Sachinkry/imdb-preference-10k huggingface dataset:
You can debate Prince's acting talent, or even his choice to parody his own life in this film. There is no debate about his musical talent either then or now. He seems like a shadowy has-been twenty years later, but the music remains relevant and fantastic.
Having lived through the hype of this movie (graduated high school in'85) I can tell you that there was nothing bigger at the time. From Tipper Gore (Al's wife) trying to censor "Little Nikki" and every thing else under the sun via the PMRC (Parents Music Resource Center) to every "Air Band" at the time impersonating Prince, it was the absolute hottest thing out. For a few weeks at least, Prince was bigger than Madonna and Michael Jackson.
We all waited for the film and were soooooo excited when it premiered. It didn't disappoint. EVERYONE was caught up. I was an MTV junkie at the time(they actually played music then....all the time)Prince played at least once or twice an hour. I must qualify this commentary by saying that, at that time, my favorites were Billy Idol, Oingo Boingo, The Fixx, Flock of Seagulls and others in the Punk/ New Wave genre' The music of Prince at the time transcended all types and styles. One of the reasons that some of it seems so cheesy and contrite now is that it was SOOOOOOOO big then. All the things that remind you of the 80's were iconic then. It was mainstream and it seems like a cliché' now. It got so popular that it became ridiculous. It's like the rappin' Granny commercial for Wendy's Hamburgers.
It looks stupid now because EVERYONE was caught up in it (sadly, kind of like a bizarre purple macarena or something. Anyway, I hope this gave you all a little insight.

This is the best film the Derek couple has ever made and if you think this is a recommendation then you haven't seen any of the others. There are the usual ingredients: it is just as poorly acted as their other efforts, we can watch Bo disrobing or auditioning for wet T-shirt contests quite frequently, the story is just laughably idiotic, and the film takes itself much too seriously. And then: Orang Utans in Africa?
But it has a few things going for it. Bo looks great, the production values (sets, costumes, etc.) are quite good, and this greatly enhances its camp value. In a strange way it is actually quite funny, simply because it tries to be serious and fails so badly.
So when i was little i got this movie as a present and my sister and i loved it. we would watch it all the time. when our friends came over we would have sleepovers and we'd watch big rock candy mountain and grandpa's magical toys. I'm 21 now and i still love this movie, some old friends and i recently got together and watched it, we knew all the songs and we danced and talked about how much we hated Profster when we were little. One friend actually bought this movie and grandpa's magical toys for her 2 year old daughter because she wants to pass on our love of this movie. This really is a movie you can let your kids watch and feel safe, no violence, no bad language, just lots of great songs and important lessons.

The movie is bad. Nothing special - just a "kid" movie with no serious thing in it. There is though one reason to watch this for: the animal talk. Some of them are so funny in what they say, you just can't stop laughing. So if you want to hear a dog in the dog pound saying "I'm Keyser Soze", or another animal saying "You're a dead cat walking", or many other funny one liners, see it. Cause there's no other good movie to watch it. Vote: 4 out of 10.
Any film that deals with bigotry in a positive manner is a film that should still be seen by current audiences as the message and moral of the story will always be relevant as long as we have a world full of bigotry.
Aside from that, the film is really an old-fashioned love story..boy meets girl..boys loses girl...boy gets girl back....
The weakest role goes to the late Kent Smith as Lt. General Webster(Riccardo Montalban is a close second)...my question would be how did he ever get to be a 3-star general...the character is such a wimp in the presence of his wife and military subordinates, it's a wonder they show him any respect at all.
Brando's southern accent is a little overdone, and some scenes have a few holes but overall, I enjoy the film every time I see it.
Red Buttons is great...I always love seeing comedians in dramatic roles...as in Button's case, often a comedian can better portray the tragedy of a person than a more traditional dramatic actor.

As one of the few commentators not to have seen the 1st film, I found this to be a very disappointing movie.
Yes, it has a funny awkward type of humour if you can bear the (highly) morally dubious premise. However, it fails abysmally in the important areas.
There is thin and nonsensical plot line involving Gordon Sinclair's generous friend who may or may not be entwined in a conspiracy to supply dangerous electronics to Third World countries - possibly in free computers ... or possibly not. Vague, long-winded and inconclusive. The lack of any substantial ending is so infuriating and what is present is pompous and wholly illogical. The film feels half-finished.
Suspension of disbelief is extremely difficult when witnessing a very attractive female teacher (Maria Doyle Kennedy) can be drawn to Gordon Sinclair's unimpressive character, especially when he fends off her advances. Laughable. It worsens later in the film when he achieves his romantic ambitions then throws it all away for some ideals based on very little evidence of ambiguous value.
Not many films leave me feeling cheated, but I felt my time was stolen.
We watched this on "The Wonderful World of Disney" on ABC last night, and I came to the conclusion that things must be tighter there at "the Mouse" than usual.
Since this movie only runs 74 minutes, and they had to pad it out to 2 hours of broadcast television time, they had, and I'm not making this up, commercial breaks that lasted 6 to 7 minutes. And during these commercial breaks, they had another advertisement in the guise of a "TV show" hosted by the oh-so-annoying Kelly Rippa that loudly proclaimed the magical wonders of "Cinderella 2: Dreams Come True".
Again and again, break after break, Disney took time out of the real movie to tell us, the loyal viewers, that we needed to get a copy of the sequel. Thank you, Disney, for doing us the service of creating a sequel to your beloved gem of a movie.
Anyway, all this commercialism and cash-register-ringing made it a difficult task to get into the actual movie of "Cinderella", because by the time the commercials were over, I had forgotten where the story had left off.
But of course, the original "Cinderella" still maintains its magic, and the story is still a good one, though we've all seen it countless times. It's a shame they had to cheapen it with all the marketing for what looks to be a lame follow-up.

Peeew this stinks! As everyone knows it's based upon some Geico insurance commercials; what no one knows is WHY?! Those commercials were amusing on first viewing at best; hardly fodder for a series. (The talking Geico gecko -- that's another story. Now that would make for an intriguing series!) And why on earth did ABC -- as reported in the press -- actually agree to buy the cavemen character rights from Geico for this? After all, the idea of cavemen struggling in the modern world is hardly unique to TV; Phil Hartman had a recurring Saturday Night Live role as The Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer over a decade ago. And that's how a concept like this works best -- as an occasional installment. But a regular series? Fuhgeddaboudit. (A 1960s series called "It's About Time" also used the cavemen in the modern world concept. It lasted one season.)
One of the show's directors, who was also responsible for the Geico commercials, was recently quoted as saying: "We were so excited when we were shooting our commercials because we felt like we had something that was very unique and we had bigger stories to tell." Wrong.
In the annals of bad TV, this is destined to take its place alongside 1972's "Me and the Chimp" as one of the all-time worst. The lead actor in the embarrassing Chimp fiasco actually went into shame-by-association hiding after it was abruptly canceled. No doubt our cavemen friends will follow suit.
This documentary by Marian Cooper is absolutely amazing. I saw it tonight on Turner Classic Movie channel. I think I will see if I can order a copy of it on DVD. The film footage doesn't look all blurry and choppy like you might think from 1925 B & W silent film. Set in Iran in 1925, The nomadic tribe people in the documentary leave their desert home and cross a raging river, men, women, children, animals... Then up and over a snowy mountain pass all Barefoot. It is sink or swim and climb or die. In search of grass for their animals. They have cows, goats, dogs, horses, mules. In one scene a man is carrying a mule who is too sick to climb the mountain. The children in the documentary all look happy and healthy. They had such a hard life. I wonder if the nomadic tribes of Iran still live like this. Makes you appreciate modern life in USA.

Sorry Fulci fans, but I could not get through this one. The soundtrack was about as annoying as they come, the acting was puerile, the story has been done and done, and the direction was non-existent.
Massacre honestly looked like a children's film project. But I've seen some of those, and they actually look better than this did! It appears to have been so underfunded they couldn't afford ... ANYTHING! Not a DoP, not a director, no one who even remotely had a clue what acting was. It was a very poor cinematic experience; one of my worst.
This was about the worst suck-fest I've seen, next to Terror Toons which is second only to Killer Klowns from Outer Space. I've nothing else to say about it.
It rates a 0.1/10 from...
the Fiend :.
Norman, Is That You? was (this is all third hand, so take it with a grain of salt) adapted to an African American family from a Jewish one, when it made the transition off stage and onto screen. Also, it was one of those movies originally filmed in video, so the prints from the theater can't have been that great. Still, performances by Redd Foxx and others were pretty good.
What I wanted to tell you all is that the movie is a PERIOD PIECE: it reflected the attitudes in the mid to early 70s about finding out you have a gay son or daughter in your family. For that reason alone, it's pretty interesting- if not a little "hollywood". Don't believe me? Check out lines about curtains, etc. Very stereotypical. Not too deep.
But... the movie really shines in a couple of areas. There is a side splitting scene when Redd Foxx is trying to find his wife, who's run away with his brother (!) to Ensenada in a souped up Pinto. The phone conversation across the border is really memorable.
But... the best scene in the movie is when Wayland Flowers and Madame did his/their gay routine that he used to do in gay bars and nightclubs. To the best of my knowledge, this is the only time that routine was filmed. And, it's a slightly cleaned up and much shorter version, I'm told. Still, it's vintage Madame, and shouldn't be missed. People are still stealing lines from Wayland; the man was truly gifted. Enjoy the movie!

...this verson doesn't mangle the Bard that badly. It's still a horrible minimalist production, Hamlet's Dutch uncle is inexplicably dubbed by a Spaniard (whether it's Ricardo Montalban or not is subject to debate), and Maximilian Schell overacts like never before. Most of the dialogue makes it through unscathed, and the fact that the MST3K version feels obliged to point out repeatedly that the speeches are long *duh* doesn't strike me as incredibly humorous. Mostly it's just bad acting, though.
THE ODD COUPLE (3+ outta 5 stars)
Like most people I will always feel that Jack Klugman and Tony Randall are the definitive "Odd Couple". Their incredible work on the TV series from the early to mid-70s was a highwater mark for television at the time... easily surpassing the stage and screen versions of the tale. Nonetheless, how can you go wrong with a Jack Lemmon/Walter Matthau pairing? Matthau is in especially good form as Oscar, the slob. Lemmon takes a bit of getting used to as Felix, particularly if you have previously seen Tony Randall's outstanding performance. The script is good... definitely Neil Simon's best. (I will go on record here as stating that Neil Simon is probably one of the worst, most over-rated playwrights of American theatre.) The storyline is simple: Felix, a neat freak and newly separated from his wife moves in with Oscar, the slob who needs some help saving money for alimony payments. Their living arrangement becomes much like a marriage as well, culminating in some amusing tiffs and spats. Lots of fun and some great one-liners.

I picked up this movie with the intention of getting a bad zombie movie. But I had no Idea what I was getting myself into.
I started the movie and soon I had been pulled into a world of pain and visual torture.
I finally know what hell is like. It's this movie. For eternity. This movie has no value. It didn't even really have a plot. There was stuff going on in each scene but no overall explanation why anything happens.
Instead of watching this movie I suggest that you line the nearest blender with oil and try and stuff as many bullets in it as you can. You will find that the outcome to be far more pleasant than this movie.
Don't even watch it. Not even to see how bad it is. I beg you. If you watch it, then it means they win.
When I was born, this television series was the number one show on T.V.!! America epitomized the feat of the ultimate fatted calf country with big ambitions, limitless potential, and a very comfortable economy!! After a big Sunday dinner, why not sit back and watch "Bonanza", IN COLOR!!! This homey western evokes an American tradition which accompanies the complacency of the typical U.S. household during the era in which it was viewed.. The breathtaking cinematography of Lake Tahoe symbolized an infinite prosperity of the emerging American culture!! Western Movies were so popular that Western Television Shows followed suit!! This was a period in time in our country which yearned for a concise reflection on our own country's struggle for survival!! The end result of the trials and tribulations at the Ponderosa Ranch, as demonstrated in this series, sparked a realization that Americans are now auspiciously enjoying the fruits of the Cartwright's painstaking labor!!
The T.V. Show "Bonanza" was popular for so many different reasons, mostly on account of the fact that the late fifties and early sixties had not yet established the divisiveness of two different cultural mindsets which was ready to surface with our nation! The unification of ideologies in the United States which prevailed during the debut of "Bonanza" was a big reason for the show's success!! In the show's later years, "Bonanza" had established a firmly entrenched core market television audience!! The cast to "Bonanza" became famous, and the wholesome entertainment of "Bonanza" encompassed a camaraderie for the All-American idealist!! Everybody liked "Bonanza" and a lot of Americans totally loved it!! Reflecting on rough and tumble family values is a favorite past time of many Americans, and the television show "Bonanza" was perfect for that frame of mind!! I liked the show a lot, and most people I know like it as well!! Certainly, my entire family loved "Bonanza"!! This show was one of the all time American classics in the history of television!!

The story idea is excellent. Unfortunately, the execution lets it down.
The movie lacks pace, for one thing. It should be an exciting ride, but it is slow and more than a little boring.
I think the problem's mainly in the screenplay and editing. There aren't enough obstacles and reversals to ratchet up suspense, and there are scenes which don't really move the story along very effectively.
The producers should have seen this in the screenplay and insisted upon a major rewrite. Unfortunately, when the producer is also the writer and the director, this evidently ain't gonna happen.
Much of the acting seems kind of flat, and that is down to the director - all the actors have been quite competent in other projects.
It's a shame, because with better writing, editing and direction, this could have been a really good thriller.
I'm gonna tip the scales here a bit and say I enjoyed this. However, the cartoon is really only going to appeal to those who have very absurdist tendencies. It's definitely something that most people will not get, as is the nature of absurdism.
the animation is horrible, but yes, that's the point. The main character is foul mouthed, violent, and stupid. no redeeming qualities whatsoever. his wife shrieks and wails, apparently just barely capable of the most basic communication skills. most of these stories completely lack any kind of point.
but again, that's the point ;)
If non sequiters, foul language, and complete and utter randomness are your thing, you're going to love this.
It is really short, so I would probably rent instead of buying.

I'm usually not one to say that a film is not worth watching, but this is certainly an extenuating circumstance. The only true upside to this film is Cornelia Sharpe, looking rather attractive, and the fact that this film is REALLY short.
The plot in the film is unbelievably boring and goes virtually nowhere throughout the film. None of the characters are even remotely interesting and there is no reason to care about anyone. I'm not sure why on earth Sean Connery agreed to do this film, but he should have definitely passed on this one.
The only reason I could see for seeing this film is if you are a die-hard Sean Connery fan and simply want to see everything he's done. Save this one for last though.
Well, if you by some miracle end up seeing this despite my review (or any of the other reviews on this site), then I hope you enjoy it more than I did. Thanks for reading.
I could not believe the low 5.6 rating on IMDb about Johnny Dangerously at the moment I wrote this review and I thought I had to do something to promote that memorable piece of comedy as much as I can. Seriously, to get a rating so low, the people who voted must have a very limited sense of humor, not to mention a very shallow opened mind. If you don't like humorous flicks, don't watch them! Combining absurd humour, a very good storytelling, and an outstanding pace given by the multiple running gags, this movie has made its way into my DVD collection. And that is without mentioning the visual farces embedded here and there and of course, the use of "clin d'oeils" and "clichés" based on our favorite organized crime movies.
I showed this movie to a lot of people and, being introduced to it without any specific expectations (except maybe watching a comedy)- the very state of mind you should have to watch any movie in my opinion - they all liked it very much. It goes well, it's not long to watch and there are absolutely no slowing downs in the evolution of the story, which I think is really straightforward. Sure it's not perfect, some gags fall a bit short, but no movie is perfect, especially when considering other opinions that yours. That is why I rated this movie 9 out of 10. This movie is in my opinion a precursor like "Top Secret" and "Spaceballs" in the field of absurd but well-thought comedies. Which are nowadays more and more absurd while cutting down on the thought and ingeniosity side. Sometimes gags need more culture than a lot of people imagine to be understood correctly, if at all. As a final word, I would like to say : watch it for yourself, do not follow average Joe's saying and if you don't like it, then you'll know for real it was not good for your tastes, which is understandable but unlikely in my opinion.

An expedition led by hunky Captain Storm (Mark Dana) travels to the Valley of the Kings in Cairo to find out what happened to an earlier expedition. They meet beautiful mysterious Simira (Ziva Rodann) who joins them. They soon find themselves faced with a blood drinking mummy...and only Simira seems to know what's going on.
A real snoozer. I caught this on late night TV when I was about 10. It put me to sleep! Seeing it again all these years later I can see why. It's slow-moving, the mummy doesn't even show up until 40 minutes in (and this is only 66 minutes long!), the acting ranges from bad (Dana) to REAL bad (George N. Neise) and there's no violence or blood to be found. This movie concentrates more on second rate dramatics (involving a silly love triangle) than horror.
This rates three stars because it actually looks pretty good, everyone plays it straight, there's some good acting from Diane Brewster, it's short and the mummy attack scenes (all three of them) aren't bad. They're not scary just mildly creepy. Still, this movie is pretty bad. A sure fire cure for insomnia.
This was a wonderful little American propaganda film that is both highly creative AND openly discusses the Nazi atrocities before the entire extent of the death camps were revealed. While late 1944 and into 1945 would reveal just how evil and horrific they were, this film, unlike other Hollywood films to date, is the most brutally honest film of the era I have seen regarding Nazi atrocities.
The film begins in a courtroom in the future--after the war is over (the film was made in 1944--the war ended in May, 1945). In this fictitious world court, a Nazi leader is being tried for war crimes. Wilhelm Grimm is totally unrepentant and one by one witnesses are called who reveal Grimm's life since 1919 in a series of flashbacks. At first, it appears that the film is going to be sympathetic or explain how Grimm was pushed to join the Nazis. However, after a while, it becomes very apparent that Grimm is just a sadistic monster. These episodes are amazingly well done and definitely hold your interest and also make the film seem less like a piece of propaganda but a legitimate drama.
All in all, the film does a great job considering the film mostly stars second-tier actors. There are many compelling scenes and performances--especially the very prescient Jewish extermination scene towards the end that can't help but bring you close to tears. It was also interesting how around the same point in the film there were some super-creative scenes that use crosses in a way you might not notice at first. Overall, it's a must-see for history lovers and anyone who wants to see a good film.
FYI--This is not meant as a serious criticism of the film, but Hitler was referred to as "that paper hanger". This is a reference to the myth that Hitler had once made money putting up wallpaper. This is in fact NOT true--previously he'd been a "starving artist", homeless person and served well in the German army in WWI. A horrible person, yes, but never a paper hanger!

had some lovely poetic bits but is really just an artsy-fartsy toss-together with no direction or resolution. how do these people get through film school? who gives them money to make this crap? could have been so much more, fine lead actor, and i always like Fairuza Balk, but come on, the alt-rock metaphor of just staring vacantly unable to find anything compelling is just so tired, and it sure doesn't make for good films. the director needs to go away and live life for a good long while and not come back to the camera until they really have something to say. this is like the throw-spaghetti-at-the-wall school of art-making, just juxtapose a bunch of earnest imagery and hope hope hope like hell that poetry emerges. that can work, if the director actually has any kind of vision, or has a brain that knows when it's in the presence of potential, but here it's just space filler, of no consequence. i felt the lazy ending coming moments before it hit, and was yelling "you lazy bastard" at the screen when the credits popped up.