Datasets:

EgehanEralp

/

imdb-single-sentence

like 1

The sound was muddy and the transfer looked like it had been shot off a theater screen with the video recorder on a cell phone, other than that, it was really, really, really bad.

All in all, "Water Lilies" was very disappointing.

This undercooked movie has studiously vapid characters (Well they're club-kids, ya big jerk!

The movie tried to portray some kind of moral, but fell flat with its message.

It's just too embarrassing to watch.

Its just that the show is unrealistic and the way he handles things makes me just squirm.

double episode crap?

I can't stand most reality shows and this one is worst than the one with Paris Hilton, and sure it's his company.

Butcharacters come and go for no apparent reason, continuity isnon-existent, and the acting, cinematography, and direction are (toput it politely) amateurish.

), the quality of the film sags considerably by the less than acceptable minimally talented Irit Levy and Kaylene Parker: when on screen the credibility of the story drops below zero.

Wlaschiha plays a gay researcher looking for answers--that within this foggy plot would be hard for anyone to find.

She's interesting, though not necessarily convincing.

The hackneyed score, redolent of many lackluster TV miniseries' slathered-on saccharine emotionalism, is at irritating odds with the emotional remoteness of the script, blocking, and overbaked formalism of the direction; except for its score and corseted script and direction, 'The Return of the Soldier' has all the right bits but it fails to make them work together.

The plot is slow and lacking.

It is not very interesting to me.

Luise Rainer won an Academy Award for this performance, which is definitely the worst in the movie.

I felt Luise's performance to be lackluster throughout, and when she died, she did not change in expression from any previous scenes.

Oh wait and the film isn't the only thing thats poorly written, the main characters wife makes absolutely no sense.

Walter Connolly is laughable as the farmer's father.

the dialog was also pretty awful.

--Standard underlying love story goes nowhere, and is poorly done.

Scarecrow's script seems to have been written in a drunken haze.

(WHAT THE HELL WERE THEY SMOKING!

He uses some of the most idiotic shots ever.

To add to the pile of festering crap they called a plot, the actors (besides 'scarecrow') we're awful, and I cared so little about them that I soon forgot who was who.

This movie really annoyed me.

The acting was pathetic, characters were losers, and the scarecrow could do a lot of gymnastix stunts.

Basically dedicating this movie to those great directors is like giving your mother a piece of sh*t for Mother's Day.

Director Itier doesn't do a particularly good job here, the kill scenes are poorly handled with no build up whatsoever which means there's never any tension as within two seconds of a character being introduced they are killed off.

I can't even continue, don't watch this pile of garbage, it was made in 8 days.

You might as well have the privilege of wasting it yourself.

But the premise to this movie alone is enough to put it near the bottom of the list of crappy movies.

even the costume was bad.

It's just bad film making at it's worst.

It makes no sense.

Let's face it; some lame kid who dies and has his soul transfered into a scarecrow.

but this particular movie was lame.

Most is very questionable.

The story itself is just crap and cliché.

Just like the two needless sequels that followed this, this isn't even worth a laugh.

Oh yes, we also have Maria Conchita Alonso overemoting like crazy as a rebel leader.

The acting was poor all round, the script and story was weak, the "action" was even weaker, and the "visuals" were but bluntly not all that visual.

Even their great acting could not redeem this movie's ridiculous storyline.

After starting out as a "this could happen to anyone" movie, it quickly falls apart as it introduces ideas that make it more and more unrealistic.

As for the infamous sexualised violence, it is very graphic, disturbing and totally unnecessary.

Yet somehow the interesting plot lines wound up unexplained or ignored, like they never happened.

All in all this is just another mediocre horror film which falls into the trap of following a simple Hollywood formula.

I was so disgusted by this film, I felt obligated to warn off others.

I live in London and the plot is so ill-researched it's ridiculous.

The Film Council ,who funded this miserable garbage should be stranded, on one of the London Undergrounds disused stations, for allowing this clichéd, dismal specimen to be committed to film, a half mutant thing made up of all the horror movies the director has seen and felt fit to imitate, most notably Deathline.

In fact there's so many clichés and seen it all before moments that no one actually thought about going into detail as to what the eponymous creep is or how long he's been killing people on the underground .

And as a result lost all its credibility.

Slowly I became more bored, and wanted to shut the thing off.

That's London underground at the middle of the night, but she's just stupid like that.

Creep does serve a purpose as a mindless, silly horror movie with no intellectual or emotional investment, but sadly, that's about it...

The gore ranges from the poor to the unnecessarily over gory whilst the sub-Gollum nutter is never really fully explained as seems little more than an under developed plot device.

This film lacks any meaning, any purpose.

I just rented Creep and was not at all impressed.

This is quite possibly the worst film I have ever seen.

Plot holes and unbelievability are rife and there are very few moments that are actually jumpy scary but plenty that are just plain dull.

I was really, really disappointed with this movie.

I was sadly disappointed by this film due to the fact that it felt false and the characters were not strong enough to carry the films pretty weak attempt at horror.

The plot is plain stupid, the directing is awful, acting was mediocre even the music was a cheap copy of so-called "Horror Soundtracks".

We follow them for an interminable forty-odd minutes as they eat, sweat, listen to music, etc.

Unfortunately, I'm not making any of this up.

Quite an insult to viewer intelligence, according to members of my family.

A mess of a movie.

The BAD - Once again we get an extremely obnoxious feminist heroine "Jessica" (Sigrid Thornton) who is a world-class pouter with an extremely annoying face and manner about her.

First of all, the music (and songs) seems totally out of place in a period drama (sounds as if it's been written for a contemporary horror film)and like another commentator, I was particularly annoyed by the way the cameras spun and spun round the actors.

All in all, a weak adaptation.

Lack of scares, lack of atmosphere, lack of interesting story.

You can start feeling how this movie would be just looking at his lead actor (Jon Bon Jovi); is a huge difference in the acting quality compared to James Woods, and then, if you watch the film (i don't recommend this part), you will get involved in one of the more simplest stories, totally predictable, with terrible acting performances, really bad special effects and incoherent events!

Frankly, as movies go, this is badly plotted, silly and forgettable.

Not worth the effort of watching

Together with the other not so interesting characters and the poor storyline the whole movie becomes predictable.

Just a waste of time thinks ...

This movie isn't very good.

A sequel to "John Carpenter's Vampires", this didn't add up right.

This has to be one of worst vampire movie I have seen.

Lacking not only in plot, but the acting is atrocious.

It just reeks of low budget.

It would have been an erotic moment except that it was filmed like a total goof, and the male actor looked mildly amused as he watched Arly Jover move her head to mimic something that was very obviously not happening.

This movie sucks on so many levels it's pathetic.

Possibly the worst movie I have ever seen.

This really is a lack of originality!

everyone left their acting lessons at home and totally forgot how to act I mean it was so bad and had no real plot and kindergarteners could have written a better story plot wait what story plot.

The two big production numbers, "Who Will Buy" and "Consider Yourself" seem over-produced, with everything but the kitchen sink thrown in.

Aside from his very bad "acting", all of Lester's singing had to be dubbed by a girl.

Generally it ruins the story.

Avoid this bloated whitewash of a musical.

First of all the plot is idiotic, it has no sense at all.

The film is, as a whole, convoluted to the point of utter confusion, boring and laughable.

However, this lame-brain, waaay-belated sequel has nothing.

The acting here is really bad.

It's hard to believe, after waiting 14 years, we wind up with this piece of cinematic garbage.

This sequel is the exact opposite, it cannot possibly get worse, bad acting and a lame script, combined with totally inept direction, this is really bad, boring, annoying.

The film is pretty confusing and ludicrous.

The screenplay is bad, the is script mediocre, and even the sex scenes are worthless.

Unbelievable.

None of the actors are interesting here either!