824 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.43289017698119436,
0.43837070362734787,
0.45186305034008,
0.47981422048784983,
0.49231308498205817,
0.5023233759941809,
0.505996455640398,
0.5075909322542886,
0.5088487655838589,
0.5105997018464005,
0.5157783786799366,
0.5229410246000357,
0.523026753621813,
0.5250983923029808
],
"ids": [
37,
180,
140,
8,
120,
50,
72,
34,
107,
80,
118,
136,
131,
33,
196
]
} | 37 | 2,790 |
This movie makes a statement about Joseph Smith, what he stood for, and what the LDS church believes. With all the current media coverage of a certain fugitive people have confused the LDS church with the FLDS church and criminal fugitive Warren Jeffs. Jeffs is Not associated with the LDS church yet media groups internationally have asked for comments about Jeffs from The LDS church. Jeffs is not mentioned in the movie at all but I think that it is ironic that this movie with all it's points about Joseph also point away from the fews of the FLDS church and their leader at this time in the media world. This is a movie about Joseph Smith and a great one at that. Some of the most obvious differences between Jeffs and Joseph is portrayed in Joseph's humanity, acceptance and love. Jeffs views and opinions differ greatly from Joseph Smith and the LDS Church and it is seen in this movie. Jeffs thinks of the "Negro" as devils. Joseph Smith knew they were children of god and gave up his wife's favorite horse to a African American (former slave) to buy his son's freedom. Joseph is shown doing housework for his wife Emma and is criticized by a member until Joseph tells him that a man may lose his wife in the next life if she chooses not to stay with her husband and that doing chores is a way to help and cherish your wife. Jeffs brought one of his polygamist wives to her knees in front of a class full of students by grabbing her braid and twisting it painfully till she came to her knees. Lastly Joseph participated with law enforcement and sought aid from the government at all times. Jeffs thumbs his nose at government and flees at all times.<br /><br />I loved this movie and if you don't know much about Joseph Smith and what the LDS church believes, then this is the movie to see. And if you had confused the LDS Church with the FLDS church then you really need to get your act together. We are not much different from anyone who believes in Jesus Christ, the Sanctity of marriage and the family, as well a patriotic to our homeland and country. We are all different as well just like you can find different protestants, Presbyterians, methodist, baptist and Catholics. What's important is our message and what we stand for. This movie trys to portray that but there is so much of Joseph's life that can't be covered in a mere 2 hour movie. This was a really great show. | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 1.936157 | 3.963263 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.6236710466095184,
0.6319307319627663,
0.6415681212772646,
0.6470175731146159,
0.6491742004849095,
0.6527569177116352,
0.6542130444708925,
0.6575260506180565,
0.6608359854163912,
0.6615962624754887,
0.6650218153733387,
0.6651299125228078,
0.6698213390961775,
0.6740886924880527
],
"ids": [
38,
167,
136,
30,
121,
135,
176,
137,
46,
34,
18,
72,
68,
37,
118
]
} | 38 | 24,427 |
There is no greater disservice to do to history than to misrepresent it. This takes the easiest and most shallow route, simply portraying him as a monster. Only showing his negative sides, and exaggerating them. "Those who are ignorant of the past doom us to repeat it". He was a human being. That may prove tough to some people to accept, but an important part of life is facing that which we don't want to. Rather than demonizing the man, we ought to try to understand him. Otherwise, we stand little chance of preventing anyone similar in the future, or possibly even the present, from succeeding at anything of remotely comparable scope, as far as damage and misery goes. Hate him and what he did, don't make him into something mythical, intentionally or otherwise. Frankly, far too much of this mini-series could play "dumb dumb *duuum*!" after or during scenes. The whole thing nods, nudges and winks at the audience, with a clear message of "was this guy evil or what", incorporating every single bad trait(as well as making up several that go directly against who and what he was), letting them appear more or less out of nowhere, and having them be constant throughout his life, not something he came to believe or claimed to. This should never be used to educate. Use Der Untergang(Downfall, in English), and maybe point out the few inaccuracies of that, instead. This, this is disrespectful to the actual events that took place, and to any and all survivors, not to mention those who died. The cinematic quality? Top-notch. It's well-done, through and through, excellent production values, a solid arc to the well-told plot, what characterization does occur is strong and credible, dialog and script are great, all acting performances are masterful(Carlyle looks and behaves the role... as it was written... perfectly), the music is well-composed, cinematography and editing are flawless and creative, and this is definitely dramatic, entertaining and riveting. They get dates and many occurrences, and do them justice. If I had been offered to work on this, and did not feel I could be objective enough to have Hitler appear as a fully fleshed-out person, I would have declined, citing that as the reason. I don't blame anyone for loathing him. How can you forgive what he did, and are we sure that we should? That is not what I am suggesting. Finally, let me point out that, as I write this, we are in a world-wide economic crisis that has lasted for about two years, and that is not terribly dissimilar to the stock market crash of 1929. The two reasons it hasn't led to a depression of the new millennium are as follows: governments are giving money to the banks to keep the market going, and the majority of the countries is now friendly towards one another. Apart from that, the lesson hadn't been learned. Hopefully, it has now. Back to this... my suggestion? Read a book, non-fiction, dealing with the subject. There are plenty of informative, smart ones. The DVD holds a trailer. I recommend this only to those who know better, and vehemently urge anyone who has watched it, to seek out the truth. 8/10 | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | -0.428861 | 7.418964 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.6355345112233045,
0.638905836635808,
0.6407169243693538,
0.6459791400524638,
0.6460287489791281,
0.6508847786426972,
0.6524130682026565,
0.664413236258451,
0.6965136075500039,
0.7010158229333213,
0.7025937240227833,
0.7149530774650881,
0.7177300813258863,
0.7191767315449827
],
"ids": [
39,
111,
165,
186,
107,
66,
60,
116,
197,
171,
157,
41,
196,
36,
195
]
} | 39 | 17,716 |
During the cheap filmed in video beginning of Crazy Fat Ethel II, I wondered if it was the same film that was on the cover. Unfortunately, it was. The story itself is mindlessly simple. Ethel, a homicidal maniac with an eating disorder, is released into a halfway house because of hospital overcrowding. She is by far the most sane resident watching while one man puts dead flies into another's soup. Ethel is then teased by one of the halfway house employees with a chocolate bar after he hits on the cost cutting measure of feeding the residents dog food. Ethel retaliates by strangling him with a wire noose on the stairs and then....well, you get the idea. If this all sounds like fun, it isn't. This film was poorly made with cheap effects and even worse acting. The characters are so wooden when delivering their lines that they should be standing out in front of a cigar store. To make matters worse, half of the film consists of flashbacks to the first Ethel movie, Criminally Insane, which is little better. A VERY poor effort. | 0 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 1.392319 | 4.373017 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.5061091857016251,
0.5126130882118287,
0.5299036884898172,
0.5301204261058297,
0.5309040561937087,
0.5318957970395192,
0.535791017013268,
0.5407763680096056,
0.5475760828725995,
0.5529079157042818,
0.5537597852469294,
0.5608332242893588,
0.5636137112269046,
0.5670982922977382
],
"ids": [
40,
143,
27,
34,
169,
114,
8,
43,
97,
44,
72,
170,
33,
131,
55
]
} | 40 | 4,972 |
This isn't cinema. It isn't talent. It isn't informative. It isn't scary. It isn't entertaining. It isn't anything at all.<br /><br />I got this because my cousin says, "Diablo! COOL!" Yeah, right. The only thing cool about this experience was the lone fact that I didn't buy it but rented it instead.<br /><br />It's shot like a bad soap opera. No wait. Soap operas at least LOOK professional...sorta. This? This looks like it was shot with someone's camcorder. It's horrid! Wretched! It sux.<br /><br />The cinematography is detestable! WHO IS this director anyway? I don't even care enough to look him up. He STINKS! The performances by these poor unsuspecting actors were far better than this crap-fest deserved.<br /><br />2.6/10 on the "B" scale. <br /><br />That registers about a 0.3/10 on the "A" scale from...<br /><br />the Fiend :. | 0 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 0.27726 | 7.337366 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.34383624411490044,
0.3481686057645573,
0.35383364710190746,
0.36445114350897656,
0.3753039302385479,
0.3886641170194567,
0.40295731440829097,
0.41262182946633574,
0.4146892600273986,
0.4228803892623496,
0.4305778525674976,
0.4360507864332793,
0.4470407483592138,
0.44747502863254174
],
"ids": [
41,
116,
107,
79,
8,
195,
122,
129,
45,
112,
182,
80,
119,
143,
174
]
} | 41 | 7,613 |
Joan Fontaine is "A Damsel in Distress" in this 1937 musical starring Fred Astaire, George Burns, and Gracie Allen. The plot, what there is of it, is about a British woman (Fontaine) in love with an American, who is mistaken for Astaire, a musical comedy star.<br /><br />The film, directed by George Stevens, contains some wonderful Gershwin music, including "Nice Work if You Can Get It" and "A Foggy Day." The best scene is the "Stiff Upper Lip" number, which takes place in a fun house.<br /><br />Astaire's singing voice sounds more robust in this film than it does in others, and he has a couple of excellent dance numbers. Burns plays his over the top publicist and Allen is Burns' secretary. She's hilarious. The problem, as others have pointed out, is Fontaine, who has to dance with Astaire at the end of the film. Stevens could easily have used a double because he shows the dance in a long shot, and it takes place among the trees. I would have thought it was a double except the dancing was so lousy.<br /><br />Definitely worth seeing despite its flaws. | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 3.268949 | 4.768754 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.5606148240975344,
0.5795008930534942,
0.5833371025661866,
0.5855039329482274,
0.5855280097438464,
0.5942406804106874,
0.5997798607671123,
0.6165349821798689,
0.6463879721085128,
0.6549528442032883,
0.657381924441485,
0.6577242241087665,
0.6583664165733363,
0.6631304413948222
],
"ids": [
42,
64,
123,
1,
150,
144,
78,
82,
132,
113,
100,
176,
126,
67,
75
]
} | 42 | 17,238 |
Manhattan apartment dwellers have to put up with all kinds of inconveniences. The worst one is the lack of closet space! Some people who eat out all the time use their ranges and dishwashers as storage places because the closets are already full!<br /><br />Melvin Frank and Norman Panama, a great comedy writing team from that era, saw the potential in Eric Hodgins novel, whose hero, Jim Blandings, can't stand the cramped apartment where he and his wife Muriel, and two daughters, must share.<br /><br />Jim Blandings, a Madison Ave. executive, has had it! When he sees an ad for Connecticut living, he decides to take a look. Obviously, a first time owner, Jim is duped by the real estate man into buying the dilapidated house he is taken to inspect by an unscrupulous agent. This is only the beginning of his problems.<br /><br />Whatever could be wrong, goes wrong. The architect is asked to come out with a plan that doesn't work for the new house, after the original one is razed. As one problem leads to another, more money is necessary, and whatever was going to be the original cost, ends up in an inflated price that Jim could not really afford.<br /><br />The film is fun because of the three principals in it. Cary Grant was an actor who clearly understood the character he was playing and makes the most out of Jim Blandings. Myrna Loy, was a delightful actress who was always effective playing opposite Mr. Grant. The third character, Bill Cole, an old boyfriend of Myrna, turned lawyer for the Blandings, is suave and debonair, the way Melvin Douglas portrayed him. One of the Blandings girls, Joan, is played by Sharyn Moffett, who bore an uncanny resemblance to Eva Marie Saint. The great Louise Beavers plays Gussie, but doesn't have much to do.<br /><br />The film is lovingly photographed by James Wong Howe, who clearly knew what to do to make this film appear much better. The direction of H.C. Potter is light and he succeeded in this film that will delight fans of classic comedies. | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 1.332111 | 3.963263 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.535791017013268,
0.628248808290431,
0.6369550305952554,
0.6405765348701802,
0.6465549474163519,
0.6540551182645944,
0.6568565058192513,
0.6568857940486068,
0.6586431748408739,
0.6624134191050937,
0.6731906374087593,
0.6736419694004069,
0.6768668042960029,
0.6799219303934461
],
"ids": [
43,
40,
114,
119,
165,
34,
33,
198,
130,
8,
170,
96,
0,
62,
84
]
} | 43 | 13,570 |
As a premise, this backwoods version of the Dead Calm storyline had promise.<br /><br />However, director Eric Red's inability to render a convincing hurricane leads to a deluge of continuity and lighting errors.<br /><br />Ultimately, the viewer is more spellbound by the bizarre weather effects than the intended storyline. Intermittent spates of ham-fisted over-direction are similarly distracting.<br /><br />Charles Dance, doing an 'inbred backwoods hardass' schtick, does his best to save the movie. But ultimately, Undertow squeals like a pig ... and has more ham to boot. | 0 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 0.739294 | 4.625585 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.5002899870259376,
0.5079531216708447,
0.5111416877331176,
0.5142205292731676,
0.5154333206985515,
0.5210565046413166,
0.5224237223127253,
0.5280701488477364,
0.5305189219196542,
0.5317508821234074,
0.5319470829220712,
0.5322013794055136,
0.5337093489088934,
0.5337887897680381
],
"ids": [
44,
120,
14,
33,
118,
41,
155,
170,
27,
34,
72,
116,
45,
119,
60
]
} | 44 | 7,946 |
...And I never thought a movie deserved to be awarded a 1! But this one is honestly the worst movie I've ever watched. My wife picked it up because of the cast, but the storyline right since the DVD box seemed quite predictable. It is not a mystery, nor a juvenile-catching film. It does not include any sensuality, if that's what the title could remotely have suggest any of you. This is just a total no-no. Don't waste your time or money unless you feel like watching a bunch of youngsters in a as-grown-up kind of Gothic setting, where a killer is going after them. Nothing new, nothing interesting, nothing worth watching. Max Makowski makes the worst of Nick Stahl. | 0 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 0.423686 | 6.320825 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.3171583944958286,
0.3719355836449163,
0.38012279303719865,
0.3835207156444419,
0.38654065011973415,
0.40201383334114804,
0.4043991149653251,
0.4049714230493854,
0.41262182946633574,
0.4154790425408874,
0.4301573191732925,
0.4387552643474205,
0.44381706348093897,
0.44520200182361025
],
"ids": [
45,
8,
170,
122,
46,
80,
97,
118,
129,
41,
195,
33,
182,
120,
185
]
} | 45 | 5,100 |
I saw this film at the Rhode Island International Film Festival and was completely blown away. The structure and execution of the film was fantastic...I know it won't, but it really deserves an Oscar nod. Cal and Andre were phenomenal as the two disturbed classmates. Yes, the film is very controversial and I can see a lot of people having a lot of problems with it, as it deals with school shooting and especially makes you identify with the killers. However, despite its harsh and blunt subject matter, Zero Day is SO worth watching. I'm looking forward to it coming out on video so I can buy it - it's very, very good. Very powerful and intense...the end shooting sequence leaves you speechless because it's almost too realistic. Their uncertainty, the "recordings", the footage and panic of the students, totally indescribable. I really hope it gets the attention it deserves. It's done in the same format as The Blair Witch Project, handheld camera, made to appear as a true home video documentary kind of film - but god is it INFINITELY better. Very impressive, hats off to everyone involved. If you've got the chance you really should see it. | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 0.095568 | 6.060546 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.3835207156444419,
0.40861829730968857,
0.4107931089522603,
0.41227064795425683,
0.413313940369778,
0.4164473293738482,
0.4213167590379808,
0.42587201119831564,
0.43308210668331537,
0.4347674629591096,
0.44218643845287275,
0.44977068301446466,
0.4644630470017498,
0.4661489249375662
],
"ids": [
46,
45,
170,
50,
118,
80,
8,
72,
97,
122,
120,
174,
195,
33,
113
]
} | 46 | 23,948 |
I enjoyed this film. I thought it was an excellent political thriller about something that's never happened before - a Secret Service agent going bad and involved in an assassination plot. Unfortunately, for Michael Douglas' character, "Pete Garrison," they think HE's the mole but he isn't. <br /><br />He's just a morally-flawed agent having an affair with the First Lady! Since he's doing that, he's unable to give an acceptable polygraph exam and that makes him suspect number one when it's revealed there is a plot to kill the President.<br /><br />"Garrison" is forced to go on the lam but at the same time he's still trying to do the right thing by protecting the President. Douglas does a fine job in this role. I don't always care the people he plays but he's an excellent actor. Keifer Sutherland ("David Breckinridge") is equally as good (at least in here) as the fellow SS boss who hunts down Douglas until convinced he has been telling the truth. When he does the two of them work together in the finale to discover and then stop, if they can, the plot. The crooks are interesting, too, by the way. Also, I have never - and never will, unfortunately - see a First Lady who looks as good as Kim Basinger<br /><br />This is simply a slick action flick that entertains start-to-finish. Are there holes in it? Of course; probably a number of them, and a reason you see so many critical comments. However, it is unfairly bashed here. It just isn't intelligent enough for the geniuses here on this website. My advice: chill, just go along for the ride and enjoy all the action and intrigue. Yes, it gets a little Rambo-ish at the end but otherwise it gets high marks for entertainment.....which is what movies are all about. | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 1.084919 | 3.809799 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.4760044458741933,
0.5112113223023504,
0.5280646894648096,
0.5344646448731197,
0.547866385496455,
0.5479922698611066,
0.5565019872652961,
0.5599158824444554,
0.5605717628179818,
0.5661143458622717,
0.572939515904348,
0.5758710017571891,
0.5870141527194347,
0.5884237255559088
],
"ids": [
47,
68,
65,
100,
165,
109,
93,
114,
118,
96,
140,
170,
134,
80,
72
]
} | 47 | 21,182 |
I have been known to fall asleep during films, but this is usually due to a combination of things including, really tired, being warm and comfortable on the sette and having just eaten a lot. However on this occasion I fell asleep because the film was rubbish. The plot development was constant. Constantly slow and boring. Things seemed to happen, but with no explanation of what was causing them or why. I admit, I may have missed part of the film, but i watched the majority of it and everything just seemed to happen of its own accord without any real concern for anything else. I cant recommend this film at all. | 0 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 0.130221 | 6.534382 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.3939343473738748,
0.42046380452024856,
0.48052741644573005,
0.48397660326050884,
0.4925323729649861,
0.4965142614234669,
0.5127475800602901,
0.5192549600723388,
0.5196481042008436,
0.5316905973077606,
0.5334121154660547,
0.5336288155049542,
0.5344137887317578,
0.5368412034805974
],
"ids": [
48,
139,
120,
106,
122,
195,
8,
170,
174,
97,
53,
116,
79,
49,
113
]
} | 48 | 733 |
This is an odd film for me, as after I reviewed a nice film from a new film maker (FAR OUT by Phil Mucci), another writer/director, Ryan Jafri, contacted me and asked me to watch and review his film, THE CURE. I don't normally review films this way, but what the heck--I love shorts and couldn't wait to see another.<br /><br />Interestingly, while it turned out I did like THE CURE, I was not thrilled by it and let Jafri know. To his credit, he encouraged me to review it anyway--giving it my honest appraisal.<br /><br />The film has tremendous style and as far as Jafri's direction goes, it's exceptional--especially for such an inexperienced film maker (it's his first film). The combination of exceptional choices of color, pacing and music that well-suited the film created a great sense of atmosphere. You really are pulled into the film and that is a credit to the film making. However, the thing I didn't love was some of the writing. While the basic idea was great, the ending was just too easy to foresee. I really would have loved the ending had it come as more of a surprise or there to have been an unexpected twist. However, considering that this film is from someone who shouldn't be able to make such a professional film given his experience, it bodes well for his future. Good job. | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | -0.669455 | 4.761454 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.38234393742783246,
0.3899719994758094,
0.42697324481298504,
0.4337822288626936,
0.44899322460590163,
0.4521430665460231,
0.46148358726034644,
0.4660176097443297,
0.4748972639434994,
0.4774438185887314,
0.47866867463909635,
0.4866469600792743,
0.4884276325440481,
0.49357102947879505
],
"ids": [
49,
118,
120,
170,
8,
129,
50,
171,
16,
35,
174,
85,
198,
80,
60
]
} | 49 | 18,404 |
this, is NOT one of those films it is one of the biggest pieces of tripe I have ever scene, the camera work is trying to be flashy but it really just crap the whole thing looks like the red shoe diaries, but without the sex, the only reason I bought this was I wanted to try out dvd and this was the cheapest one I could find, possibly the worst buy of my life and could have put you off dvd forever, the soundtrack is REALLY tacky and most of the movie is made up of endless repeats of clips from the first two films, why anyone would want to make a movie as awful as this is beyond me, if they had really attempted to make an original movie and failed I would be nicer in this review but they don't they just got the rights to reproduce stuff from the first two and then edit it and repeat it into this film with about maybe under 1 3rd original footage which is about up to the standards of film school students, DO NOT buy this movie. the only entertainment this dvd can offer is if you were to stick it in the microwave and watch the flashing lights! UTTER UTTER UTTER UTTTER unbelievable GARBAGE! 0/10 if only the voting system would allow that. | 0 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 0.583803 | 6.826081 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.3098087438490451,
0.3166385134128411,
0.38856368608595193,
0.4107931089522603,
0.41430853589819505,
0.415247162689492,
0.41925056847390607,
0.4210525612023224,
0.4427794180100223,
0.44442791211669186,
0.4484008413019709,
0.44896160348859515,
0.4495573643320594,
0.4521430665460231
],
"ids": [
50,
8,
129,
107,
46,
79,
170,
113,
120,
198,
97,
182,
118,
119,
49
]
} | 50 | 3,848 |
I'm not entirely sure Rob Schmidt qualifies as a "Master" in the genre of horror, since he previously just directed one horror film called "Wrong Turn" and that one was actually just was slightly above mediocre, but fact is that he made with "Right to Die" one of the best and creepiest episodes of the entire second season of the "Masters of Horror" franchise. There was a similar underdog story in season one, when William Malone made on of the best episodes with "The Fair Haired Child" even though his other long feature films "Fear Dot Com" and "House on Haunted Hill" sucked pretty badly.<br /><br />The story of "Right to Die" cleverly picks in on the nowadays piping hot social debate of euthanasia, but thankfully also features multiple old-fashioned horror themes like ghostly vengeance, murderous conspiracies, pitch black humor and comic book styled violence. Whilst driving home late one night and discussing the husband's continuous adultery, the Addison couple are involved in a terrible car accident. Cliff walks away from the wreck unharmed but his wife Abby is fully burned and needs to be kept alive artificially. Whilst Cliff and his sleazy attorney (Corbin Bernsen of "The Dentist") want to plug the plug on her and sue the car constructor, Abbey's mum sets up a giant media campaign to keep her daughter alive as a vegetable and blame everything on Cliff. Meanwhile Abbey's hateful spirit comes back for revenge and kills someone in Cliff's surrounding whenever she has a near fatal experience with the medical devices. After a few victims, Cliff realizes it might be safer for him to keep his wife alive if he wants to remain alive as well. "Right to Die" is a stupendous episode and exactly the type of stuff I always hoped to see from a TV-series concept like "Masters of Horror". It's violent and gory with a sick & twisted sense of humor and loads of sleaze sequences. The euthanasia theme and the whole obligatory media circus that surrounds it is processed into the script very well, yet without unnecessarily reverting to political standpoints or morality lessons. The atmosphere is suspenseful and the killing sequences are suitably nasty and unsettling. Actresses Julia Anderson and Robin Sydney both have pretty face and impressively voluptuous racks, which is always a welcome plus, and Corbin Bernsen is finally offered the chance again to depict a mean-spirited and egocentric bastard. Great "MoH" episode; definitely one of the highlights of both seasons. | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | -0.716108 | 6.547297 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.5063753583394767,
0.5127761648614074,
0.5368017830663744,
0.5485764818322119,
0.5552256777539522,
0.5563990365471642,
0.5596687199076018,
0.5622326927833583,
0.5645972843711184,
0.5835955129414986,
0.5855581808232788,
0.5978143283455211,
0.6036211089489527,
0.6045858406173779
],
"ids": [
51,
119,
45,
169,
116,
151,
114,
44,
111,
195,
72,
139,
8,
112,
181
]
} | 51 | 22,714 |
Johnny and Jeremy are vampires of sorts. Minus the fangs, of course. They're dark, bitter creatures with nothing better to do than to spread their own misery. Through their charms (namely a sharp tongue and a fat wallet, respectively) they seduce desperate souls, who they proceed to torment and victimize. That's more or less the basis of this black comedy, as I understand it.<br /><br />It's not a blend of black humor that I can easily subscribe to, partly because it bothers me to imagine the audience rooting for the sleazy, main character. I did enjoy, however, the sound and the melody of the rapid-fire (and supposedly very witty) remarks. I was very impressed by the cast's strong acting, particularly David Thelis's; only the character of Jeremy seemed too bi-dimensional. The photography and the music, both dramatic and somber, work very well together. <br /><br />What really turns me off about "Naked" (and the main reason I'd never recommend it to anyone) is the way it repeatedly seems to present misogyny as a valid way to vent one's angst. In other words, in a world that sucks so bad, what difference does it make if one inflicts some pain on girls, right? To suggest (as some have on this website) that Johnny is not so unkind a person because he's not as rough on girls as Jeremy, seems completely absurd to me. They're both terrible, nasty people. And they're particularly keen on hurting women every single time they get a chance. One could argue that Johnny eventually gets what he deserves, as if his bad karma suddenly swung straight back and bit him in the ass. But still, his and Jeremy's sadistic behavior are treated to a certain degree as a laughing matter. And I could be wrong, but I'm guessing that most people who absolutely love this movie also find that aspect of the film darkly comical. | 0 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 2.59011 | 5.629646 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.5283638485129709,
0.530321191033394,
0.5354960316773651,
0.5398300591563447,
0.5459658414826127,
0.563601992084009,
0.5674351906708168,
0.5694384168815912,
0.5725513499167739,
0.5774130019762824,
0.5826806852332607,
0.5846282392402256,
0.5884178080559612,
0.5936020451964575
],
"ids": [
52,
197,
75,
8,
182,
144,
5,
11,
41,
129,
44,
60,
16,
192,
49
]
} | 52 | 9,888 |
<br /><br />I watched this movie just a little while ago and I found that this movie was terrible! It moved very slowly and was hardly entertaining!<br /><br />Sorry for all those that liked it.... this is only my opinion! | 0 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 0.716033 | 5.751317 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.34483946817402633,
0.36911835111523605,
0.37553965268474665,
0.3990222757282732,
0.4031271944238939,
0.410227253082063,
0.4135489612844757,
0.41730381197388955,
0.430687071254209,
0.43729746445867235,
0.4519040157194846,
0.4570886536262484,
0.4587877513976383,
0.46400606918002685
],
"ids": [
53,
80,
170,
122,
120,
118,
139,
143,
8,
109,
190,
106,
97,
129,
27
]
} | 53 | 4,405 |
Look it's Eva Longoria and Paul Rudd in a movie about a dead girlfriend haunting the new girlfriend. It's Gabrielle from Desperate Housewives and the guy who wore "sex Panther cologne" in Anchorman. If you are expecting a Golden Globe nominated movie then you need to rethink how you look at movies. However, if you are willing to suspend reality for 90 minutes and want to watch a funny movie then you've come to the right place. The characters are all funny. They work together very well. The real match up is Paul Rudd and Lake Bell. He's as funny as he was on Friends and she was funny and good looking all at the same time. I went with my wife, she enjoyed it and so did I. | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 2.815781 | 5.65098 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.4051685990620466,
0.4604583940523913,
0.46364443864543714,
0.4792452479761148,
0.48275481540690335,
0.49382758515630176,
0.49784167689641656,
0.5127540621129179,
0.5226355464175454,
0.5241095132023387,
0.5328249550240975,
0.5335947483868375,
0.5343080578858806,
0.5408630272561488
],
"ids": [
54,
8,
128,
126,
129,
144,
29,
5,
132,
104,
55,
118,
122,
140,
143
]
} | 54 | 22,683 |
This is not as funny and gory as the DVD box claims. I really love twisted and wierd movies, but this one is really just dull! It's one hour of ripped off penises, flying Baby Born dolls and a lot of rape! I think the intention with this amateur sleaze, was to make a It's-so-bad-it's-good movies, but it fails. It's just bad! A few scenes are ok, but in whole it's a mess. If you like amateur splatter like this one (Only way better) I would recommend Andreas Schnass' Violent Shit 2 and 3. | 0 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 1.302915 | 6.601856 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.393290165220455,
0.3987046751395743,
0.43950676137477174,
0.4399783566816756,
0.4705791903404183,
0.4773736486539474,
0.479836807424189,
0.48503234573243026,
0.4908873471450286,
0.49345344945325487,
0.49561915174392035,
0.4987557053672046,
0.499991675000213,
0.5056503500090082
],
"ids": [
55,
8,
129,
118,
182,
50,
45,
29,
79,
53,
34,
113,
144,
170,
35
]
} | 55 | 3,352 |
"Silverlake Life" is a documentary and it was plain and straightforward. Actually, it was more like a home movie, and if you want dramatic illuminations, see something else. And it's by no means a tearjerker. But I mean that in positive ways. It shows two men who love each other and how being afflicted with AIDS is affecting the quality of their every-day lives. It's almost difficult for me to say whether this was a quality film or not, because it was so undressed that I had to look for other ways to respond. It's an admirable film, actually one of the most admirable, sincere documents I've ever seen. These two men have incredible integrity as their lives are reduced to the most basic parts. It makes Hollow-wood productions on AIDS seem hip and heartless. These men made this movie for themselves, which is one of the best reasons to create something. The scene where Tom sings "You are My Sunshine" to Mark and tells him goodbye is the real thing. | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 0.897381 | 5.341909 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.5117414958689042,
0.513150712288291,
0.5245616658305101,
0.5267759540794559,
0.5365499107843348,
0.5435089679032326,
0.5455834984412579,
0.555352378933847,
0.5614519367626888,
0.5622196704788658,
0.5638850025108607,
0.5641322114544549,
0.5649805599867814,
0.566380141296212
],
"ids": [
56,
170,
83,
80,
8,
121,
49,
168,
46,
129,
30,
34,
35,
143,
199
]
} | 56 | 15,191 |
I missed the entire season of the show and started watching it on ABC website during the summer of 2007. I am absolutely crazy about the show. I think the entire cast is excellent. It's one of my favorite show ever. I just checked the ABC program lineup for this Fall and did not see it on the schedule. That is really sad. I hope they will bring it back ... maybe they are waiting until Bridget Moynahan has her baby? Or is it only my wishful thinking? <br /><br />I read some of the comments posted about the show and see so many glowing remarks, similar to mine. I certainly hope that ABC will reconsider its decision or hopefully another station will pick it up. | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 2.986554 | 6.360537 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.5093853529877718,
0.5782361636791482,
0.6116219820900715,
0.6263843794106849,
0.6305041402297313,
0.6311325193180248,
0.6392199438565567,
0.6546948078227264,
0.669803441274674,
0.6706210565867536,
0.6753544923650272,
0.6850214726340177,
0.6851893771566802,
0.68602916664695
],
"ids": [
57,
127,
25,
109,
98,
179,
104,
183,
143,
90,
190,
161,
138,
193,
78
]
} | 57 | 15,694 |
Two years passed and mostly everyone looks different, some for good and some for worse. I still enjoyed as much as I did the original though.<br /><br />Some flaws they had though like changing the Joker he now has no red lips and looks like more blackish hair and black pupils, hes still voiced by Mark Hamill which is a plus I guess. They made Poison Ivy more white hinting that she is becoming more like a plant and Catwomen looks much different and not as "attractive" as she was in the original.<br /><br />Though costumes like Batman, Batgirl, Killer Croc and Scarecrow look badass, especially Scarecrow.<br /><br />The show isn't as dark as the original because Batman doesn't work as alone as he used to. Most of the time working with Batgirl and the new Robin, Tim Drake. While NightWing(Dick Grayson) comes to the rescue often. Batman gave up the yellow logo and with the black wing on his suit and seems like he got a bit bigger but still kicking tons of ass.<br /><br />The show isn't as good as the original mostly because of some of the revamped characters but the stories are as exciting as ever and the dialogue is still elite. "Over the Edge" might be one of the greatest Batman episodes ever so make sure you check that out.<br /><br />Overall 8-9/10 | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 2.152341 | 4.976329 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.572867063844828,
0.5764334258471616,
0.586402660925865,
0.599047749193956,
0.6191847414888987,
0.6201869847652401,
0.6207150262552208,
0.6307900161648501,
0.6339442290913508,
0.6403637378857334,
0.6414058125762425,
0.6423022865048106,
0.6425024751625481,
0.6455946693324615
],
"ids": [
58,
183,
133,
140,
163,
141,
54,
115,
88,
132,
22,
143,
5,
122,
195
]
} | 58 | 19,946 |
This movie was incredible. I would recommend it to anyone, much better than what I had already anticipated. It was definitely a heart-wrenching spectacular movie. It is an amazing story, with amazing actors and creators. Definitely another great movie with Denzel Washington. (shouldn't surprise anyone) Derek Luke did a wonderful job as well. | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 0.23444 | 5.086386 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.39151263655300605,
0.3966131423908411,
0.4199773815289275,
0.4324497090038588,
0.4382276816498264,
0.43885027953615885,
0.4421066015659195,
0.4463947146789625,
0.45045101279526223,
0.4638280201594993,
0.46646196138659346,
0.46779860375775706,
0.46861546026749334,
0.474944230457215
],
"ids": [
59,
68,
170,
80,
118,
106,
15,
109,
30,
120,
108,
33,
53,
168,
45
]
} | 59 | 14,354 |
I've seen this film criticized with the statement, "If you can get past the moralizing..." That misses the point. Moralizing is in the conscience of the beholder, as it were. This is a decent film with a standard murder mystery, but with a distinct twist that surfaces midway through. The resolution leaves the viewer wondering, "What would I have done in this position?" And I have to believe that's exactly what the filmmaker intended. To that end, and to the end of entertaining the audience, the film succeeds. I also like the way that the violence is never on stage, but just off camera. We know what has just happened; it's just not served up in front of us, then rubbed in our faces, as it would be today with contemporary blood and gore dressing. Besides, the violence is not the point. The point is the protagonist's moral dilemma, which is cleverly, albeit disturbingly, resolved. | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | -0.732647 | 4.902938 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.38736474457660286,
0.40920722556001266,
0.4126095985660536,
0.43748186013066204,
0.4406071264296567,
0.4462655409362831,
0.4491878059177996,
0.45262981086954457,
0.4570206183575911,
0.46933133799367466,
0.4713272616866482,
0.47180034427481665,
0.4830599086056532,
0.48801344154019355
],
"ids": [
60,
169,
118,
182,
8,
170,
33,
34,
114,
171,
107,
197,
186,
193,
83
]
} | 60 | 21,742 |
Michael Is King. This film contains some of the best stuff Mike has ever done. Smooth Criminal is pure genius. The cameos are wonderful, but as always, the main event is MJ himself. He is the best, hands down. | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 0.402133 | 4.995137 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.5721150678882458,
0.5869852138341951,
0.5886295267845463,
0.6070043772226479,
0.6127565537711778,
0.6160791682708564,
0.6229888690243499,
0.626516918988322,
0.6335248861545767,
0.6363196521836085,
0.6400256716959485,
0.6429485145922869,
0.6458563456158979,
0.648579111385009
],
"ids": [
61,
180,
68,
59,
24,
135,
87,
118,
47,
45,
96,
128,
3,
166,
165
]
} | 61 | 18,353 |
This movie is beautifully designed! There are no flaws. Not in the design of the set, the lighting, the sounds, the plot. The script is an invitation to a complex game where the participants are on a simple mission.<br /><br />Paxton is at his best in this role. His mannerisms, the infections used in the tones of his voice are without miscue. Each shot meticulously done! Surprises turn up one after another when the movie reaches past its first hour. This may not be the best picture of the year, but it's a gem that has been very well polished. It's not for the simple mind. | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 0.535669 | 5.449086 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.40295284971997336,
0.41618623897617435,
0.4803454735139945,
0.4806060469011152,
0.48226031529603763,
0.4855483863852702,
0.4929552888903871,
0.4939378233640468,
0.4986662560644768,
0.5055750615867853,
0.5082545462796033,
0.5120156411000252,
0.5131237586792838,
0.5143813426478767
],
"ids": [
62,
170,
80,
14,
24,
118,
34,
108,
59,
168,
8,
119,
120,
53,
177
]
} | 62 | 17,580 |
"Ardh Satya" is one of the finest film ever made in Indian Cinema. Directed by the great director Govind Nihalani, this one is the most successful Hard Hitting Parallel Cinema which also turned out to be a Commercial Success. Even today, Ardh Satya is an inspiration for all leading directors of India.<br /><br />The film tells the Real-life Scenario of Mumbai Police of the 70s. Unlike any Police of other cities in India, Mumbai Police encompasses a Different system altogether. Govind Nihalani creates a very practical Outlay with real life approach of Mumbai Police Environment.<br /><br />Amongst various Police officers & colleagues, the film describes the story of Anand Velankar, a young hot-blooded Cop coming from a poor family. His father is a harsh Police Constable. Anand himself suffers from his father's ideologies & incidences of his father's Atrocities on his mother. Anand's approach towards immediate action against crime, is an inert craving for his own Job satisfaction. The film is here revolved in a Plot wherein Anand's constant efforts against crime are trampled by his seniors.This leads to frustrations, as he cannot achieve the desired Job-satisfaction. Resulting from the frustrations, his anger is expressed in excessive violence in the remand rooms & bars, also turning him to an alcoholic.<br /><br />The Spirit within him is still alive, as he constantly fights the system. He is aware of the system of the Metro, where the Police & Politicians are a inertly associated by far end. His compromise towards unethical practice is negative. Finally he gets suspended.<br /><br />The Direction is a master piece & thoroughly hard core. One of the best memorable scenes is when Anand breaks in the Underworld gangster Rama Shetty's house to arrest him, followed by short conversation which is fantastic. At many scenes, the film has Hair-raising moments.<br /><br />The Practical approach of Script is a major Punch. Alcoholism, Corruption, Political Influence, Courage, Deceptions all are integral part of Mumbai police even today. Those aspects are dealt brilliantly.<br /><br />Finally, the films belongs to the One man show, Om Puri portraying Anand Velankar traversing through all his emotions absolutely brilliantly. | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | -0.595437 | 2.988736 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.45399269200168435,
0.4759851131685865,
0.5625385331568368,
0.5965639124691224,
0.6087502985609743,
0.6238059475545676,
0.6261345438392193,
0.6302445331179372,
0.632135600483716,
0.6331264655675435,
0.6332388246071231,
0.6377777889571914,
0.647961836878637,
0.6538879397431674
],
"ids": [
63,
101,
92,
146,
118,
169,
177,
96,
32,
170,
60,
151,
194,
171,
79
]
} | 63 | 22,488 |
As someone else has already said here, every scene in this film is gem. Most films are lucky to have one scene that is perfect, but director Jewison hit a home run every time. The cast got just the right take on the excellent script, and in addition, Dick Hyman's musical settings of the opera and the other music made for a perfect match. Hard to imagine how they kept the precise mood going throughout the long production of a film. The comedy is subtle (mostly), and the camera-work mirrors every little emotional inflection of the narrative. Cher is such a comedy natural, Vincent Gardenia (who I know mostly through his Frank Lorenzo role on All in the Family until I saw him in this and then off-Broadway in the 80's)deserved far greater stardom than he ever got, and Aiello's hapless loser are just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to giving kudos to this tremendous cast. Has Jewison ever written about this film?<br /><br />Would love to read it. Hard to figure out why the average rating here at IMDb is so low... | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 2.881585 | 4.932748 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.45789475921414324,
0.4628719817617969,
0.4948910752244252,
0.495721916211043,
0.5039283144040302,
0.5063838829575074,
0.5123462496412561,
0.520313265949967,
0.5218691972997352,
0.5231520676365612,
0.5247108086079348,
0.5275522013353311,
0.53124495332379,
0.5331543881822569
],
"ids": [
64,
132,
144,
165,
123,
8,
112,
121,
80,
78,
170,
71,
82,
135,
183
]
} | 64 | 14,092 |
Revenge is the theme of this Denzel Washington thriller that offers its share of action, mayhem, murder and grisly bloodletting. The essentials are a bodyguard's search and destroy mission as his charge, young Dakota Fanning, is kidnapped from school, which is exactly what Washington was hired to prevent. The Mexico City locations are as chaotic as the storyline moves towards its predictable, violent conclusion, with plot twists along the way. Washington, a former CIA operative with a drinking problem, gets a good reference from a former fellow agent which sets in motion the plot's outline. Washington and Fanning have a great chemistry between them and after a troublesome beginning, the bodyguard and his charge become the best of friends. Christopher Walken, Rachel Ticotin, Radha Mitchell, Giancarlo Giannini and Mickey Rourke comprise the good cast in support of the two stars. | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 1.027248 | 4.186233 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.5048092713626134,
0.5112113223023504,
0.5171010939553347,
0.5219371457990765,
0.5275196033433684,
0.5347322212780296,
0.5460460825124315,
0.5472486710440237,
0.5472548437597706,
0.5485210492366243,
0.549040304345544,
0.5550422866389823,
0.5564027752967944,
0.5579096323283741
],
"ids": [
65,
34,
47,
68,
170,
79,
32,
114,
193,
149,
59,
45,
171,
93,
118
]
} | 65 | 20,523 |
David Chase's "The Sopranos" is perhaps the most over-praised television show in recent memory. Not only is the series devoid of intellect and passion, it's devoid of a soul. As anyone reading likely knows already, James Gandolfini *IS* Tony Soprano, a big, fat a**hole of a mob boss with a spoiled b*tch of a wife, and two bratty, sh*t-brained kids living in - you guessed it - the armpit of America (that's New Jersey, by the way). Not only is Tony a womanizing adulterer, he's also an unrepentant murdering scumbag, with a crew of "Saturday Night Live" skit-worthy caricatures for subordinates. It's not the fact that Tony is a piece of sh*t mobster that offends me (and apparently only me). Allowing characters to be who and what they are, without judgment, is something American TV hardly allows. But Chase - and his entourage of money-gorged, Emmy-gored writers - have not simply allowed us to observe Tony and his crew as they behave, nor have they even attempted to provide any insight into the action / reaction reality of (even obviously fictionalized) organized crime (a la "The Godfather"). Instead, Chase glorifies and endorses his characters' greedy, violent, and corrupt lifestyle in the same way that Tony, his wife, and even his hair-brained psychologist do week after week (or should I say month after month. Or is it year after year? It seems like the show's paltry 13-episode seasons come out with the same regularity as a lunar eclipse). Much has been made of the series' refusal to adhere to "network" structure, with plot lines that go nowhere, and characters that pop-up and disappear like backyard vermin. But if the show is so brilliant in its lack of structure, why does it always feel like I'm watching a soap-opera? Tired mob clichés, bored housewives, self-serving, irredeemable characters AND plots that go nowhere. More than ever, I can see why so many Americans of Italian heritage are p*ssed at this show. It's enough to make you want to curl up with a good book (Danté's "Inferno" springs to mind).<br /><br />People on IMDb love to claim that there's nothing good on television, and therefore "The Sopranos" is a breath of fresh air. Are these same people too busy paying their cable bills to watch "The Shield"? (It's included in Basic, ya know). How about the (still good) "The West Wing"? Or the brilliantly acted (if erratically written) "Boston Legal"? What about possibly the best comedy of the last few decades, "Arrested Development"? And lest we forget that we live in an age of DVDs - nobody *has* to watch *anything* new. I'd much rather shell out $40 for an over-priced boxed set of, well, pretty much *anything*, than give HBO $10 a month (or $80 a DVD set!) to continue to prove how much of a hack-factory it can be.<br /><br />You want good television? Watch "Homicide: Life on the Street." Or "Murder One". Or "Picket Fences". Or even Chase's prior show, "Northern Exposure." If you're already among "The Sopranos"'s legion of brain-washed fans and critics, it's too late for you. But if not, leave Tony and his worthless kin where they all belong - rotting with the fishes. ("Sleeping" would be way too kind) | 0 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 1.533357 | 4.511656 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.5743534471161409,
0.5957735151758085,
0.6041331272398529,
0.6059850920564105,
0.6194301333847445,
0.6286438115194057,
0.6304975148806649,
0.6374481666552005,
0.6381718459066125,
0.6460287489791281,
0.648713820772685,
0.652904738954651,
0.6549039727127821,
0.6567613372589025
],
"ids": [
66,
34,
156,
135,
165,
176,
151,
45,
65,
32,
39,
197,
80,
52,
41
]
} | 66 | 3,492 |
The film gets my stamp of approval. The scene in the museum demands acting without dialogue. This is one of the most interesting and unique scenes in the history of film. Dickinson's character Kate is very well developed and her performance is felt throughout the entire film. The best work Angie Dickinson did since Point Blank! | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 2.913691 | 4.451362 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.4643754667261458,
0.48435616209733123,
0.4927469137846765,
0.49443612563416195,
0.4958629228130855,
0.5087954358098967,
0.5172174732909028,
0.5217772934444626,
0.5251452828894332,
0.5273561890990193,
0.5276335888974217,
0.5299002313733726,
0.5317815245743616,
0.5325538097606299
],
"ids": [
67,
123,
143,
170,
130,
104,
185,
80,
83,
34,
132,
120,
139,
78,
128
]
} | 67 | 19,349 |
Im going to keep this fairly brief as to not spoil anything for you. This movie is awesome. From beginning to end, it is filled with genuine thrills. The fight scenes are fantastic, the chase scenes are enthralling, and it moves at such a pace that it really only felt slow toward the end when things are explained, but that is only because everything that preceded it. Damon shines and really has proved a very solid actor, daring you not to believe him in this role. He is this role. A welcome addition to the series in David Straithrain (hope i spelled that close to right) as a seedy CIA agent out to kill Bourne. This is non stop and will truly leave you on the edge of your seat for most of the way. Some things toward the end are just a smidgeon preposterous, thus negating a 10 rating. The ending is left open for sequels and I sure hope that they consider doing more of these, for none have been bad. Excellent film all in all and a fantastic ending to an amazing trilogy.<br /><br />P.S. The shaky cam did not hurt any of the action, but I still think we could do without it. The good news is, you only really notice it when people are talking and not so much the action. | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 0.12515 | 4.616609 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.39151263655300605,
0.4099525805109271,
0.44017609835505256,
0.442025877254813,
0.4551615543500659,
0.455225951330124,
0.4569693563503181,
0.4760044458741933,
0.48291598327440344,
0.5003800342119205,
0.5010705167315909,
0.5019851905063504,
0.5111848671814447,
0.5171010939553347
],
"ids": [
68,
59,
118,
170,
33,
85,
80,
120,
47,
15,
8,
45,
34,
60,
65
]
} | 68 | 15,657 |
I figured the whole joke of the movie would be to see some rich white guy acting like Chris Rock, and then see Chris Rock react to people's reactions. Instead you just see Chris Rock being himself and people not understanding him. There are maybe 2 scenes in the entire movie where they use their gimmick. This should have been a lot better. | 0 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 2.279362 | 5.754119 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.4390019041768064,
0.48565577396770987,
0.4876802005582397,
0.5178577954930211,
0.5410844955391899,
0.5429556248139866,
0.5496289299535337,
0.5570690519548056,
0.5683873618875688,
0.5725817592721141,
0.5741375479702824,
0.5779182452192425,
0.5782180412014662,
0.582307758328777
],
"ids": [
69,
5,
121,
157,
80,
128,
196,
143,
107,
34,
144,
37,
75,
140,
118
]
} | 69 | 3,589 |
Unless the title is supposed to be some kind of spoiler for the wife's transformation (the fiends! ruining it for us). Anycase, if this movie wasn't Made-For-TV, it should have been, it's so remarkably low-budget, underscripted, underacted, and hits every 70's cliche except disco. Nobody is likeable, and you could careless what happens to anyone in this one. Eminently forgetable except for the bad, bad performances. | 0 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 1.474085 | 5.939774 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.29836193851051906,
0.4330263125087497,
0.47920514270674996,
0.5040722510882452,
0.5045648523285629,
0.5136643959893477,
0.5159953498850242,
0.5199885743287314,
0.5234163406907864,
0.5253263273408932,
0.5256709643184849,
0.5421871336222546,
0.5450921394706866,
0.5516847982152207
],
"ids": [
70,
199,
8,
139,
170,
117,
80,
185,
120,
14,
16,
143,
11,
114,
129
]
} | 70 | 8,124 |
There is something special about the Austrian movies not only by Seidl, but by Spielmann and other directors as well. This is the piercing sense of reality that never leaves the viewer throughout the movie. Hundstage is no exception. This effect is achieved not only by the depicted stories but also by actors playing. In Hundstage I have never had the feeling that these are actors playing, but real people instead. So real is the visceral feeling of the viewer...Almost as if the grumpy pensioner or lonely lady in the movie are living below you in your block.<br /><br />Any person living in Vienna can without any doubt painfully recognize the people in the movie with their meckern/sudern (complaining), their hidden sexual urges and the prolo macho guys. This is further reinforced by the Viennese dialect which is, according to many, especially made for complaining as a way of life. A special parochialism and arrogance typical for Vienna are also very well portrayed.<br /><br />The Viennese suburbs have a vivid presence in the movie with their stupor and drowsiness where nothing happens. Moreover, they have been turned into a celebration of materialism with shopping malls and huge department stores. Inbetween are the houses of the people where they indulge into what they reckon is pleasure-giving activities, trying to stay in touch with their human selves, yet in vain. The examples are the sexual game of the old lady with the men which bordered on rape, the prolo guy losing his nerves and hitting his girlfriend and the young woman who hitchhikes and irritates her drivers.<br /><br />The film has no soundtrack as it concentrates on the normality/abnormality of its images only. Another typical feature of Seidl (and other Austrian directors) is his showing of disturbingly sexual images. These include the stripping of the old woman for her husband, the sexual scenes in the bath, the sexual game of the lady with the two men in her apartment, etc.<br /><br />In Hundstage Seild has portrayed the lives of people who eventually may be as much Viennese as they could be citizens of Paris, New York or Madrid. The viewers should not despise or feel pity for the Viennese in the movie as they themselves could become victims of the same human estrangement and alienation, albeit in different circumstances. In the end, I believe Seidl's film is a warning to us about the terrible state of human relationships so brutally revealed in Hundstage. And if the viewer does not succumb to the reasons for this evil transformation, Seidl has achieved his goal. | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 2.952289 | 4.916357 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.5247108086079348,
0.554926603658868,
0.5551389724757707,
0.5626017140018817,
0.589964508479998,
0.5970457595249925,
0.6081739692600983,
0.6087344571284459,
0.6162821748995762,
0.6177713828426195,
0.6211237009831041,
0.629591442157448,
0.6316349948703197,
0.6326875508602439
],
"ids": [
71,
64,
123,
172,
194,
41,
32,
35,
132,
67,
8,
198,
170,
77,
160
]
} | 71 | 18,665 |
Set in Providence, Rhode Island, Feeding the Masses tries to be a satiric look at the role of the media in government. At best, it could be applied to how the US try to control media during the Iraq War, but it ends up feeling hollow. There's never any really tension in the story and the acting never very good. Worst, the direction of the movie is atrocious, focus more on odd camera angles that fail to convey anything beyond "Isn't this an odd way to hold the camera." Special effects are pretty bad...at one point video of an explosion is green screened over the city, and it's laughable at best.<br /><br />The film does have a couple bright spots...namely the advertisements for post-zombie services (including a reclamation service and a party bus). But it's far too little to make the film worthwhile.<br /><br />For a better zombie film, try Hide and Creep. It has the same weak production value, but there's much more wit, humor and talent behind it. | 0 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | -0.492314 | 6.245655 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.34556148310394075,
0.4006220031181599,
0.4213167590379808,
0.4369060656040026,
0.44248282279905327,
0.4445564818761394,
0.4477022520292201,
0.44774220501813145,
0.4528750100258542,
0.4577176374829055,
0.4591108697331563,
0.4594005844020489,
0.4654592314985313,
0.46573115427880984
],
"ids": [
72,
195,
33,
46,
187,
174,
34,
116,
122,
159,
107,
182,
8,
131,
118
]
} | 72 | 12,042 |
I went to see this film based on the review by Siskel and Ebert; not only did I get duped, but I took some friends along, and had to spend the rest of the day profusely apologizing for making them sit through this pointless crap. After this, I never went to see a movie based solely on Siskel & Ebert's advice. | 0 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | -0.073911 | 6.614369 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.5287618092635705,
0.530295226851175,
0.5383528317895062,
0.5404125926865491,
0.5560821913710681,
0.5576667158853623,
0.5683127464086829,
0.5721027991964986,
0.5737088378608186,
0.5743329419309087,
0.5758487822633651,
0.5835888378661515,
0.5864393978230394,
0.5865933497252986
],
"ids": [
73,
50,
107,
120,
170,
49,
109,
196,
116,
122,
8,
24,
129,
45,
118
]
} | 73 | 8,504 |
It seems Hal Hartley's films are kind of hit or miss with most audiences. This film will be no exception to that rule. Fay Grim acts as a sequel to Hartley's 'Henry Foole' from 1998. The focus this time is on Henry's ex wife (played to perfection by the always welcome Parker Posey), who is being pestered by CIA goons about Henry's unpublished book about all of his shady dealings. In the interim of all of this, Fay ends up on an odyssey,dealing with international spies,etc. The film does get a bit bogged down in the second half. If you've been a fan of Hal Hartley in the past, this is one not to be missed. For the novice Hartley first timer who has only heard of his film making technique, you might want to check out his earlier films before taking on this one (especially if you haven't seen 'Henry' yet). I admired the camera work,which at times reminded me of certain early Man Ray photography. | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 1.428967 | 6.807305 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.5027751927268381,
0.5368338554636164,
0.5462500536888444,
0.5469021532655398,
0.5531551809061488,
0.560366746344553,
0.5607376671497685,
0.5637994446546529,
0.5712649745477422,
0.5790477393024598,
0.5800278628026974,
0.5803091333816741,
0.5890747425999171,
0.5893541616820833
],
"ids": [
74,
172,
168,
144,
64,
34,
11,
8,
165,
41,
198,
35,
76,
70,
17
]
} | 74 | 18,724 |
"Smokey And The Bandit" wasn't exactly Shakespeare, but then nobody wanted it to be. It was lowdown slapstick, but it did have brains. It had a very smart script with definable characters and a fun wrap-up. People came out of the theater smiling. "Hooper" provides none of this. There is no reason to smile. If it's supposed to be a tribute to the Hollywood Stuntman, it makes them look awfully lazy by providing nothing but badly-choreographed fight scenes and one of the most unconvincing car-jumps I've ever seen. It all looks phony, badly-filmed almost on purpose. Poor Sally Field (as the girlfriend who wrings her hands on the sidelines) is given her weakest role, with not a single funny or smart line ("If you do that jump, I won't be here when you get back"). Burt Reynolds keeps looking at the camera and winking, but the joke is on any audience who sits through "Hooper". * from **** | 0 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 2.53415 | 5.440379 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.47993316160415245,
0.5070274536358829,
0.512691734209267,
0.5153050971211333,
0.530321191033394,
0.5388319601565779,
0.5435033099186286,
0.5440782173177534,
0.5500718931846473,
0.5587505134126878,
0.5634924299201358,
0.5665098258773384,
0.5670241337258443,
0.5709509480738588
],
"ids": [
75,
132,
29,
168,
77,
52,
144,
128,
5,
96,
34,
8,
67,
135,
11
]
} | 75 | 6,253 |
The question of whether or not one likes this film version of "The Ghost Train" invariably depends on one thing and one thing alone: your reaction to the performance of Arthur Askey.<br /><br />He tends to steal almost every scene he's in, and not always in a good way. Sometimes you wish he'd settle down or back off just a little, to allow the plot's many characters to feature and develop (which they do to some extent). But somehow everything keeps pointing back to Askey's Tommy Gander character.<br /><br />Personally I like the film, and even like Askey to an extent. I always seem to plonk it into the vcr at those odd hours of the early morning when I can't sleep and really can't find the energy to watch anything else. There is something about watching old b/w movies in the quiet dark of pre-dawn that I find appealing.... | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 0.551656 | 6.948558 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.5107464731949947,
0.5160064678397911,
0.5281058282595347,
0.5283903481154633,
0.5402648441860474,
0.5451372814357489,
0.5458639348180043,
0.5464122576315762,
0.5492720927260126,
0.5544917330943593,
0.563568311318394,
0.5664946741280427,
0.5733343804972106,
0.5782626141286609
],
"ids": [
76,
122,
11,
79,
97,
120,
67,
168,
41,
48,
113,
118,
195,
140,
14
]
} | 76 | 17,244 |
I had high expectations of this movie (the title, translated, is "How We Get Rid of the Others"). After all, the concept is great: a near future in which the ruling elite has taken the consequence of the right-wing government's constant verbal and legislative persecution of so-called freeloaders and the left wing in general, and decided to just kill off everyone who cannot prove that they're contributing something to the establishment (the establishment being called "the common good", but actually meaning the interests of the ruling capitalist ideology).<br /><br />Very cool idea! Ideal for biting satire! Only, this movie completely blows its chance. The satire comes out only in a few scenes and performances of absurdity, but this satire is not sustained; it is neither sharp nor witty. And for an alleged comedy, the movie has nearly no funny scenes. The comedy, I assume, is supposed to be in the absurdity of the situations, but the situations are largely uncomfortable and over-serious, rather than evoking either laughter or thought.<br /><br />The script is rife with grave errors in disposition. The action should have focused on the political aspects and how wrong it would be to do such a thing, but instead oodles of time are spent on a young woman who was the one that wrote the new laws for fun, and who's trying to save everybody, by organizing a resistance that ships people to Africa. All this is beside the point! A movie like this should not pretend to be so serious! It's a satire! A political statement. But it doesn't even begin to actually address the problem it's supposed to be about. Maybe it was afraid of going too far? How cowardly. That's not art. It's not even real satire.<br /><br />Søren Pilmark, a very serious and by now one of Denmark's absolutely senior actors, was very good. He largely carried what little entertainment value the movie had. Everybody else: nothing special (well, perhaps except for Lene Poulsen, who did supply a convincing performance).<br /><br />In fact, a problem with most Danish movies is that the language never sounds natural. Neither the formulation nor the delivery. Why is it so difficult to make it sound right? Why must it be so stilted and artificial? I hope, when people look at these movies fifty years from now, they don't think that this was how people talked in general Danish society.<br /><br />3 out of 10. | 0 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 0.929699 | 4.07396 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.34707704348003243,
0.390767346549316,
0.4507360392836913,
0.4533885206717243,
0.4538432236173484,
0.4707831159447071,
0.48099839885400486,
0.4816511676992907,
0.4900838293755727,
0.4900986393179214,
0.49188528794646236,
0.49745516491710806,
0.5003373040767363,
0.5074207474929143
],
"ids": [
77,
118,
8,
170,
34,
80,
165,
29,
144,
132,
129,
60,
128,
198,
96
]
} | 77 | 12,331 |
Allison Dean's performance is what stands out in my mind watching this film. She balances out the melancholy tone of the film with an iridescent energy. I would like to see more of her. | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 3.313073 | 4.116525 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.4570164682219444,
0.47980869717720576,
0.4868953006633632,
0.5120245118470901,
0.5125246013280107,
0.5200128475590613,
0.5218691972997352,
0.5300408261601617,
0.5317815245743616,
0.533061142472167,
0.5333675835146212,
0.5355391324044005,
0.5447362594925435,
0.5449634922497658
],
"ids": [
78,
117,
173,
150,
123,
104,
185,
64,
130,
67,
193,
144,
83,
23,
183
]
} | 78 | 20,198 |
I've just lost 2 hours of my life watching this mindless plot. I could make a better movie with my cellphone camera. How do they manage to get actors to play in those movies?? Porn movies have better scenarios and effects... I wish I had those 2 hours back...<br /><br />The only good thing about this movie is the cast. Even though, their acting skills in this one could not lift this movie to passable, the rest was just WAY too bad! <br /><br />It's the type of movie that I'd recommend using to torture prisoners into scaring them straight.<br /><br />Even worse, I saw a translated version of this flick...Imagine, a bad movie...with an even worst translation...Yikes! | 0 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 0.579608 | 7.066415 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.3038768929369272,
0.35383364710190746,
0.3591381590319398,
0.39947414744114296,
0.40151585619389907,
0.4076194476640915,
0.41430853589819505,
0.4201754301122682,
0.445190105508357,
0.44565712501014687,
0.452120657838736,
0.4522350231871308,
0.4534899547207336,
0.4545602988995805
],
"ids": [
79,
129,
41,
8,
80,
187,
116,
50,
34,
170,
139,
118,
107,
120,
122
]
} | 79 | 866 |
I had to watch this in school. And to sum it up...<br /><br />Talentless actors, talentless script, and a talentless director.<br /><br />This movie is such a waste of your time. Don't even watch the movie. Don't bother. You will be so disappointed. My teacher said it was supposed to be good. How wrong she was. She even slept through it a little. The movie's actors were just bad. The best actor in there was the old man and that's not saying much. It's has horrible plot with awful characters. So unrealistic and I can honestly said it had no point. The script was unemotional and confusing. There was points in the movie when I furrowed my brows and said, "What?". Also there were just too many loose ties and plot holes. It was just absolutely horrendous. | 0 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 0.807187 | 5.659221 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.2956398556499169,
0.30299685079333416,
0.32586904142842943,
0.33967830820881384,
0.34483946817402633,
0.3570906532908048,
0.38654065011973415,
0.38911648308238955,
0.3939614144430639,
0.39528309812143836,
0.3958070800765009,
0.39947414744114296,
0.4099591868268758,
0.413313940369778
],
"ids": [
80,
120,
118,
170,
8,
53,
143,
45,
139,
121,
34,
107,
79,
14,
46
]
} | 80 | 11,506 |
A very good start. I was a bit surprised to find the machinery not quite so advanced: It should have been cruder, to match we saw in the original series. The cast is interesting, although the Vulkan lady comes across as a little too human. She needs to school on Spock who, after all, is the model for this race. Too bad they couldn't have picked Jeri Ryan. I like Ms. Park, the Korean(?)lady. The doctor has possibilities. Haven't sorted out the other males, except for the black guy. He's a really likeable. Bakula needs to find his niche--In QL his strong point was his sense of humor and his willingness to try anything. He is, of course, big and strong enough for the heroics. The heavies were OK, although I didn't like their make-up. | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | -0.192067 | 3.427916 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.6007418341619182,
0.6063014869047397,
0.6082829331410671,
0.6091509057847606,
0.6135499563906568,
0.6148516151350953,
0.6287648748191466,
0.6373845912523075,
0.6443877723784213,
0.6452810708297281,
0.6508695758135004,
0.6517044900825352,
0.656669206200132,
0.6576751511397354
],
"ids": [
81,
92,
118,
127,
165,
7,
88,
80,
109,
171,
148,
34,
32,
132,
22
]
} | 81 | 12,890 |
At least something good came out of Damon Runyon's misguided attempt to sentimentalize the Mafia. "Guys and Dolls," the seemingly indestructible stage musical, was captured on film in 1955 by Joseph L. Mankiewicz ("All About Eve") in a colorful, enjoyable movie that featured an all-star cast including Vivian Blaine (from the original Broadway show), Jean Simmons (whose character bears an odd resemblance to Audrey Hepburn in "Roman Holiday") and two of the all-time great leading men, Frank Sinatra and Marlon Brando, both of whom had recently won Oscars for Best Supporting Actor ("From Here To Eternity") and Best Actor ("On the Waterfront") and were on the top of their game. One listen to Brando singing "Luck Be a Lady Tonight" speaks volumes about where the early Dylan got his voice. Stubby Kaye steals the show as Nicely Nicely Johnson, who brings down the house with "Sit Down You're Rocking The Boat." The ubiquitous Sheldon Leonard adds yet another page to his rogue's gallery of screen gangsters. The film has a bright, cartoonish look, anticipating the Pop Art of the early 1960s. The characters speak in a stylized patois, apparently based on Yiddish idioms. Although the film's social attitudes and gender roles are dated, it's all great fun, and even the gentle kidding of the Salvation Army is harmless and reflects no real animosity toward organized religion. Just seeing Sinatra and Brando in the same film is reason enough to watch this movie, but it has lots of other attractions to offer during its 149 minutes. | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 3.08215 | 4.822206 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.5275522013353311,
0.5385199179136357,
0.5625705584556249,
0.5650814112972848,
0.5777758206933046,
0.5909899557731559,
0.5952166367806331,
0.5997798607671123,
0.5997954033762052,
0.6013484976180974,
0.6027669842117043,
0.6046020787187709,
0.6094639194628487,
0.6118291096504793
],
"ids": [
82,
64,
144,
176,
135,
105,
140,
1,
42,
121,
67,
56,
112,
113,
35
]
} | 82 | 15,978 |
I gave this film 10 not because it is a superbly consistent movie, but for it's pure ability to evoke emotions in its audience. The story of one-woman's-struggle-against-all-odds is an old cliché by now, but very few films have carried it off with so much warmth and sincerity as The Color Purple.<br /><br />It also showed a different side to the African-American experience - showing that after slaves were granted freedom many fell into the ways of the hated 'white man' and were abusive of their own people. I find this an important point as it goes against the portray-white-on-black-violence-and-win-an-Oscar trend.<br /><br />Also the acting performances are superb - especially Oprah who I now have a new found respect for.<br /><br />Well worth watching - but keep some tissue handy. | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 0.442086 | 4.557975 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.4300069306283911,
0.44188835164269813,
0.4525756238810026,
0.46248000645677956,
0.4650431975856725,
0.48399173981181653,
0.48801344154019355,
0.4972478913215579,
0.5008991919007092,
0.5081659589676842,
0.513150712288291,
0.5167012727486702,
0.516973112134108,
0.5217772934444626
],
"ids": [
83,
133,
35,
30,
34,
118,
8,
60,
170,
143,
144,
56,
182,
185,
67
]
} | 83 | 12,758 |
This is a film I saw when it first came out, and which I have seen a few more times over the years. It's always enjoyable.<br /><br />One thing is that the comedy does not take sides: it skewers labor and capitalists equally. Only Sid seems outside the classic struggle, even though he's responsible for it. <br /><br />Spoiler warning: do not read further if you haven't seen the film <br /><br />This is a fantasy, though presented fairly plausibly. Ask yourself: could someone support most of his or her weight in a single strand of fabric? It would cut through almost any support.<br /><br />Also, when cornered in an alley, Sid uses a garbage can cover like a knight's shield. Cute symbolism.<br /><br />Someday, I'll get this on DVD. | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 1.452195 | 3.718423 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.6029717153700482,
0.6078294622784302,
0.6249674047221655,
0.6370688261343089,
0.638452118020552,
0.6459973932017976,
0.6487004682689017,
0.6509355172594992,
0.6556306562897992,
0.6566983402148232,
0.658542181807922,
0.6591146817477407,
0.6648793760888556,
0.6774538119150351
],
"ids": [
84,
181,
60,
55,
40,
34,
96,
175,
77,
8,
92,
44,
118,
198,
129
]
} | 84 | 21,916 |
I don't know much about film-making, but good movies have to tell some sort of a story...your characters have to start and complete their journey. In Last Exit to Brooklyn they may, but its not in any satisfying way, and I'm not meaning a happy ending, just ANY ending.<br /><br />Last Exit to Brooklyn, set in 1952 Brooklyn during a very brutal labor strike, sets a number of story threads in motion. Most involve some of the most unlikeable characters to ever walk across a movie screen. But Last Exit to Brooklyn fails to bring these stories to any conclusion...it leaves some of them dangling with no ending, or blasts off into some bizarre stratosphere for an "artistic" ending.<br /><br />Two cases in point, and they contain spoilers.<br /><br />A sad transvestite character (an important character in the film), is struck by a car and killed. And that's it for him in the movie....he's gone for good, erased from everyone's memory..no reactions from his friends, enemies, lovers....nothing.<br /><br />In another thread the stupid, clueless, and secretly gay strike leader, having been rejected by labor, his gay lover, and found out by the neighborhood thugs, gets stomped by the thugs. The closing scene to the beating shows the streets of Brooklyn, and the streetlights are very, very similar to those of Nazi death camps...and the scene drags on and on and on...and the camera pans down to the body of the labor leader, and he's been crucified.....ppppuuuulllleeeeeez. And of course that's it for him too....brain erasure.....gone.<br /><br />Bottom line....no matter what the reviewers originally said in 1989 about this film....this movie is a depressing piece of sludge. Avoid it. And if you don't be forewarned, it really deserves an NC-17 rating for massive amounts of physical, emotional and sexual brutality...don't even let the teenagers watch. | 0 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 1.146332 | 3.026284 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.3372701942240326,
0.4268227737342267,
0.4398228764074218,
0.4551615543500659,
0.46165569789112615,
0.4619377362189214,
0.46304282784217354,
0.46800698521026163,
0.47866867463909635,
0.4992504014936159,
0.505276940892268,
0.5157790988779523,
0.5184150229755905,
0.5193707408946702
],
"ids": [
85,
151,
114,
171,
68,
120,
118,
139,
170,
49,
80,
8,
33,
60,
129
]
} | 85 | 9,807 |
The Last Station, director Michael Hoffman's melodrama about the last months in the life of Leo Tolstoy, begins with fog and sleep. Tolstoy (Christopher Plummer) lives with his family in a compound at Yasnaya Polyana, taking walks and writing and being seen to by his wife and the adherents to his "movement", people dedicated to his ideas of pacifism, vegetarianism, sexual abstinence and communal property who have gathered in a forest camp not far away. His wife, Sophia (Helen Mirren) wars openly with the head of his movement Chertkov (Paul Giamatti), who she claims in his efforts to convince Tolstoy to sign the rights to his works over to the Russian people is trying to steal the wealth that is owed to her upon her husbands imminent death. Observing all of this is Tolstoy's new steward, Bulgakov (James McAvoy), a naive adherent who is torn between his love of the man and concern for his wife.<br /><br />Hoffman's script, which is based on the novel by Jay Parini, quite often veers itself into confused territory, building up a complex tangle of threads and opaque motivations that ultimately don't resolve themselves in any satisfying way. The scope of the film is grand, and its story should reverberate just as Tolstoy, whose beliefs foreshadowed in some ways both the Bolsheviks' and those of pacifists like Ghandi. It unfortunately doesn't, it's un-unpickable, building up with much gusto confrontations that are constantly ravelling off into nothingness. The three-way relationship between the Church, the faithful Sophia and the unbelieving Tolstoy, for example, is referenced often. In the last section of the film a mute priest in a magnificent hat even shows up, but the script never expands on this beyond awkwardly inserting it into the story as an attempt at enriching it or providing some semblance of historical accuracy. There are a ton of details in the film, but not enough attention is paid to most of them and as a result the film feels cluttered, overburdened, energetic but unfortunately pointless.<br /><br />At its heart is the love story between Sophia and Tolstoy, and that story, as baffling and cramped as it is, is the reason to watch the film. Mirren and Plummer are, unsurprisingly, the best things in the film. Plummer's Tolstoy is vague, at once confused and resolute, apprehensive and full of joy and certainty. Mirren's Sophia is in full panic, in a righteous lather, forced to watch and expected to be mute as her husband gives away his time, his possessions and his money to people who are unquestionably devoted to him but also clearly in possession of their own agendas. They're great performances, all the more so given the vast gulf between the real importance of the couple's place in history and the script's ability to support that, both Sophia and Tolstoy seem willed into the film by Mirren and Plummer alone, both making the best they can out of what meagre material is there. Giammati and McAvoy, both talented actors, are unable to do the same and Giamatti's Chertkov seems neither a revolutionary nor a thief (and not both at once, either) but rather a cipher, a stand-in for a whole package of unresolved anxieties and aborted historical impulses. The scope of this thing never boils down to anything, it hitches along, getting by on the strength of Plummer and Mirren and not much else. It's interesting and pretty, but ultimately unrewarding. 4.5/10 | 0 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 0.785347 | 3.130368 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.5954330149850281,
0.6157939340805785,
0.6221759163534939,
0.6508471309580186,
0.6578970972251945,
0.6641290283338026,
0.670286042409812,
0.672833258634395,
0.6775222999152875,
0.67926513751696,
0.6818114303282372,
0.6844999900051503,
0.6861935261710634,
0.687218483191488
],
"ids": [
86,
151,
85,
7,
194,
109,
81,
47,
164,
176,
130,
64,
123,
93,
90
]
} | 86 | 5,035 |
The problem with the 1985 version of this movie is simple; Indiana Jones was so closely modeled after Alan Quartermain (or at least is an Alan Quartermain TYPE of character), that the '85 director made the mistake of plundering the IJ movies for dialog and story far too deeply. What you got as a finished product was a jumbled mess of the name Alan Quartermain, in an uneven hodge podge of a cheaply imitated IJ saga (with a touch of Austin Powers-esquire cheese here and there). <br /><br />It was labeled by many critics to have been a "great parody," or "unintentional comedy." Unintentional is the word. This movie was never intended to be humorous; witty, yes, but not humorous. Unfortunately, it's witless rather than witty.<br /><br />With this new M4TV mini-series, you get much more story, character development of your lead, solid portrayals, and a fine, even, entertaining blend. This story is a bit long; much longer than its predecessors, but deservedly so as this version carries a real storyline and not just action and Eye Candy. While it features both action and Eye Candy, it also corrects the mistake made in the 1985 version by forgetting IJ all together and going back to the source materials for AQ, making for a fine, well - thought - out plot, and some nice complementing sub-plots. <br /><br />Now this attempt is not the all out action-extravaganza that is Indiana Jones. Nor is it a poor attempt to be so. This vehicle is plot and character driven and is a beautiful rendition of the AQ/KSM saga. Filmed on location in South Africa, the audience is granted beautiful (if desolate) vistas, SA aboriginal cultures, and some nice wildlife footage to blend smoothly with the performances and storyline here.<br /><br />Steve Boyum totally surprised me with this one, as I have never been one to subscribe to his vision. In fact, I have disliked most of his work as a director, until this attempt. I hope this is more a new vein of talent and less the fluke that it seems to be. <br /><br />This version rates a 9.8/10 on the "TV" scale from...<br /><br />the Fiend :. | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 0.824505 | 5.564338 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.42967625184986724,
0.45882696954150215,
0.46733738603550035,
0.4998897393233209,
0.5039399964724773,
0.5080176410966222,
0.5099558951775227,
0.5107534265577416,
0.5147546962093816,
0.5149234693999756,
0.5216081378677195,
0.5308040028621761,
0.5371088291044304,
0.5372648567002214
],
"ids": [
87,
8,
120,
118,
132,
129,
170,
14,
128,
80,
29,
198,
77,
174,
16
]
} | 87 | 17,518 |
For everyone who expects a traditional superhero-movie it might be an unpleasant surprise. It is definitely more of a drama rather than an action movie. It focuses mainly on emotions and it's a bit like a Greek tragedy - whatever the main character does it always goes wrong somehow.<br /><br />That's because Sasha, like each superhero, takes the law into his own hands and the society doesn't appreciate it. Sasha becomes an outlaw. While on the run, he meets a beautiful girl and falls in love so things get even more complicated for him.<br /><br />As you can see, the plot itself is really dramatic but the movie lacks in dynamics. It reminds me slightly of the narration in the recent movies by Ram Gopal Varma. Everything happens very slowly. However, when there's an action scene it gets so immensely dynamic that before you realize what's going on, it's all over. But the director does not want to impress us with flashy and showy action. What is more important here is the outcome of Sasha's actions, which are mostly very drastic. The score is very scarce, which also makes it more difficult to concentrate on the film. So basically you need to be very patient in order to watch it.<br /><br />Is the film worth it? That is a question really difficult to answer. I don't think that this experience enriched me so very much, but somehow I keep on thinking about this movie and feel like watching it again. Mostly due to the atmosphere, which is really dense, but not suffocating because all the time Sasha and Katya have hope. After all they're young people, who have all their lives to live. So no matter how hard it gets there's always a slight joyous tune when they are together. | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 0.536494 | 4.235549 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.4754807171301043,
0.478592939086843,
0.5116806927762705,
0.5314292088770667,
0.5360957814996103,
0.5368737706316435,
0.5393054522360088,
0.5504285429923886,
0.5521773621087223,
0.5523172870944434,
0.5568551878169444,
0.5586789361154119,
0.5586958925612397,
0.5614094648911323
],
"ids": [
88,
34,
118,
170,
187,
149,
80,
139,
143,
131,
27,
8,
33,
60,
171
]
} | 88 | 21,078 |
"Cry Freedom" is not just a movie. It is a historical account, heroic story, and insight into the cultural background of a major event in history. Not only does Denzel Washington do a terrific job of impersonating a motivating, determined hero, Steve Biko, but he delivers a message to the public about the horrors of South Arfrican Apartheid. The story of Biko, an influential leader, and his main "influencee", Donald Woods, is a heartbreaking one. But, the ultimate success of his life can go beyond the atrocities committed in South Africa. "Cry Freedom" manages to communicate to its audience the optimistic aspect of the seemingly disturbing plot. It is because of great films like this one, that the public can become educated on terrible events in history, great leaders who sought to end them, and how we can never allow them to happen in the future. Because of this importance, "Cry Freedom" is an amazing film that should be seen by all. | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 0.117219 | 4.629915 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.5270822214935997,
0.5536021637403556,
0.5637749707235886,
0.5677314672122264,
0.5705911707622227,
0.5737124307202941,
0.5776098248668131,
0.5796278692870467,
0.5874994298513634,
0.5880540245995534,
0.5895444054208396,
0.5958585119510202,
0.5960973089604407,
0.5984221218708508
],
"ids": [
89,
83,
93,
59,
170,
92,
171,
94,
169,
35,
116,
165,
120,
107,
79
]
} | 89 | 20,181 |
I liked the movie, first of all because it told an interesting story, but the story as told in the movie felt like it was condensed from a much-longer story. Since the book is over 400 pages, that makes sense. It spans a time period from the 1920s to the 1970s, in a fictional South American country, also a lot to fit into the time available. I think it would have been much better as a six-hour mini-series than it turned out as a 140-minute movie.<br /><br />Even though it's rushed, the story doesn't skip so much that it gets confusing. What is told is told fairly well. One fault is that Clara's supernatural powers appear inconsistently; either they should have appeared more evenly through the course of the movie, or they should have been left out. Two more faults (which could be spoilers): Esteban's eventual return to goodness happens somewhat too suddenly, and Ferula's curse seems to wear off, even though the tone of the story suggests that it should endure forever.<br /><br />The acting is excellent. Glenn Close, as the tormented spinster Ferula, is outstanding. Jeremy Irons, as the brutal self-made rich man, is also excellent. Meryl Streep, as the main character Clara, is great, although she's often even better than she was in this movie. There were many well-performed smaller roles too. The biggest fault is that the movie seemed to lack a dialect coach; each actor seemed to speak in a different sort of accent. | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 1.474648 | 4.782437 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.4541144474696355,
0.4951885928178157,
0.4965331279473043,
0.5258442076247751,
0.5401104361507625,
0.5428069183021242,
0.5443344321779484,
0.5485061640898026,
0.5509142863922145,
0.563492646330713,
0.5643443995643893,
0.5665211445690537,
0.5690879463796619,
0.5726877336225872
],
"ids": [
90,
114,
170,
80,
109,
64,
120,
53,
140,
118,
67,
143,
130,
45,
139
]
} | 90 | 24,661 |
Hello there,<br /><br />This is my first post in IMDb even though I use it as a reference for quite a while. I would therefore like to salute you all. The fact that I am a Greek is inevitably going to affect my judgement I hope not to your annoyance.<br /><br />I spent 2 years of my life, (all we Greeks did actually), analysing Omirus epos (and not Homers as you see everywhere), rhyme by rhyme. If I recall well it was Iliada (Iliad) on 8th grade and Odysseia (Odyssey) on 9th grade. Warner's Troy, was a big disappointment to me and my fellow Greeks around the campus (I study in the UK).<br /><br />Iliad epos is one of the very best literature works ever made. It was composed by a Greek poet Omirus a whole 400 years after the actual war. Historians put Trojan war around 1200 BC, and the actual reason of the war not being Helen's beauty but the strategically crucial position of Troy. That said one may now understand that Omirus epos is not presenting the actual events (as it's not accurate historically) but this was never the purpose of this work. <br /><br />Reading this huge poem, one can find himself wondering for the very definitions of honour, love, anger, hate, heroism, discipline, loyalty and so on. The best part and the most educational as well were these prolonged talks between the warriors before the battle. None of these though were revealed in 'Troy'<br /><br />Warner's Troy was really cheap to my eyes, and to other intellectual people English Finnish and German colleagues of me as well. It is a shame to spend millions of dollars in such a bad scenario. By the way perfect storm was a bad and stupid blockbuster (computers graphics did the whole work), and yet it is Wolfgang Petersen's best work. <br /><br />I conclude saying that you'd better watch something else instead. I would give Troy 2 out of 10. It is a really expensive B movie.<br /><br />Cheers <br /><br />Alex | 0 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 1.283481 | 4.876544 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.7185223978273176,
0.7246147131664955,
0.7305160082725577,
0.7311395064904209,
0.7530635300773343,
0.7533934911260114,
0.761931507223427,
0.7626225457234365,
0.763580301728464,
0.7640599521563557,
0.766623518378946,
0.7675353218871567,
0.7683266283108792,
0.7689269417230636
],
"ids": [
91,
148,
90,
87,
117,
41,
132,
98,
114,
165,
9,
39,
160,
111,
193
]
} | 91 | 12,146 |
Another detailed work on the subject by Dr Dwivedi takes us back in time to pre-partioned Panjab. Dr Dwivedi chose a difficult subject for his movie debut. He has worked on all meticulous details to bring the story to life. The treatment of the subject is very delicate.<br /><br />Even though we have not been to the region during that time, the sets and costumes look real. Unlike most movies made on partition, this one focuses not on the gory details of violence to attract audience, but on its after-effects. The characters come to life. Priyanshu Chatterjee has given an impressive performance. Manoj Bajpai has acted his heart out showing the plight of a guilt-ridden man. The rest of the cast has done a good job too. | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | -0.618182 | 3.308871 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.430793776234097,
0.4759851131685865,
0.4822393737618652,
0.49939714325153994,
0.5094827592156773,
0.5101852294711801,
0.5135867510037642,
0.5401612399900029,
0.5417317122633427,
0.5495824845196431,
0.5520420202354241,
0.553740094821244,
0.5634648366926093,
0.563798543576973
],
"ids": [
92,
101,
63,
194,
118,
114,
171,
79,
32,
177,
35,
170,
60,
199,
80
]
} | 92 | 16,541 |
What a fantastic premise: A movie about the Berlin Airlift. It should have it all. Tragedy. Suspense. Comradeship. Rivals. Berliner Frauleins and tough US pilots. love and Tears. What we've got, is a film with none of the above. Heino Ferch tries to impersonate John Wayne or so, but he fails miserably. He acts so wooden, that at any given moment he should crack. He tries to play the tough guy, instead of being a tough guy! Why would Bettina Zimmermann's character fall in love with him? Cause they were throwing stones in a lake? Cause he brings her coal bricks? The SFX are very, very well done. Too much though. The hundreds or so planes over Berlin, look like an attack-fighter-formation-squadron rather than an organised airlift as it actually was. Interestingly enough, the White House, the Kremlin, and General Lucius D. Clays office seem all to be one and the same dark and dusty set. Notice the same drapes, hanging deep down the windows, as if a protective shield against nuclear fallout. Why is almost every scene INSIDE dark and dusty? By the way, GENERAL LUCIUS D. CLAY, comes across as a small time, insecure, looser General, who doest trust in his own noble idea the airlift. He was very much the opposite. So you combine all those individual blunders and the result is a film with that builds toward no passion, no suspense and no historic accuracy. Sad, it started out so promising
| 0 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 0.50151 | 3.824685 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.4703396496702571,
0.4747988050273537,
0.4996426233408703,
0.5124737251736414,
0.5125392227083958,
0.5186693137313528,
0.526367001974216,
0.5278404102363861,
0.5391343854597201,
0.5406223974835889,
0.5434616649944135,
0.5473293586328348,
0.5479922698611066,
0.5536021637403556
],
"ids": [
93,
2,
198,
165,
77,
170,
118,
3,
72,
34,
44,
151,
24,
47,
89
]
} | 93 | 9,317 |
Of course, by any normal standard of film criticism, Soldier is a very poor film indeed. Kurt Russell is a futuristic super soldier raised since birth to kill but then made obsolete after being bettered by a bunch of really super soldiers at a dangly hoop ruck that looks a bit like a Gladiators contest without the crash mats.<br /><br />Abandoned on a junk planet, he's befriended by a community of naff space hippies that teach him about gardening, family life and, um, breasts. Kurt doesn't talk much. Finally the really super soldiers turn up and kill the hippies by shooting them in the back while they're running away. Kurt gets angry and kills everyone. A planet gets totalled. The end.<br /><br />Unless the Academy start a new category for "Best Explosion", Soldier is not going to win any awards. However, as ludicrous as it is, it remains an enjoyable experience. The military hardware is the coolest since Aliens (the APC's especially) and, at 90 minutes long, it doesn't outstay its welcome. Please note that the below mark is only a guide. Knock five points off if you intend to take it seriously and discount one more if you don't like miniguns.<br /><br />7 out of 10 | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | -0.367218 | 5.404196 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.5031566893093681,
0.5360112896107236,
0.5381758017466826,
0.5472999955512856,
0.5776098248668131,
0.5850064326411302,
0.5862417661457704,
0.5944263144660733,
0.5958243150046604,
0.5991197353450788,
0.5992219447332723,
0.6001445560701009,
0.601522450886232,
0.6059108218846501
],
"ids": [
94,
196,
34,
24,
115,
89,
121,
16,
93,
113,
198,
171,
72,
56,
116
]
} | 94 | 15,820 |
The movie starts off in a classroom setting where not surprisingly, our main actress, Orked was seen in a Chinese Language class. Later in the film, she was asked on why (by Mukhsin) that she was sent to learn Mandarin. Her answer was simple for a child she is; coz she's already known the Malay Language well.<br /><br />It's a bit of a romance one may thought of it, but once you've stopped yourself from reading too much critics and go for it, you'll notice the typical elements of Malaysia. The movie basically focuses on 10 year old Orked who met 12 year old Mukhsin in a game of which many would think of it as a boy's game. Running out of players, Mukhsin (who was new in that village) was forced to allow Orked into the game, in which she eagerly showed the male side of her. Orked is no such ordinary girl as she depicts more of the male behavior as you will see in the movie, defending Mukhsin from much violent encounter with her school-bullies, throwing one of the bully's bag out from the school bus window, throwing punches and kicks on Mukhsin's brother where after he teased Mukhsin and so on and so forth. Both were awesome buddies, and stick closer than that, but with a slightest of misunderstanding in which most of us would all respond to in the same way, parted the both of them until the day when Mukhsin left town.<br /><br />Now the movie depicts the first love between Orked and Mukhsin, they started out as friends, but slowly evolving into somewhat more of a closer relationship and then towards BGR. You would notice, the changes Yasmin made in the movies for each of the main actor and the actress when they go through love. The different character was portrayed with eagerness and mild humor. The scenes were all in random but it depicted so much reality in it that you'd be stuck on the screen for a long time. You will love the movie for what it is, and not because that you want to be patriotic to the local scenes, coz it means much more.<br /><br />As the movie envelopes around the two love birds, it also manages to find its lens towards Orked's parents, her mother who was educated in England, speaks very good English and in which, her husband and the caretaker in the house with very much attempt tries to speak back their own kind of English, which was humor all the way indeed. Let me just explain to you why humor can be such a prominent thing in this movie. And that explanation or description that you may portray can be given in only one word and that is RANDOMNESS. Often more than not, we don't learn to laugh at ourselves, and when we do, we do it at the expense of others. It is just like what the movie Just Follow Law by Jack Neo would have mentioned - Often when we are ourselves, we don't see the person in us we are, but when only when we are in another person's body, then only would we learn to see who we really are. And that is how humor applies as well, more so than just dignity.<br /><br />The movie was filled with such randomness that the typical facts of our routine lives as we carried it out could be all the way filled with laughter if we want it to be.<br /><br />The other focus of this movie was on how Orked's neighbor, a couple in which the husband is no longer loving to his wife, and wanted to find another. Pak Koboi as what he's nicked after was seen polishing his motorbike daily and would take it out for a ride with his newly found girlfriend. The producer did not fail to show you perhaps why the husband wanted to find another wife. The wife was a real hurler or KPC as we Chinese would call it, having interrupting on other people's business and sending her own daughter to tease Orked in words only adults would use. After all, what goes around, comes around, and that's probably why bad things kinda want to happen to her. In every time, being nice to people around you won't hurt at all, unless you have an ego to protect, but then again, what's it worth? The movie also centers around Mukhsin's brother, Hussein who would go out to town everyday until very late at night, smoking, drinking, and also finding 'girls'. He's the total opposite of Mukhsin, but that's all perhaps because of family problems. Both the brothers were staying with their aunt and the parents were far away from them. I will not reveal more of the story line as it would spoil much of the interest in wanting to find it out for yourself, but the slightest of all elements in which the producer wanted to send a message across to the viewers is the life of us all. She wanted us, me at least to view life from our own perspective when we are not ourselves. Movies in a way, take us out from our own body, places us in the character's position, and use our empty mind then to view on the happenings of it. Depending on the type and genre of the movie, you will be mesmerized by how a good movie such as this would portray and imply a significant impact on you. | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | -0.787394 | 3.789451 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.5506625138710077,
0.5794395277304025,
0.5800883095496947,
0.5921069510657009,
0.602155378729344,
0.6150954738477132,
0.6154318501982399,
0.6185235267215774,
0.6239726803197299,
0.6251175153452166,
0.6263364943310938,
0.6278415458440421,
0.6365401578535048,
0.6381387476284848
],
"ids": [
95,
171,
114,
177,
32,
92,
118,
193,
14,
101,
192,
138,
7,
80,
79
]
} | 95 | 13,952 |
by Dane Youssef<br /><br />A gang of crooks. The perfect plan. It all goes wrong. They're in trouble. The police are outside. They're cornered. What are they gonna do now?<br /><br />Sound familiar?<br /><br />The movie seems like it's trying to be a combination of the acting workshop, the "indie" film and the theater.<br /><br />It's the kind of things that actors love--it's kind of like a workshop or a play because it mostly consists of tight focusing on the actors acting... acting angry, tense, scared, conversing, scheming, planning--giving the performers a lot of free range to really ham it all up.<br /><br />A trio of crooks, one leader, one goon, one brother, come up with a big heist scheme... and a monkey wrench is thrown into the works. To top things off, there's a bit of a "fender-bender" and one of the crooks in flung through the back of the windshield.<br /><br />The cops are on their tail and they stumble into a bar named poetically (and leadenly) "Dino's Last Chance."<br /><br />Spacey, as a director, tries to keep the focus on the actors' performances and delivery of dialouge. He pans over to a bright passion-red cigarette ad of a smoking and smoldering Bogart. And he keeps all the violence off-screen, really.<br /><br />I think that was a mistake. Focusing on the intensity and gruesome violent scenes would have given the movie some edge.<br /><br />The problem with the movie is that it moves too slow and suffers from miscasting in almost every role. Matt Dillon ("Drugstore Cowboy" and "Wild Things") seems too young and too idealistic to be the leader of this gang.<br /><br />Gary Sinese seems to brooding and deep in thought to be a spineless tag-along with these guys and Joe Mantaga is effective as the traditional routine foul-swearing mad-dog police lieutenant who's all thumbs, but he isn't given anything to really do here.<br /><br />William Fischter is the only actor who is believable in his role as a brainless grunt who just wants to spill blood.<br /><br />And the crooks are in a tense situation where they either go to jail or they try to think of some way out of this.<br /><br />Spacey lacks the ability to create a lot of tension and keep it going. The characters are mostly chatting away, trying to think of a plan... and they're to calm and too articulate. There's even a scene where the crooks are playing pool with a whole swarm of armed cops right outside, ready to strike. At one point, one of the crooks even call the police who are right outside the bar. Oh brother. Oh bother.<br /><br />These cops are going to either blow them away or going to lock them up. Shouldn't the holed-up crooks be a little scared, a little uneasy? Meanwhile, all the real action is happening inside.<br /><br />Someone whips out a gun, a baseball bat, which leads to an ugly confrontation off-screen and there's one more casualty that happens that's... well, kinda sad. But...<br /><br />Faye Dunaway also should have spent more time with a dialect coach, improving on her New Orleans accent. Skeet Ullrich is fine in a smaller part.<br /><br />A cop listening in reaches for a pack of matches at the absolute worst time is a nice look. And so is a scene where someone goes right through the rear windshield. <br /><br />The dialouge is obviously trying to go for a David Mamet approach and it's as profane, but never as realistic or as insightful.<br /><br />The movie feels like too much of what it really is... a really low-budget movie with an actor behind the camera for the first time directing other actors from a script that's "not bad, but needs a few more re-writes." Spacey shows he's not a terrible director, but he lacks a sort of feel for "shaping a movie" and it feels like he's just filming actors act.<br /><br />These actors are all talented and could work with the material, but they all feel out of place. As I said before, the movie really suffers from miscasting. <br /><br />I don't mean that the wrong actors were cast. I think they found just the right cast, but placed them in all the wrong roles. I think switching some of the roles would've helped immensely.<br /><br />Having veteran mob actor Joe Mantagna play the leader of the pack, Gary Sinese as the angry police lieutenant outside on his bullhorn giving orders and barking at his troops, keeping Fischter in his "bloodthirsty goon" part and Matt Dillion as the sacrificial lamb. That would have been a big improvement.<br /><br />When some actors direct, it works. They can even win Oscars for it. But a lot of the time, when actors direct, they have a tendency to just focus on the performances. Just shoot the actors acting.<br /><br />Sometimes it works... but they need a good showcase for it. An excuse for it.<br /><br />Hostage situations are all pretty much the same in real life just like coming-of-age stories so it's only natural that movies about them will go from point A to point B as well.<br /><br />There are a few really great entries into this genre.' Spacey himself appeared in a similar movie about hostage situations: "The Negotiator."<br /><br />This certainly won't become a cult classic, let alone one of AFI's 100. Still, it does have a few nice moments and personal touches, but in the end, it's instantly forgettable and the kind of movie that would play best on regular TV. It's just not worth going out of your way to see.<br /><br />I give a 3 out of 10. <br /><br />Spacey's other directorial credit, "Beyond The Sea" was reportedly a better effort. Hmmm... maybe it's true. You need to fail before you succeed.<br /><br />by Dane Youssef | 0 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 1.631162 | 3.52067 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.460585371214294,
0.49099648026584963,
0.49959991283412597,
0.5074207474929143,
0.518975541406455,
0.5228769247005632,
0.5254508019235054,
0.5255450185304121,
0.5316434242512719,
0.5361375234005186,
0.5408989154820416,
0.5436940961826517,
0.5448286029371722,
0.5463391661995416
],
"ids": [
96,
134,
34,
118,
77,
80,
149,
79,
168,
114,
170,
8,
176,
41,
32
]
} | 96 | 12,058 |
I saw this movie at an actual movie theater (probably the $2.00 one) with my cousin and uncle. We were around 11 and 12, I guess, and really into scary movies. I remember being so excited to see it because my cool uncle let us pick the movie (and we probably never got to do that again!) and sooo disappointed afterwards!! Just boring and not scary. The only redeeming thing I can remember was Corky Pigeon from Silver Spoons, and that wasn't all that great, just someone I recognized. I've seen bad movies before and this one has always stuck out in my mind as the worst. This was from what I can recall, one of the most boring, non-scary, waste of our collective $6, and a waste of film. I have read some of the reviews that say it is worth a watch and I say, "Too each his own", but I wouldn't even bother. Not even so bad it's good. | 0 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 0.292424 | 6.99612 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.30198042764606947,
0.34962895838089336,
0.37976337921221326,
0.3887029108700363,
0.38899171631329865,
0.38927231109680815,
0.40099803776942256,
0.40201383334114804,
0.4186353603559666,
0.42587201119831564,
0.43271208083922263,
0.4347572578400415,
0.43976475981068786,
0.4397953811346189
],
"ids": [
97,
122,
163,
106,
129,
8,
182,
120,
45,
107,
46,
195,
128,
26,
113
]
} | 97 | 8,091 |
My siblings and I stumbled upon The Champions when our local station aired re-runs of it one summer in the 1970's. We absolutely adored it. There was something so exotic and mysterious about it, especially when compared to the usual American re-runs (Petticoat Junction, Green Acres... you get the idea). It had a similar feel to The Avengers (not too much of a surprise, since it was also British and in the spy/adventure genre).<br /><br />I would love to see it again now -- hopefully it holds up. I've mentioned this show to others and no one has ever heard of it, so I began to wonder if I'd imagined its whole existence. But the wonder that is the web has allowed me track down information about it. Hopefully it will find a new generation of fans. | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 2.608957 | 6.718995 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.5599868228259453,
0.6115365450847297,
0.6182414965312808,
0.6263843794106849,
0.649886190486669,
0.6522191763634126,
0.6662890253977389,
0.6668599056515103,
0.6733880858819252,
0.6787704110451649,
0.6812006387161138,
0.6840623947705988,
0.6843398557563583,
0.6856739580369534
],
"ids": [
98,
127,
115,
25,
57,
148,
161,
46,
37,
45,
81,
78,
170,
9,
106
]
} | 98 | 23,589 |
Good western filmed in the rocky Arizona wilds. Lots of tough guys throughout; Cobern's character seemed to rock back and forth between a raging psycho and a laid back type. Several holes appeared in the picture, but not enough to offset it being exciting and worth seeing. One really dumb scene shows Heston emptying .45 cases of their powder and collecting it in a sack for the purpose of starting a fire. A. To gather that much gunpowder he would have needed a pack mule to carry the ammo. B. The grass was obviously dry: why not just drop a match on it and let 'er rip? | 1 | train | stanfordnlp/imdb | 1.040163 | 4.770589 | {
"distances": [
0,
0.5828646110735676,
0.6096851955398296,
0.6109213386730528,
0.6234001349123004,
0.6274479672726819,
0.6388247005552572,
0.6388791314795397,
0.6403869755117433,
0.6415318089020252,
0.6428566008711507,
0.6462991649818108,
0.6468275003165446,
0.6497442612634821,
0.6603877942965078
],
"ids": [
99,
115,
159,
44,
11,
40,
105,
72,
75,
167,
168,
118,
93,
33,
171
]
} | 99 | 24,419 |
End of preview. Expand
in Data Studio
No dataset card yet
- Downloads last month
- 9