Mouwiya/IMDb-Movie-Reviews-Sentiment-Dataset huggingface dataset:
coinciding with the emerging popularity of movies that deal with anything related to serial killers , relentless , 1989 low budget thriller about lapd detective sam dietz , played by character actor leo rossi , spawned three more sequels . 
relentless 3 , third in the row , features sam dietz again , but this time detective , who had to catch vicious serial killer in his very first case , doesn't want to deal with similar line of work . 
divorced , demoralised and transferred , he reluctantly returns to his old post when los angeles becomes a hunting ground for another serial killer , and evidence indicate connection with one of dietz's old cases . 
to make things even more interesting , it seems that the killer deliberately stages murders in order to bring dietz to the investigation . 
fans of the british tv films and mini-series like prime suspect or cracker would probably see a lot of similarities relentless series of movies . 
they both feature vicious psychopathic killers , yet also give a lot of , usually depressive , details about chief investigator's private lives . 
this one isn't an exception , but similarities with british television are only in content . 
the execution and style is different , which makes this film mediocre piece of entertainment at best . 
useless , gratuitous erotica also doesn't help either , obviously making this film longer than it should be . 
the actors are good , though - leo rossi is fine as usual , and william forsythe plays one of more compelling villains in his career . 
signy coleman as dietz's love interest , is , on the other hand , quite miscast . 
but she won't have to worry about it in the future career , since relentless 3 wasn't supposed to be anybody's finest moment anyway . 


Sentiment: neg
'lake placid' is definately not your typical creature attacking people movie , ok so maybe it is , but this one is enjoyable , and clever . 
actually it comes off more of a comedy than a horror film . 
well the ending is kinda scary , but in most horror/comedies they are . 
i will admit that 'lake placid' isn't an oscar worthy film , but it does come off as an inventive movie that is original and funny . 
bridget fonda plays a palentologist who after finding out her boyfriend is cheating , is forced to go to lake placid and investigate a tooth , after a man is bit in half . 
she gets there but really doesn't understand why she is there . 
bill pullman plays a man also investigating what happened , along with the sherriff and a rich croc obsessed man , they go out and find what is going on . 
what they find though isn't great . 
a huge and i mean huge crocodile is living in lake placid , over 150 years old , he has migrated here for who knows why . 
they have to fight against the croc and try to trap him so they can study him and see where he came from . 
betty white plays a woman who lives on the shores of lake placid , and well you'll have to see the movie to find out . 
her character is very funny and foul-mouthed , which is surprising to hear betty spew words and phrases that are pretty bad , but funny . 
to me the movie came off as a spoof of jaws . 
with the opening sequence , and some others , it is not original and is . 
when you watch this movie , you definately notice the smartness and cleverness of it . 
david e . kelly who is the mastermind of the practice and ally mcbeal , writes this movie with ease and surprisingly does a great job . 
the characters have smartmouths , two foul , and some great one-liners . 
but believe me , don't take 'lake placid' too seriously or you won't like it . 
but it is a movie that can be enjoyed as a fun 'popcorn' type movie . 
but i guess it rates above the 'popcorn' rating . 
sit back , watch the movie , laugh , scream , and whatever you want . 
even though the movie is r , and i put violence and gore . 
there's really not that much gore , but what there is might seem kinda gross to some . 
'lake placid' is a smart , clever , funny , and scary movie that i enjoyed and i think you will too . 


Sentiment: pos
here is a movie that sadly follows the hong kong-recipe of moviemaking and storytelling to the letter . 
these kinds of movies are marked by an eye-opening sequence that introduces us to the main characters ; a life-and-death plot in which these characters become involved ; the inclusion of a host of inconsequential characters ; ridiculous subplots , and sunglass-wearing henchmen . 
that is not to say that i don't like hong kong influenced movies ; however , it is quite obvious that these moviemakers haven't a clue that the american filmgoer needs more than hip-hop-talking thugs and stupid sight gags . 
observe the opening sequence . 
a band of hitmen are about to storm an apartment , led by melvin ( mark wahlberg ) and cisco ( lou diamond phillips ) . 
they are waiting for their partner to cut off the power so that they can storm the apartment with the help of infrared goggles . 
however , their partner is unsure of which cable to cut . 
he is undecided . 
this happens for about 10 seconds . 
the audience finds some humor in his foolishness . 
the lights suddenly go out . 
cisco is surprised and says : " whoa . . . let's 
go ! " 
and they storm the apartment in a very nicely executed sequence . 
the big hit of the title refers to a kidnapping that happens a quarter of the way through the film . 
needing cash , cisco devises a plan to kidnap the daughter ( china chow ) of wealthy japanese industrialist jiro nishi . 
however , the daughter is also the god-daughter of paris ( avery brooks ) , who is cisco's and melvin's boss . 
infuriated and insufferable , paris commands cisco to uncover the mastermind of the kidnapping . 
during his 'investigation' , cisco singles out melvin as the ringleader , and paris orders his capture and execution . 
melvin must now find a way to stay alive . 
by the way , do you know how the investigation takes place ? 
cisco's partner makes the ransom phone call believing that his call will not be traced because of a trace buster that prevents tracing . 
but , mr . nishi has a trace buster buster . 
to counter that , cisco's partner has a trace buster buster buster . 
but nishi has a trace buster buster buster buster . 
and so on . . . 
there is no doubt that this is an interesting world in which they live . 
and there are lots of issues that we'd like to know more about . 
how does melvin justify his profession to his fiancee ? 
what goes on among this clique ? 
why is cisco at odds with melvin ? 
there is actually a lot of potential material that could have been explored , but it seems that no effort is made to go in that direction , and instead we are given a not-so-engrossing plot filled with one-liners , silly sight gags , extraneous sub-plots and tomfoolery . 
and , i haven't even mentioned his financee's visiting parents who want them to separate , nor melvin's mistress , nor the pimple-faced video clerk demanding the return of an overdue video and on and on and on . 
if the big hit signals the future of hong kong style movies that are made for american audiences , then shoot me now . 


Sentiment: neg
as fairy tales go , cinderella has to be one of the most famous . 
almost everyone knows it , well at least in north america . 
so it is natural that someone will try to make a movie out of it . 
it has been done before with varying results . 
this version of the story is both similar to the original and different at the same time . 
the basic story remains unchanged but , one thing that seems to vanish with this version , and that is all the fantastical elements of the story . 
there is no fairy god mother or anything even remotely of that nature . 
after the fantastical elements are stripped away what is left is a realistic believable rendition of the cinderella story and an interesting love story at the least . 
 . 
unlike in the fairy tale , the prince plays a much larger part than just that of the masked ball at the end . 
the ? prince' , who happens to be the crown prince to the throne of france , meets 'cinderella' , known as danielle , on a few occasions , most coincidentally and he becomes smitten with her . 
although this seems to be a far cry from the traditional story it allows for the main plot to proceed with enough room for some imaginative story telling . . 
the story takes place in a renaissance setting ; in france , with leonardo da vinci providing some comic relief on more than one occasion . 
this addition of leonardo da vinci , was quite successful in that it added some color to the movie , since some of the roles are a bit stereotypical . 
for example the role that was scripted for the prince leaves a few things to be desired . 
for instance the character seems to be a bit too unstable and fickle , a crown prince should not be anything remotely like that . 
especially since he is portrayed to be in his mid twenties at the least and almost ready to take the throne . 
the characters of danielle ( cinderella ) played by drew barrymore , and that of the evil step mother , played by anjelica huston , are well developed and well played by the two women . 
although the part of danielle is a bit stretched it is not too unlikely and not totally unbelievable . 
the nuances of the character are brought out well by drew barrymore and from watching the movie it seems like she had fun making the movie . 
as a contrast the part of the evil step mother is clearly seen from the very beginning and is almost clique . 
but , anjelica huston seems to add a certain flair to the role that makes it suit the movie nearly perfectly . 
the actual story is fairly predictable since it is after all the basic story of cinderella , but there are more than enough twists in how the story is told to make it interesting and enjoyable . 
the acting is of high caliber and seems deserved of praise . 
all in all this movie takes you back into history , into a seemingly magical fairy land . 
but , don't get me wrong there is nothing but reality , it is just refreshing to watch a movie that is not based in a familiar setting with everyday familiar things happening . 
so although the story is basically familiar the world it is set in is not , and that adds a dimension to the film which in this humble reviewers opinion makes it worth seeing 


Sentiment: pos
with storytelling this compelling , who needs books ? 
based on the book by author james ellroy , l . a . confidential is probably one of the best piece of work produced by hollywood in recent years . 
together with director curtis hanson ( the hand that rocks the cradle , the river wild ) whom ellroy corroborated closely throughout the shooting of the film , resulted in a movie with a plot and and script so tight , an atom would have to squeeze itself through . 
set in the 50s , the story revolves around 3 policemen of vivid personalities . 
jack vincennes ( spacey ) is the cop who is more concerned on busting with fame and stardom ala hollywood style , concentrating heavily on work which will attract him media attention . 
there is also the young hot-shot rookie , ed exley ( pearce ) , fresh out of the academy and all-out to carve a name for himself in the footsteps of his legendary cop father . 
the tough and unnerving bud white ( crowe ) , a cop who believes in justice , the swift and violent way . 
3 policemen , distinct in their characters and paths but all of them working in a place where there is no real distinction between good and evil . 
when his partner is murdered on the day of his resignation , bud sets out to find the people responsible but unwittingly delved himself into something more than just a simple robbery murder . 
even after exley receives a promotion for his work on the murder case , happenings began to link itself to the murder . 
the 3 eventually reach a point of convergence when what actually began as a personal investigation turns out to be an uncovering of a complex web of organised-crime in hollywood . 
the last time i remember a film so clever and compelling was when i watched the usual suspects . 
in l . a . confidential , you do not get the shock and cleverness as the former but it has a lot more of `story' going for it . 
there is not a single moment in the film in which i felt was slow at all . 
surprisingly , though spacey did a very convincing job as the street-wise vincennes , the movie was carried mostly by the two rather `unknowns' , pearce and crowe . 
pearce's exley is cool and calculative in his actions and there is a slight hint of val kilmer in his appearance . 
crowe's bud white is the most impressive of all ; head-strong and temperamental , he should obtain some sort of recognition for his work here . 
superb acting . , wonderful storytelling and one of the best climaxing gunfights ever . 
easily the best hollywood piece for 1997 . 


Sentiment: pos
the happy bastard's quick movie review 
damn that y2k bug . 
it's got a head start in this movie starring jamie lee curtis and another baldwin brother ( william this time ) in a story regarding a crew of a tugboat that comes across a deserted russian tech ship that has a strangeness to it when they kick the power back on . 
little do they know the power within . . . 
going for the gore and bringing on a few action sequences here and there , virus still feels very empty , like a movie going for all flash and no substance . 
we don't know why the crew was really out in the middle of nowhere , we don't know the origin of what took over the ship ( just that a big pink flashy thing hit the mir ) , and , of course , we don't know why donald sutherland is stumbling around drunkenly throughout . 
here , it's just " hey , let's chase these people around with some robots " . 
the acting is below average , even from the likes of curtis . 
you're more likely to get a kick out of her work in halloween h20 . 
sutherland is wasted and baldwin , well , he's acting like a baldwin , of course . 
the real star here are stan winston's robot design , some schnazzy cgi , and the occasional good gore shot , like picking into someone's brain . 
so , if robots and body parts really turn you on , here's your movie . 
otherwise , it's pretty much a sunken ship of a movie . 


Sentiment: neg
as with any gen-x mtv movie ( like last year's dead man on campus ) , the movie is marketed for a primarily male audience as indicated by its main selling points : sex and football . 
those two items , wrapped in a guilty-pleasure package , are sure to snare a sizeable box office chunk initially , but sales will decline for two reasons . 
first , the football sequences are nothing new , nor can they be ; the sports genre isn't mainstream and it's been retread to death . 
second , the sex is just bad . 
despite the appearance of a whipped cream bikini or the all-night strip-club party , there's nothing even remotely tantalizing . 
the acting is mostly mediocre , not including the fantastic jon voight . 
cultivating his usual sliminess , voight gives an unexpectedly standout performance as west canaan coyotes head coach bud kilmer . 
kilmer is the driving force behind the coyotes' twenty-two conference championships and two state titles in thirty years ; this year he plans to make it twenty-three . 
unfortunately , when his star quarterback , lance harbor ( paul walker ) , goes down for the count , he's got to rely on the unreliable abilities of backup john moxon ( james van der beek ) . 
moxon leads the team through its last four games , and then must cope with his newfound stardom , the effect it has on his relationship with girlfriend julie ( amy smart ) , and other temptations that abound in football-crazy west canaan . 
most regions of the country are not nearly as football-crazy as texas , and so the atmosphere is likely to be lost on most . 
similarly , the set design is wrong for a high school setting : the teams are decked out with sparkling uniforms , radio headsets ( which never seem to work , however , and instead require coaches to signal plays manually ) , and even a giant bronze statue of coach kilmer . 
these elements ( as well as the heavy drinking and carousing ) might be more appropriate on a college campus -- but mtv's core audience is the high school demographic . 
this focus is further emphasized by the casting : james van der beek , of tv's " dawson's creek , " is an understandable choice for the reluctant hero , although he never manages to do anything with the role . 
other stars are similarly young and unmemorable . 
there's not much that goes right about varsity blues , and there's not much to like about it , either . 
everything herein has already been done , and if it hasn't , the movie manages to botch it one way or another . 
this is certainly missable . 


Sentiment: neg
you've got mail is a timely romance for this impersonal , computer-driven decade . 
two people who've never met confide in each other via e-mail without revealing their true identities . 
nora ephron's contemporary update of the shop around the corner retains the basic plot : two people who despise each other unwittingly become enamored with each other through their anonymous correspondence . 
ephron , who co-wrote the film with her sister , delia , as well as directed it , knew what she was doing by reteaming tom hanks and meg ryan as the at-odds couple . 
ryan is kathleen kelly , owner of a small children's bookstore , while hanks is joe fox , who heads up a chain of mega bookstores ( think barnes & noble ) . 
their charm and chemistry are the glue that binds this film , even through some of the script's rough spots . 
for the ephrons invested so much effort in their protagonists that they give short shrift to the talented supporting cast , including parker posey , greg kinnear , jean stapleton and steve zahn . 
yet no one is really going to complain because the ephrons know their audience - and what the paying public wants is hanks and ryan . 
and the two are kept busy . 
one , the other or both are in nearly every scene . 
hanks has his decent guy routine down pat , yet each time he does it , it seems effortless , spontaneous and fresh . 
ryan smoothly moves between spunky and vulnerable , with a sexy touch of winsomeness added to the brew . 
their scenes together sparkle , even though they lack the nostalgic romanticism of sleepless in seattle . 
and the shadow of that earlier hit hangs over you've got mail like dried-up mistletoe . 
the sparks created by the earlier movie are , by necessity , not evident here . 
true , these are two people seeking true love , but you've got mail is more comic and less poignant than its predecessor . 
the ephrons' script is witty and sharp . 
however , as a director nora ephron is a bit uneven . 
some scenes drag , while others , especially when hanks and ryan are revealing their souls via e-mail , are crisp and tidy . 
also , the script gets sloppy toward the end with characters merely disappearing from the story . 
a nice , romantic soundtrack adds to this date-night special . 
overall , you've got mail is a lush and cute outing , taking advantage of the star appeal of its two leads . 
it's a nice holiday movie , one for holding hands and snuggling . 
committed to lifelong learning through effective communication 


Sentiment: pos
guilt . guilt is something i felt while watching basic instinct for the ninth time ; the penultimate t & a thriller , basic instinct made my last few teenage years worth living . 
but i know so well that it's a terrible film , made by a terrible director incapable of feeling guilt . 
verhoeven went on to make the even more offensive showgirls and , on november seventh , 1997 , unleashed starship troopers to innocent moviegoers like me , who cannot control the urge to see giant bug movies . 
the pic begins with the most unintentional laugh of the year . 
a simple , white on black title card reads " starship troopers " -my friends and i speculated that the night before the prints were shipped , verhoeven realized he forgot the credits . 
is this how a hundred million dollar movie should open ? 
were the rest of the film that subdued . . . 
starship troopers is about a group of white , blond-haired himbos and bimbos who all have spanish last names . 
they graduate high school , join the military , and then , rather curiously , decide to travel to an alien planet and destroy all lifeforms on that planet . 
the story is so incomprehensible , and told so bombastically , it's akin to 129 minutes of someone screaming punishments at you in a foreign tongue . 
 ( aside , club lovers will be happy to know that dance music hasn't changed in the future . ) 
one plus : starship troopers contains some very funny sequences , specifically the newsreels of the future . 
hysterically funny , actually . 
but the cynicism of these reports left me curious as to whether verhoeven felt pessimistic about the story in between . 
the storytelling lacks focus , to say the least . 
the politics of the film are scary . 
the actions of the major female characters are dictated by their out-of-control libidos . 
there's even a creepy sex scene : the lovely dina meyer makes out , nude , with the sickening van dien while half her face is covered by her opaque sweater , just the way he seems to like it . 
i use the term sickening because van dien is the least appealing actor i've encountered in a big budget picture ; all chiseled features and machismo , he even barks a eulogy at a funeral like military orders . 
of course , verhoeven's probably the one to blame , and perhaps i'm jealous because i'm so disgusting . 
at any rate , a movie called starship troopers shouldn't be about sex . 
exactly ten years ago , verhoeven made robocop , which was about nothing but skillfully made and oddly moving . 
and r-rated , despite its goofy premise . 
maybe it's asking too much for verhoeven to make a pg-movie , then-he's a master of insipid violence . 
however , ten year old boys would adore starship troopers if they could see it . 


Sentiment: neg
warning : anyone offended by blatant , leering machismo had better avoid this film . 
or lots of blood & guts , men against men and mano-et-mano stuff . 
in other words , it's a walter hill film ! 
with a john milius script ! 
i always picture these guys getting together and producing a movie between arm-wrestling matches . 
these films always contain male characters i have a very hard time identifying with , probably due to the likelihood that any meeting between them and me would result in my arm being ripped off and then my subsequent death by beating with said limb . 
and we got tough guys galore , here ; drug-running banditos by the dozens , all dirty and sweaty and pretty ill-tempered , overall ; a secret task force of army commandos who are in the area to cover-up ( supposedly ) any connection between the government and the drug runners ; and lots of shit-kicking texas dirt farmers who'd as soon shoot you between the eyes as look at you . 
in particular , we got nick nolte as one hard-ass texas ranger , powers boothe as the drug kingpin , michael ironsides as the leader of the secret army , and rip torn as the local sheriff . 
torn is the sympathetic figure of the group ; he smiles before shooting anyone . 
as to women . . . 
well , i've never seen jane fonda or meryl streep in a walter hill film , and at this rate , i doubt i ever will . 
women exist here to look good , comfort the man , and get argued over . 
gosh ! 
just like the old days . . . 
frankly , this is a pretty good movie , if you can accept the premise and can take the macho stuff . 
the cinematography is excellent , the cast of characters is broad and has texture , the script is quite good , and the film lets you keep up with what's happening yourself , without spelling it out to you . 
i appreciate a film that makes me have to think to keep up . 
finally , there's lots of sam peckinpah slow-motion shoot-ups . 


Sentiment: pos
susan granger's review of " two can play that game " ( screen gems ) 
since the success of " waiting to exhale , " there have been several romantic comedies about african-american professionals . 
this female revenge fantasy , vivica a . fox plays shante smith , a stunning ad exec who seems to have reached the pinnacle of success : a mansion , a sporty car and an idyllic relationship with a hunky , hot-shot lawyer , morris chestnut . 
she's at a point in her life when she dispenses advice to her grateful girl-friends ( mo'nique , wendy racquel robinson , tamala jones ) . 
 " when your man messes up , no matter how small it is , " she smugly decrees , " yuh gots to punish him . " 
so when she catches her hot man dancing at a bar with a smart and sexy rival , gabrielle union , she devises her own version of " the rules , " a 10-day " tough love " emotionally punishing plan to get him back . 
unfortunately , writer/director mark brown ( " how to be a player " ) breaks the cardinal rule of romantic comedy : you have to like the protagonist - and shrill , self-congratulatory shante smith is a smirking , superficial , spiteful shrew who doesn't realize that rational rules cannot always be applied to love . 
having her talk directly into the camera gets stale very quickly and the " day one , " " day two " title-card device underscores the tedium . 
comic anthony anderson scores as chestnut's boisterous best-friend , and singer bobby brown does a cameo as a scuzzy mechanic who's given a smooth makeover by ms . robinson . 
but the out-takes over the closing credits contain more humor than the film itself . 
on the granger movie gauge of 1 to 10 , " two can play that game " is smarmy if slick 4 , filled with misogynistic attitude and blatant product placements ( coca-cola , miller genuine draft ) but little else . 
in this r-rated ( for explicit sexual language ) , pseudo-hip battle of the sexes , the audience loses . 


Sentiment: neg
saw an advanced screening of the movie sniper last night , and i have to say i wasn't too impressed . 
this film is about an expert marine sniper , played by tom berenger , who is teamed with a hot-shot-young-no-experience-never-killed-a-man new partner to take out some drug-kingpins and military strong men in panama . 
sound cliche ? 
that's only the beginning . 
billy zane ( memphis belle ) played the rookie , and never seemed to get a handle on his character . 
he was so contrary and pig-headed in the beginning , you just wanted to smack him . 
then he goes " crazy " from the pressure , but seems to immediately snap out of it . 
i'm not sure if the blame should lie with the directing , editing , scriptwriting , or acting . . . 
but it didn't all come together . 
i think berenger is a pretty good actor , and he looked great in the part , covered in camo , face painted , stalking through the jungle with his high-power rifle . . . 
but once again , his character was given some pretty bad dialogue , and didn't react too logically to many of the situations . 
there was very little logical development in these characters . 
my biggest problem with this film was it's tendency to put these two snipers in as * many * inches-from-death situations as possible . 
they began to resemble g . i . joes , the greatest american hero . 
and of course their almost supernatural accuracy with their guns was called upon to get them out of far too many close calls . 
now a lot of movies are stamped out of this mold , in fact that's what made die hard so much fun : the super-hero avenger type . 
so some will enjoy the action hero heroics , but i didn't think it fit with the nice tension that was built up in the earlier scenes , and the " real life " feel of covert operations in panama . 
a word must be said on the camera work , much of it was very nice . 
the jungles of panama ( or their stand-ins in this case ) formed a very picturesque background . . . 
and the drama of speeding bullets was captured using some nice trick photography . 
many have seen the slowed down " bullet-cam " following the projectile to its target . 
this was used well in the beginning to show the feverish nightmares berenger gets when remembering the moment of the kill . 
it was dramatic when used in flashback . . . but 
it seems the director liked the technique so much he started inserting these shots ( pardon the pun ) into the real time action . . . then 
it just seemed silly . 
all in all , not a real dog : there is some nice action , good atmosphere , and pretty photography . 
but the plot is pretty lame , the acting didn't form a cohesive whole , and far too much thisclosefromdeath heroics . 


Sentiment: neg
i know what i would do with $4 . 4 million if i found it in a previously undiscovered airplane crash site , especially if i were with jacob and lou . 
 ( huh ? ) 
well , in any event , that is the situation hank ( paxton ) finds himself in . 
he and his dim-witted brother jacob ( thorton ) and tubby friend lou ( brent briscoe ) come upon a large bag of cash inside a plane wreck . 
against his better judgement , hank decides to go along with the idea of keeping it rather than going to the authorities . 
the rest of the film is a question of who is going to die to keep this a secret , and is it worth it ? 
a simple wish lies along the lines of very bad things , clay pigeons and even fargo , and is kind of wrapped all into one little dark bundle . 
oh , and its much better than any of those . 
sam raimi took a departure from his normal freak-show horror-monkey films and made this stylish and intriguing picture . 
he really lets the audience sit back and watch the events unfold rather than force them down our throats as many directors prefer to do . 
i think raimi knew he had a winner on his hands and decided to direct the picture on a natural flowing course . 
one of the film's components can be linked to a recurring theme in terrence malick's the thin red line . 
in malick's three hour bore-a-thon , he makes an interesting attempt to link mother earth to his war story . 
it seemed nothing more than an occasional pretty cut to a field of flowing grass , a small bird , or a flowing body of water . 
sure , there were obvious metaphorical connections , but there was no subtlty to his efforts . 
raimi does a fine job of tying in a fox in a chicken coop and birds of prey to signify the future of the characters . 
i think most viewers may miss the comparison , but it is a very intriguing ingredient in the film . 
and then there's billy bob thorton , who is proof that the independent film industry is vital to the life blood of hollywood . 
if it can continute to produce people like thorton , hollywood will be ok . 
he gives a fantastic and devastatingly deep performance here . 
it is not as engrossing as his carl childers character in slingblade , but is is just as complex , if not more so . 
jacob is slow and simple , and yet we so often see him deep in thought . 
i wondered if he was thinking about things that he would never say ( or didn't know how to say ) or if he was just taking a long time to think about the thing he just said . 
here he really proves his worth as one of the best character actors in the industry . 
though the plot is somewhat unoriginal , it has a very appealing new twist in its characters . 
paxton gives one of the better performances of his career as the straight and serious leader of the group ( a far cry from chet in wierd science ) . 
perhaps bridget fonda is miscast as his advice-giving wife , but she certainly doesn't do anything ruin the picture . 
a simple plan can be included in the group of recent small hollywood films that is just dark and pretty un-redeeming . 
but at least this one has an important message , unlike so many of its counterparts . 


Sentiment: pos
originally launched in 1978 , this popular film was re-introduced in 1998 to a whole new generation of moviegoers . 
based on the mighty successful musical from broadway , grease was followed in 1980 with the less stellar grease 2 ( 6 . 5/10 ) , 
starring a young michelle pheiffer in one of her first feature film roles . 
plot : high-school musical set in the 1950's showcasing the relationship between the cool danny zuko of the t-birds ( travolta ) and the innocent and pure sandy olsen ( newton-john ) from australia . 
the film follows the couple and their vivacious friends during their last year at rydell high through song , dance and humour . 
critique : fun-loving , energetic and innocent look back at times much simpler . 
this movie effectively juggles a thin romantic story line and the overall experience of the 1950's , with a superb soundtrack and some great dance numbers . 
admittedly , i am somewhat biased in this opinion , since this film blasts me into my past as a rebellious youth ( grease was one of schmoe's first big-screen experiences , and every other scene sends me reeling into the times of my elaborate grease bubble-gum card collection ) , and the lesser responsibilities that i possessed at that time . 
but apart from the nostalgic vibe , i was still extremely impressed by this film , as it continued to amuse me , despite my previous dozen or so viewings . 
this film took john travolta from a dim-witted " sweathog " on tv's welcome back kotter , and transformed him into a movie-star of spectacular proportions ( saturday night fever ( 7 . 5/10 ) in 1979 confirmed that sudden popularity ) . 
unfortunately for the rest of the cast , his popularity was not terribly contagious , despite their effective showings in this classic movie . 
on the down side , some of the absolute innocence in this film might bore or turn people off ( like when sandy sings about " drinking lemonade " and " staying out until 10 " with danny in " summer nights " ) , and the plot isn't exactly the most elaborate story-line ever created , but despite these small reservations , this movie carries enough great music and high energy to keep anyone amused through its rapid 110 minute running time ( and believe me . . . i 
am not a fan of the musicals ! ! ) . 
make sure to look for a young lorenzo lamas in the static role of the brainless football player , as well as the national bandstand dance contest as one of the film's absolute highlights . 
and don't forget to buy the popular soundtrack afterwards , so that you could listen to its peppy tunes whenever you're feeling a little blue . 
little known facts : henry winkler , of tv's happy days' fonzie fame , turned down the part of danny zuko because he did not want to be typecast for the rest of his career . 
both travolta and conaway were smitten by newton-john during the filming of this picture . 
conaway eventually bowed out of the woo-fest , and married newton-john's sister a year later ( divorced after five years ) . 


Sentiment: pos
brian de palma's snake eyes stars nicolas cage's evil twin , who confusingly uses the same stage name as his talented brother . 
like a foreign tourist who screams his lines in english to ensure that he will be understood , cage yells with the ferocity of a man with a bad case of caffeine overload . 
de palma , whose last great film , the untouchables , was crafted over a decade ago seems to have lost his magic . 
in snake eyes , he manages to elicit some of the worst performances possible out of a skilled cast . 
only gary sinise rises slightly above the hackneyed material . 
the rest of the actors become caricatures in this by-the-numbers thriller . 
ryuichi sakamoto's atmospheric and melodramatic music dominates almost every scene . 
heavy on the long violin notes , its rhythm is punctuated by thunder . 
 ( the script by de palma and lost world's david koepp sets the action during a hurricane in an attempt to pump up the adrenaline level and the noise . 
only the latter is achieved . ) 
cage plays rick santoro , a corrupt atlantic city cop who shakes down criminals to get betting money . 
the movie takes place over a single evening when a world championship fight is being held . 
with a flashy , bad wardrobe and a gold cell phone , rick is an obnoxious cop who doesn't know when to shut up . 
spouting cliched and ridiculous dialog , he screams such lines as , " i was made for the sewer , baby ! " 
actually the line is more apropos for the movie as a whole . 
sinise plays kevin dunne , a naval officer who is in charge of the security for the secretary of the navy , who has come to watch the fight . 
but most people in the film are not who they seem to be , and the thin script makes all of them easy to guess . 
the plot , which is told in endless flashbacks , concerns the assassination of the secretary through a scheme set up by some malevolent businessmen ? that adjective is , of course , redundant in hollywood thrillers . 
the flashbacks become repetitious with the same scene shown again and again , sometimes from a different perspective and sometimes not . 
although a brian de palma film requires a certain amount of gratuitous violence , this one is remarkably tame for the man who became famous when he made carrie . 
the movie's outline has some promise , but the movie itself is leaden . 
the film takes itself all too seriously . 
at best , it is a 1940s-style b movie . 
a little humor would have helped the script some , but a complete rewrite would have been better . 
and , although i hate to say it , a different director would have been the biggest improvement . 
snake eyes runs 1 : 39 . 
it is rated r for violence and would be acceptable for teenagers . 


Sentiment: neg
american pie acknowledges a cold , hard fact that most movies don't : it is very difficult to get laid . 
its four virgin heroes are jim ( biggs ) , a chronic masturbator , kev ( nicholas ) , who desperately wants to deflower his girlfriend ( reid ) , oz ( klein ) , a lacrosse player whose approach requires some fine tuning , and finch ( eddie kaye thomas ) , a germphobe ( his crass nickname is hilarious , but i won't spoil it here ) who pays a classmate to spread rumours about the size of his member . 
jim , kev , oz and finch attend a high school in suburban michigan full of so many impossibly beautiful women it's no wonder they're horny all the time . 
after a party at their studly friend stifler's ( seann william scott , in the film's sharpest performance ) house leaves them sexually unsatisfied , the quartet make a pact : to " lose it " by graduation-specifically , prom night , which is only a few weeks away . 
american pie is in the tradition of bachelor party or revenge of the nerds . 
almost every conversation these characters have revolves around makin' whoopee . 
all women are there to be ogled . 
 ( alyson hannigan's perky music student is the only memorable female of the bunch . ) 
situations abound that defy logic only to arouse and/or amuse its core audience , adolescent boys . 
 ( to arouse : nadia's ( shannon elizabeth ) internet striptease-an unexpectedly raucous ( and guiltily pleasurable ) sequence . 
to amuse : jim's lusty encounter with a hot apple pie . ) 
what differentiates american pie from those dirty eighties comedies , aside from a very nineties obsession with bodily fluids * , is a cast that's light years more appealing than that of , say , just one of the guys . 
two more standouts : klein and " sctv " 's eugene levy . 
klein plays a kind-hearted athlete for the second time in a row , after alexander payne's underappreciated election . 
i hope to see more of this warm actor with the disarmingly honest face very soon . 
levy's is the most crowd-pleasing performance , and indeed , it's nice to see him back on the big screen in a role that makes wonderful use of that expressive brow . 
american pie also wants to emulate the teen flicks your parents _would_ let you watch growing up . 
it skillfully employs a broad mix of pop tunes , much like john hughes' movies did , and even pays homage to the breakfast club a couple of times , most evidently when the prom band covers simple minds' " don't you ( forget about me ) . " 
the picture ultimately has a healthy , if obligatory , attitude towards safe sex-even at their most libidinous , american pie's protagonists first whip out a condom . 
the filmmakers prove that socially responsible raunch is possible . 
for its familiarity and for its charming leads , i recommend american pie , but the buzz on this film had me expecting something . . . fresher . 
as far as the new teen cinema goes , it's at the top of the heap . 
 * don't say i didn't warn you about the party scene . 


Sentiment: pos
apparantly money talks . 
 . 
 . 
and uses quite a bit of obscenities doing so ! 
i've always considered myself pretty open about the gratuity a film can possess , whether in language , violence , sex , or what have you . 
i find that this fact gives me a little more leverage to complain when a movie goes overboard , and money talks definitely does ! 
it's not so much that the movie swore nearly constantly ( and i mean constantly ! ) , but it swore so much that it seemed overly prominent and way too staged . 
perhaps if one character were foul mouthed , but in this film , everybody swears nearly every other word . 
money talks is about a black ticket scalper named franklin hatchett ( played less annoyingly than expected by chris tucker ) . 
franklin is your typical con-man and ends up with more than one person out to get him . 
when the plot finally gets underway , there's no less than three people ( or groups ) that want him , dead or alive . 
the frenchman who's somewhat responsible for franklin's escape from a prisoner-packed bus , a hoodlum whom franklin owes seven grand , and the cops who wrongly suspect him of murder . 
franklin's only hope : james russell ( charlie sheen ) , an investigative reporter for the local news who's out to prove himself a worthy journalist . 
james offers to help clear franklin's name if franklin will just allow him an exclusive report to help channel 12 conquer sweeps week . 
both of these elements are completely lost along the way however , and never do reappear . 
as expected , the odd couple of franklin and james do wind up friends at the end , which is another wasted element seeing as how they show no signs of becoming friends at any point along the way . 
there is just nothing original or intriguing about this film , and so many developments are either non-relevant , or just plain forgotten about . 
money talks is a paint-by-numbers movie that lacks any real involvment with the audience . 
frivilous dialogue , a predictable , flat storyline , and two-dimensional characters make money talks a reason to save your money . 


Sentiment: neg
us critic-type people are always shaking our heads and telling everyone that movies aren't thrill rides , but i think that " back to the future ii " is one of the few exceptions . 
if the original film had the spirit of the 1950s , then this has the spirit of the 80s : full of fights ; chase scenes ; cliff hangers ; special effects ; some detective work ; and of course the vision of the high-tech future . 
the film picks up exactly where the first film left off , with doc ( lloyd ) , marty ( fox ) , and jennifer ( elizabeth shue ) travelling 30 years into the future , because something bad is going to happen to marty and jennifer's kids . 
doc tells marty he must take his son's place at an incident that will cause a chain reaction if marty mcfly jr . says yes to griff ( wilson - in one of four different roles ) . 
whoever said history tends to repeat itself wasn't joking , especially when it comes to the movies . 
essentially the same chase scene that marty endured in the 50s takes place again in the year 2015 , but it's not as authentically exciting this time because it is so obviously a parody of itself . 
at the end of the situation marty has changed the course of history for the better , and it seems like everything's copasetic right ? 
wrong . 
since when do things go according to plan in the " back to the future " movies ? 
there are so many minor conflicts and details that effect the plot and the direction of the story i won't even bother to list them all . 
basically we get to see marty as an old man , his house , his family , etc . we also go back to an alternate 1985 , and then back again to 1955 , with everything happening so fast the film never stops to catch a breath . 
the films' best aspect is the fact that it actually goes back to the first movie and shows a lot of the action that occurred from another angle . 
it's difficult to convey the sense of wild and zany fun without describing every little detail . 
the only thing sacrificed in this film is the suspense . 
instead of a grand finale , we get lots of little victories . 
by the end everything is back to normal , but something happens that leads to yet another sequel , but it doesn't seem gratuitous . 
 " back to the future part ii " is a really great adventure movie . 
it certainly has more originality than other films but it lacks a certain charm that was dominate throughout its predecessor . 


Sentiment: pos
edward burns tackles his third picture with no looking back , and like his previous two , it is a working-class relationship picture . 
however , unlike his previous work , the film dwells on a more personal story , and with a female protagonist . 
and in no looking back , he stumbles , making a slow , boring film without the spark that enlivened his previous work . 
claudia ( lauren holly ) is a small town waitress who is feeling stifled by her life . 
she's at a turning point in her life , and feels as if she's going nowhere . 
her boyfriend , michael ( jon bon jovi ) , is broke and in a dead end job . 
if she were to marry him , she'd never get a chance to escape this town . 
enter charlie ( edward burns ) , claudia's old flame . 
he skipped town several years before , without any explanations . . . even 
for claudia . 
he has come back to town to see her , and suddenly she is torn . 
should she stay with stable michael , and never escape her hometown . . . or 
should she ignore her instincts and fall for charlie again . 
part of the answer lies in the character of her mother ( blythe danner ) , who fell for the wrong man . . . and has spent her life pining for claudia's father to return . 
now it seems that claudia is about to make the same mistakes . 
at only a little past ninety minutes , no looking back is rather short for its genre . 
unfortunately , it seems much much longer . 
the storyline is simple and uninspired , and there's a lack of energy to the whole proceedings , which makes the entire drama rather tedious . 
edward burns makes a misstep by casting himself in the crucial role as the egomaniacal old flame . 
there's no one to restrain his ego , which reigns unchecked . 
he walks into the room and lauren holly swoons . . . yeah , 
right . 
lauren holly does what she can with her central character . 
but we never understand why her character makes such pathetically bad decisions . . . and 
we never really care . 
bon jovi is the only sympathetic character in the whole movie . 
his acting talents are much greater than they might seem , but he is given a mostly bland and ineffective role to work with . 
there's not much to recommend in no looking back . 
it's not that the film is bad . . . it's 
simply boring . 
there's no zest in any aspect of the film , and no reason to spend ninety minutes watching it . 


Sentiment: neg