empathielabs/imbd_dataset_v0 huggingface dataset:
system
classify the user's feedback by responding with only a single number: 1 for positive or 0 for negative


user
28 years before 9/11, there was another 9/11 which represented a key date in the history of Chile, South America and the whole world. This was the date in 1973 when a bloody coup in Chile deposed Salvador Allende the first Marxist president elected democratically anywhere in the world and put an end to the Chilean experiment of a democratic transition from capitalism to socialism. Allende committed suicide when the armed forces attacked the presidential palace.
Unfortunately this film is too biased and too nostalgic towards the time of Allende's rule to be an objective rendition of the man and of his place in history. The times were troubled and Allende was a disputed figure in the history of his country and of the whole world. True, he was democratically elected, but his policies plunged Chile into economic crisis. He was deposed by a coup and a right-wing dictatorship followed with repression and flagrant human rights abuses, but he was also an ally of Castro who saw in his policies another way of making revolution. We'll never know if his tentative to build a socialist yet democratic society would have succeeded. The authors of the movie take a completely pro-Allende position, there is no opinion or point of view trying to explain the other side, to answer questions like why did the middle class oppose him, or how his democratic views could go together with supporting or being supported by Castro. The tone of the commentaries is nostalgic and apologetic, almost propagandistic. People who want to get a better understanding of this episode of the history need to wait for a more balanced and objective film or book in the future.


assistant
0
system
classify the user's feedback by responding with only a single number: 1 for positive or 0 for negative


user
I kind of like JAG. It do have it´s charm but lately it´s to much propaganda in it. For an outsider (a non American) the patriotic feeling can be a bit to much.
I don´t like that Rabb and MacKenzie goes from being lawyers (as they were in the early parts of the TV show) to become super heros that stops wars and rescues entire continents. Its almost like watching a recruitment video from the US army.
I still watch the show, so it´s not that bad. But i would prefer more episodes when Rabb and MacKenzie investigates military accidents and don´t save the world in the future.


assistant
0
system
classify the user's feedback by responding with only a single number: 1 for positive or 0 for negative


user
I was so "impressed" with Tim Kincaid's MUTANT HUNT that I gave this one a try. It is the near future, post apocalypse of course. A wandering fighter named Neo (no, not that Neo!) joins a group of similar looking fighters to challenge The Dark One and his underling Valaria. Along the way they encounter mutants, crazed females, sewer worms, a big spider leg and some clunky robots. Oh my!
Sadly, ROBOT HOLOCAUST is hardly up (or down) to HUNT's level. Clocking in at a painful 79 minutes (the box says 90), this is one cheap flick. The sets have all the elaborate design of a carnival haunted house and the costumes prove that in the near future everyone will dress like John Travolta in the final dance number of STAYING ALIVE. The atomic wasteland is a combination of rubble filled old buildings and Central Park. The Dark One's headquarters is ominously named The Power Station and looks like, well, a power station. The acting is universally bad except for Angelika Jager as the evil Valaria. Jager is a whole 'nother level of bad. Vit er sick Cherman acczent, she gives a performance so amazingly bad that it becomes the sole reason to recommend this film. She also delivers the film's only nudity in the "pleasure chamber" section of the film. Ed French again supplies the robot effects but they aren't nearly as slimy as his work in MUTANT HUNT.


assistant
0
system
classify the user's feedback by responding with only a single number: 1 for positive or 0 for negative


user
What a despairing film. Dress actors in furry rags, place in suburban wasteland, set cameras rolling and hope for the best. One can only imagine e the thanks the cast gave when their characters were killed off by sockpuppets, thus sparing them further humiliation in this dullfest. This rivals Monster a go-go as the best cure for insomnia ever made. Oh God - how can I fill up 10 lines explaining how overwhelmingly bored everybody looks in this movie? Whiney crappy plastic bungling robot who annoys everybody both on and off screen, Giant spider reduced to a single giant hairy leg pulled by string, actors desperately trying not to look at the camera while mumbling off dialogs...


assistant
0
system
classify the user's feedback by responding with only a single number: 1 for positive or 0 for negative


user
In fact it was awful. The main chick in it who gets topless was obviously sleeping with the director at the time. It was shot at some warehouse most likely owned by family or friends. Also they chose not to bother coming up with a story. Sure these are ways to cut cost, but are they smart ways of keeping costs down? No they aren't. At the very least they could have found a middle school student in a "creative writing" course. Those kids may have at least had a lesson about story structure. At the very least, they could have read up on 3 act structure but acting obviously wasn't a priority either. Watching these jerks run around in funny clothing that was stupid by 1980's standards was an embarrassment. The fact that none of these actors committed suicide in humiliation is probably a testament to the limited distribution this film received. Had the actors actually seen the final result of their hard work, there would have been a line of people waiting to jump off the Brooklyn Bridge.
I'd give this movie 10/10 stars but it only deserves 1 for being released at all. This movie should be shown to film students everywhere. It's better than 90% of student films I've seen and wow is this movie a piece of shiiiit.


assistant
0
system
classify the user's feedback by responding with only a single number: 1 for positive or 0 for negative


user
All right, there's no way to sugarcoat this. The plot was ridiculous, the premise was ridiculous, the acting was unconscionable, the effects were laughable and all of the outdoor scenes appear to have been filmed in New York's Central Park. That having been said, there was something about this movie that I couldn't walk away from. Maybe it was the atmosphere, or maybe it was the evil super-vixen or the amazon wenches.
Anyway I'm not one to sit on the margins and criticise without pointing out a few redeeming qualities, so here they are.
A violent off-shoot of the women's lib movement is portrayed in a wilderness setting (central park, of course), and all of the masochistic young men out there will be very impressed. Furthermore, some of the scenes in which certain characters lose consciousness are amusingly dramatic (you'll note that I write dramatic, rather than convincing).
All I can say is that some people like B movies and I'm one of them. If you're one of them too, then give it a go. Cheers, Mr Kincaid. This is one for the ages.


assistant
0
system
classify the user's feedback by responding with only a single number: 1 for positive or 0 for negative


user
I am not familiar with the producer's other works, but this movie is a piece of crap.
I never saw the MST3K version, but I can tell you, Mike and the Bots probably didn't save it.
I love a grade-z movie as much as the next bad movie fan, but this was almost unwatchable.
There was no credit for who did the voice of "The Dark One". Sounded a bit like Patrick Stewart at times.
A group of high school students who found a junk super-8 camera in the trash heap could make a better movie than that.


assistant
0
system
classify the user's feedback by responding with only a single number: 1 for positive or 0 for negative


user
This movie is really bad. Most of it looks like it was filmed either in a park or a basement. There's a giant spider but all we see of it is one leg. There are some worms that live in a cave that are just cheap sock puppets with cardboard teeth. And the plot is a bunch of post-apocalyptic mumbo jumbo that makes no sense at all. The whole thing is just laughable.


assistant
0
system
classify the user's feedback by responding with only a single number: 1 for positive or 0 for negative


user
Mystery Science Theater 3000 would have not been able to bring any redeeming quality to a showing of this "gem."
This one is like a cheesy pirate copy of 80's porn you could have purchased on VHS from an arcade on 42nd st. before Disney bought the whole smash and closed them all down.
But, wait - all the sex scenes have been cut. I challenge anyone to find a worse film. This film could replace water-boarding as a humane method of interrogation.
No, I take that back - I would prefer water-boarding.
The only credit this movie could earn apart from being the worst movie ever made would be to threaten the middle east into solving its problems under pain of having to watch this movie.


assistant
0
system
classify the user's feedback by responding with only a single number: 1 for positive or 0 for negative


user
Robot Holocaust is about the lamest, most pathetic attempt at making a post-apocalyptic movie that I've seen. And I thought the Italians were the masters of wretched Mad Max wannabes. Some of those movies like Escape 2000 are positively brilliant in comparison with this piece of poo. The plot is nonsensical  even with a narrator setting up every scene. And boy does it drag. Scene after scene with nothing of any interest happening. The special effects (and I use the word "special" loosely) consist of sock puppets. Yes, that's right  sock puppets! The acting is abysmal. Angelika Jager is in the running for worst performance I've ever seen. Sure, she's French or German or whatever  but man is she bad. I cannot think of a single positive thing to say about the movie. So I'll stop there because ten sentences on this junk is about ten too many.
However, and fortunately for me, I saw the MST3K version of Robot Holocaust. Some of the things that made the movie so bad helped make this MST3K episode a winner. For a season one episode, the riffs come fast and furious and hit their mark just about every time. On my MST3K rating scale, I give this episode a 4/5  seek it out.


assistant
0
system
classify the user's feedback by responding with only a single number: 1 for positive or 0 for negative


user
Some films are just plain silly beyond explanation. This is one of them. Words cannot do justice to the wooden acting, the stupid plotline, and the ever-predictable outcome. About the only thing that makes this film halfway worth watching are the scantily clad women (and the mute guy for you ladies) in it. The leader of the warrior women and Valeria are quite appealing to the eye. But that's about all this movie has going for it.
Some silliness in point: One scene, when they start to journey to the lair of the Dark One, they are walking away from a supposedly destroyed land. But we clearly see a 1980's New York behind them. About 2/3rds of this movie looks like it was filmed in a high school basement. The deadly sock puppets look about as scary as a sesame street monster. I have to agree with Latronic in that many 1950's trash b-movies did a better job than this. About the only one I can think of that didn't was Teenagers from Outer Space.


assistant
0
system
classify the user's feedback by responding with only a single number: 1 for positive or 0 for negative


user
After watching this movie, I couldn't help but notice the parallels between it and another film called America 3000. Both were very bad mid 1980's post apocalypse disasters on celluloid. Obviously fake sets, wooden acting and stupid monsters are found in both films. About the only difference between the two is that the lead villainess here (played by Angelika Jager) has a very thick accent. Avoid this one unless you're watching the MST3K version. Joel and the bots barely salvage this turkey.


assistant
0
system
classify the user's feedback by responding with only a single number: 1 for positive or 0 for negative


user
this was made in that beloved age known as the 80s and shot in my hometown of New York City. actually, this has become one of my favorite b sci-fi movies. Oh, sure, it really stinks to high hell, but there's so much to make fun of, laugh, and enjoy that it becomes more tolerable after every viewing.
Such as:
Try to find the similarities between this and...well, OK, there is nothing similarly bad as this. Well, except Castle of FuManchu.
Sock puppets can be dangerous to your health
Create supense by describing through voice over rather than showing any imagery
Have leading villainess "Valeria" (played wonderfully by Angelika Jager) deliver some of the most riveting lines ever!!
Lots of men and women in post apocalyptic fashion (aka leather bikinis, loin cloths, and dead animal fur)
Do be horrified by the end!
I'm off to have a salad. Toodles!!


assistant
0
system
classify the user's feedback by responding with only a single number: 1 for positive or 0 for negative


user
I think I can safely say (without really giving anything away), that this movie had no robots in it. The guys in "robot" costumes didn't act or speak as such, and the evil entity behind the whole "plot" isn't a robot either.
The whole thing looks like it was shot in a city park somewhere, with photos dropped in the background when the director needed a custom set. I can't even use words to describe the acting...
This couldn't even offer the hilarious ending of "Star Crystal". In short, it is clearly one of the worst sci-fi movies of the 80's and I would be so bold as to say "of all time".


assistant
0
system
classify the user's feedback by responding with only a single number: 1 for positive or 0 for negative


user
Well, this movie actually did have one redeeming quality. It made up the funniest season one episode of MST3K. I wish Rhino had released this one instead of "The Crawling Hand."


assistant
0
system
classify the user's feedback by responding with only a single number: 1 for positive or 0 for negative


user
I once lived in the u.p and let me tell you what. I didn't have the foggyest idea what the heck this "bear walk " is. I never heard of it the whole 10 years I was up there. It was really funny in the beginning but went down hill quickly.


assistant
0
system
classify the user's feedback by responding with only a single number: 1 for positive or 0 for negative


user
Having lived in Michigan's Upper Peninsula (30 miles from Escanaba) in the mid-1990s, I was eager to see this film. It begins promisingly enough, with some superficial understanding of the values and quirks of U.P. life. But Jeff Daniels apparently was not content with a low-key approach that would have been fitting given the place and the people. Instead, he introduces extremely crude humor and some wildly inappropriate mystical/supernatural elements. Although there is a good movie to be made about this practically unknown region of the U.S., this is NOT it.


assistant
0
system
classify the user's feedback by responding with only a single number: 1 for positive or 0 for negative


user
It is inconceivable to me how ANYONE could have enjoyed or laughed at this movie. I'd say it's the worst movie I've seen in years and I see a lot of them. Maybe I've forgotten junior high? It's also very hard to believe that this is the same Jeff Daniels to did such a brilliant performance of George Washington in The Crossing. Seems like ever since he did Dumber, he's gone into the tank. Can you believe he even wrote and directed this junk?


assistant
0
system
classify the user's feedback by responding with only a single number: 1 for positive or 0 for negative


user
I went into this movie expecting a thoughtfull piece about how to be accepted in culture and I wound up blowing $8.50 on a 10 minute fart joke and a whole bunch of fake accents. Sorry, Jeff, but if you're going for the whole cult thing, you gotta a while to go.


assistant
0
system
classify the user's feedback by responding with only a single number: 1 for positive or 0 for negative


user
One of the worst movies I have ever seen. Excruciatingly slow-moving, boring and stupid. Lots of juvenile bathroom-humor, drawn out into painful tedium. I like Jeff Daniels, but he should stick to acting and forget writing. I am amazed this is rated as high as it is. I call it a turkey.


assistant
0
system
classify the user's feedback by responding with only a single number: 1 for positive or 0 for negative


user
"Escanaba in da Moonlight" is the first showcasing of Jeff Daniels writing and directing talents.
I've seen worse debuts but this one isn't that great.
"Escanaba in da Moonlight" starts off like as a decent parody of this part of American culture. As we follow Rebuen Soady (Jeff Daniels) on the eve of deer hunting season 1989. He is getting close to the record of oldest Soady to never bag a buck.
The film takes places in the upper regions of Michigan and has all the normal cliche characters. But there is a warmth there that tells you, this isn't being mean spirited.
Well, Reuben is heading off to The Soady Deer Camp and before his wife (Kimberly Norris Guerrero) gives him a Native American necklace, his lucky hat, and two-forms of liquid you probably don't want to know about.
Anyway, she is really the only one who believe in him. He finally gets to the camp where his Dad, Albery Soady (Harve Presnell) is waiting and his brother Remnar (Joey Albright) is soon to show.
Okay, let's fast forward this. In here there are some laughs, a few moments when I chuckled a loud. But most of the jokes here are used a few to many times.
But the biggest draw back is the spiritual/Native American happenings. Just when you settle in with the characters these strange things occur. But the special effects are so cheap all it is, is a big flash of light and then head quickly bobbing back in forth.
And the ending, well it is worthless.
The move itself wasn't bad, the quirky character, and fun parody were good. But it should've stayed at that. Instead of having stupid spiritual awakenings that look like rejected scenes from some demon possession movie.
I give "Escanaba in da Moonlight" a 4.5 out of 10.


assistant
0
system
classify the user's feedback by responding with only a single number: 1 for positive or 0 for negative


user
Admittedly, I tuned into this in the hopes of seeing some beefcake shots of James Brolin. Unfortunately, there was only one, early on, and the rest of the movie was very tame, and ultimately made little sense.
The story, what there is of it, centers on Nick and Julie Atkins, a couple whose marriage of many years is beginning to grow stale. Nick, a successful businessman is focused on work to the point of neglecting Julie, who tries to fill the void by going back to school. Julie's longing for the passion that she and Nick had early in their marriage begins to take shape in the form of powerful sexual fantasies which block out reality for minutes at a time, causing her to do things like burning breakfast and misplace her husband's papers. At first she fantasizes about her husband, but as the movie progresses, she begins to fantasize about other men, and about encounters with random strangers whom she meets. This culminates in her acting out her fantasies with disastrous consequences for her marriage. Can she and her husband rebuild their relationship? Is it worth saving?
This could have been an interesting premise, but the execution is so bland that you wonder why they even bothered. Characters aren't developed. Motives aren't explained. Background information isn't given. No exploration is made of how Julie got to the point where she couldn't control herself, and no explanation is offered as to how she will do so in the future. The end product is a muddled mess which is just as confusing as Julie's fantasies, which are surprisingly underdeveloped.
The acting is a mixed bag. Donna Mills as Julie does well with the material she is given, although her continual self pity does become strident after awhile. James Brolin acts as though he is reading his lines from cue cards, and even his anger over his wife's infidelity is hard to buy into, he shows so little passion over the whole issue. The supporting roles are mostly forgettable.
Disappointing treatment of what could have been an interesting story. More's the pity, since it doesn't even offer the eye candy it promised.


assistant
0
system
classify the user's feedback by responding with only a single number: 1 for positive or 0 for negative


user
This unintentionally amusing mid-80s TV movie is based on the premise that sex bomb Donna Mills (in a mostly appalling wardrobe throughout) is a neglected housewife, pining for her sexy past as a cheerleader. She escapes her empty life by fantasising about random sexual encounters with one of the many attractive men she comes across, finally giving into her fantasies and indulging in a bit on the side, although all she really wants is to reignite the flames of passion with her boring husband James Brolin.
There are many laughable aspects to this film, Mills' first foray into co-producing (later, following her departure from Knots Landing, she found great success as a trashy TV movie queen starring in mostly issue-of-the-week melodramas through most of the '90s - she usually played a victim of some sort, clearly determined to wash her hands of the wonderfully wicked and entertaining conniver she played for so long on Knots). Funniest are the drawn-out fantasy sequences, filmed as though they are meant to be soft-core porn (wind and smoke machines, backlighting, porno music), but as this is a network TV movie the scenes are all very chaste and ultimately not very sexy at all. The most amusing (and bizarre) scene has Mills taking a walk on the wild side downtown among the spiky-haired punks (complete with Robert Palmer soundtrack).
Less laughable is the dreadful dialogue that the cardboard characters are forced to utter (pity poor Cicely Tyson as the mandatory psycho-analyst, or Veronica Cartwright as the mandatory best friend, or even pre-Babs James Brolin with that daytime soap style of clenched fist anger.)
Of course, as in all of these sorts of films, we learn that all problems can be solved through psycho-therapy and then the film just becomes silly, as we explore, briefly, the reasons for Mills' "shocking" behaviour (as if it can't just be that she wants a good shag!)
Vacuous.


assistant
0
system
classify the user's feedback by responding with only a single number: 1 for positive or 0 for negative


user
This movie purports to show a middle class family's attempt to figure out what is "going down" in the America of the late 1960's. Their trip to a rock festival is as far as their refurbished old bus gets. Without exception, the characters are superficial stereotypes.
If you want to know which well-established Hollywood actors were desperate for a paycheck in those days,.. just look at the credits. Sal Mineo, I had forgotten just how badly his career had hit the skids! Thank God, his career rebounded before his untimely death.
The writers on this television turkey were clueless. Outside of doing weed, their insights into the "hippie movement" were laughable.


assistant
0
system
classify the user's feedback by responding with only a single number: 1 for positive or 0 for negative


user
One of the problems with popular culture, especially when discussing the popular culture of the 1970s, is that mass media - especially television - is usually about four years behind 'underground' media, primarily music. Many people think the 'Woodstock Generation" remained important throughout the 1970s; actually, it was all over at Altamont in 1970. By 1972, 'underground' rock or the 'counterculture' had moved east to England and Led Zepplin, Black sabbath, and David Bowie, early metal-heads and the so-called 'glam-rockers,' who were all 'peace and love' - not. Neither, in a darkly different vein, was Charles Manson's 'family.'
This obvious pilot for a television show (that, thankfully, was never picked up by the networks) is attempting to come to terms with a culture that was already as withered as yesterday's flowers. The script must have been lying around a few years - by the time it was produced, writer Carlino had already achieved recognition for tough Mafia revenge tales. And the cultural references are all to "Easy Rider" and Woodstock (1969). The music referenced on the soundtrack is actually earlier, 1966/67 - at Woodstock Hendrix, Canned Heat, and Sly and the Family Stone had blasted this kind of folk-pop into oblivion.
The movie is about a middle-class family that goes on the road in order to meet hippies. Wow, man, farout, outasight, it's a groovy mind-blowing happening of a bag. However, politics count for nothing - Vietnam? some place in Asia, right?
This average (meaning stale and vacuous) TV movie is only redeemed by Jeff Bridges' surprisingly mature performance as the young college drop-out who convinces his parents and grandma to 'discover' (hippie) America. All the rest of the performances are standard TV fair by standard TV actors of the time. The director avails himself of some nice location cinematography, but otherwise the film is a poor way to spend 90 minutes.
I knew it was all over when Sal Mineo remarks of a young runaway (who tells the other characters they are not really there): "She's a latent existentialist." Wow, far out, groovy.
A couple extra points for being 'so bad it's funny,' but if you don't care about the '70's TV version of the '60's, stay away.


assistant
0
system
classify the user's feedback by responding with only a single number: 1 for positive or 0 for negative


user
You don't have to spend much time watching this made for TV movie or series pilot or whatever it was intended to be to figure out just what lies in store. The incredibly bad musical score makes its debut from the start. Seriously, if this isn't the worst theme I've ever heard, I certainly can't remember it. While the acting talent is available here, from Jeff Bridges to Carl Betz, Vera Miles, and Sal Mineo, the writing is atrocious and the story is contrived, filled with insipid stereotypes, and an obvious ripoff from Ken Kesey. Why must Hollywood always present tales from the sixties as if the so-called hippies were all unidimensional morons? It's too bad that such an interesting era in our exceptionally conformist social experience is generally depicted by out and out garbage so that the least offensive of the genre is now accepted as reasonably authentic when almost none of it comes even close to the way things really were. The best I've seen to date is a memoir called Looking Back by a guy named Becker, but who else has even heard of it? No one in Hollywood, that's for sure. They're too busy pushing tripe like this groaner of a movie to bother with reality.


assistant
0
system
classify the user's feedback by responding with only a single number: 1 for positive or 0 for negative


user
Set in the Philipines, Lethal Panther 2 is a dreary early-90s martial-arts action flick which sees a reckless cop hunting down the nasty criminals who killed his wife. A rather cheap looking production with almost no artistic merit, this film relies on the quality and quantity of its action. But whilst there is no shortage of fisticuffs, gun fights and explosions, the quality is just not there. The endless battles are desperately lacking in originality or excitement, with poor editing and mundane direction making this film a real chore to sit through.
The usually impressive Yukari Oshima is totally wasted, with her natural athletic ability overshadowed by some excruciatingly bad wire-work. The ballistic action scenes are an unimpressive mixture of 'slow-motion flying-through-the-air-whilst-shooting' heroics, crazy vehicle stunts, and endless bad guys lining up to be shot.
With so many better examples of the 'girls and guns' genre now available on DVD, I suggest that you leave this one well alone (unless, like me, you'll endure pretty much any old rubbish in order to be a completist).


assistant
0
system
classify the user's feedback by responding with only a single number: 1 for positive or 0 for negative


user
Just awful. It's almost unbelievable that, with characters and situations provided by Dashiell Hammett, such a plodding, passionless mishmash could result. But that's television for you -- filler between commercials. The first warning signal sounds from the fussiness of the period re-creation, which screams "1928" in banner type. Flivvers and touring cars, fedoras and waistcoats, cloches and speakeasy jazz (jarringly played) -- with all the attention paid to pointless, arty detail, the important matters get ignored.
Like narrative clarity, or plausibility, or competent writing and acting. The plot sets one of Hammett's operatives ("Hamilton Nash" so whether he's called "Ham" or "Nash" we think of "Hammett" or "Dash") investigating a bogus diamond theft. Thus is introduced the young woman who supposedly carries the Dain Curse (the charmless and talentless Nancy Addison, who went back to soaps where she belonged); she belongs to a crackpot religious cult led by Jean Simmons and seems addicted to "drugs" as well; there's also a Mysterious Gaseous Drug which seeps into rooms....
But enough. The writing is never more pedestrian than when it reaches for the poetic or high-flown, and the cast parrots it the only way they know how: by grotesquely overacting. Simmons gets treated like minor royalty from Old Hollywood, but the grande-dame treatment doesn't wash. Hector Elizondo for some reason enjoys second billing (after Coburn) for a dispensable part. Other familiar faces drift through, doing little good for their resumes.
The actors aren't even photographed to look good; Jason Miller is an especial fright, but extreme close-ups of Coburn are pitiless, too. Coburn probably copped this role because, with mustache, he bears a strong resemblance to Hammett. He needed more guidance than that; nobody has given him the vaguest hint as to how to play his character, or of the story's tone, or of how the different strands of the plot mesh together (they don't, at least not in this telling). So he flashes his big Chesire-cat grin whether called for or not.
The Dain Curse is available on videotape, in a variety of lengths. For those foolhardy enough to "see for themselves," the shortest abridgement is the kindest cut of all.


assistant
0
system
classify the user's feedback by responding with only a single number: 1 for positive or 0 for negative


user
I appeared as an extra and was on location as a journalist covering "The Dain Curse". My involvement was during the segments of this film shot in Jim Thorpe, Pa. (Jim Thorpe was also one of the locations of the 1969 film "The Molly Maguires"). I reported the 'action' in the Emmaus Free Press newspaper where I was editor 1978-80 (the paper ceased publication int he 1990s). I recall the excellent attention to detail of the period costumes, automobiles, etc. The modern asphalted streets of Jim Thorpe were covered with gravel to mimic a 1920s rural town of the south. At the time, I interviewed the producer and spoke briefly with the director during a set change break; I did not get to interview James Coburn which was always a great disappointment to me. As an aside, I appear briefly in one of the street scenes wearing a snap- brim hat and a tweed jacket. The producer asked me to "jump in" and it was a real thrill. I still have a collection of black and white stills I took of the production work for the newspaper. Someday, they may be of interest to film/television historians.--Lou Varricchio


assistant
0
system
classify the user's feedback by responding with only a single number: 1 for positive or 0 for negative


user
This has to be the most boring movie I ever sat through. It is dreary and drab, has no excitement, the acting by Hulce is terrible as Hulce cannot pull off the proper accent required for this film. The story is stupid and I sure wouldn't recommend this crap for anyone unless you want to die of boredom.


assistant
0
system
classify the user's feedback by responding with only a single number: 1 for positive or 0 for negative


user
ExCUSE me, but my tongue was TOO in my cheek when we filmed this piece o' poop. As the evil sister with hair that Mommy Dearest would envy, I did my very best to channel Tim Curry in Rocky Horror. I'm sad that this did not come across... Ah well, a friend compared it to a 'rock bottom budget SHOWGIRLS' with a white hot spoon.' I'll have to be content with that.
What amazes me is no one mentioned the endless (and dull) wet T-shirt contest. It is seriously the longest wet T-shirt contest in cinema history. And the only one where the contestants were wearing industrial strength cotton-polyester shirts that defied all efforts to get them wet and translucent.
And didn't anyone catch the director's cameo as the dude on the payphone interrupted by our hero? With the line 'are we filming yet?" clearly audible? Jeez, this is bad movie heaven for REAL aficionados...


assistant
0
system
classify the user's feedback by responding with only a single number: 1 for positive or 0 for negative


user
This movie can't decide what it is -- a soft porno or a sf movie. Not enough plot for a real movie, but way too much for a porno.
In a galaxy far far away, a good princess (we know she's good because she has long blonde hair, wears a white toga, is polite, and is mooning wistfully about her dying mother when we first see her) inherits the kingdom over her elder sister, who is evil (and we know this because she has dark hair and wears too much makeup, abuses her male sexual slaves, sneers and curls her lip all the time, and talks imperiously about the horrors she'll perpetrate when she's queen). The evil princess gets upset and tries to stage a coup, but the good sister gets away to Earth. Of course, she materializes buck naked in a bar during a wet T-shirt contest. It really goes downhill from there. The acting is ludicrous, the dialog sounds like it was written for a porno, and the general storyline is ridiculous. There's not even enough skin to make happy the sort of person who'd watch this for skin. I love "good" bad movies, and this one's not even enjoyable on a "bad movie" level.


assistant
0
system
classify the user's feedback by responding with only a single number: 1 for positive or 0 for negative


user
I know when you buy a used (oops, excuse me, previously viewed)DVD for $5.99 you shouldn't have very high expectations, but even that was a steep price for this poor boxed disc.
I will give the producers credit for providing a complex challenge for the viewer . . . to determine which is worst, the acting, the scripting, the camera work, the special effects . . . they all pretty much tie for just plain terrible. Oh, it has the absolutely WORST faked car crash ever used in a motion picture anywhere.
Now all this is pretty serious ridicule for a movie fan who proudly features 'Police Academy', 'Naked Gun', 'National Lampoon's Loaded Weapon" and a host of other campy discs in his collection. But, at least those folks know that ones tongue should be planted firmly in ones cheek, the cast of PW, unfortunately use their tongues in an attempt to deliver inane dialogue. And, although it is almost beyond my belief, the movies characters seem to think they might actually be doing something of value. A back room pornographer would be ashamed to release this mess.
Oh . . . lucky me bought the worst video ever made at the same time . .."Fraternity Demon" . . . maybe the name should have given me a hint.


assistant
0
system
classify the user's feedback by responding with only a single number: 1 for positive or 0 for negative


user
I absolutely hated this movie. Even though the movie wanted to transmit some kind of social message, it was done in such a cliché ridden and melodramatic way like a Mexican soap opera.
Also the acting was terrible especially Charityn and her son. That's one of the problems with dominican movies, they use celebrities that can't even act just to attract the masses.
I'm even more ashamed about the positive reviews here which sadly means Dominicans are just being condescending to what's done here instead of giving honest and critical opinions that will help our film industry base itself on quality.


assistant
0
system
classify the user's feedback by responding with only a single number: 1 for positive or 0 for negative


user
As a fan of Henriksen (I liked him in the "Millennium" series) and of course Lorenzo "Renegade" Lamas, I had expected at least SOMETHING from this film. Sadly, the plot is predictable, the acting is bad and the computergraphics used for most stunts don't work out. Sometimes it even looks like they've captured some shots from Microsoft Flight Simulator.
The cinematography sucks as well. Unnecessary funky camerawork in the beginning only detracts (from the cheesy dialogue) and gives the film a cheap, made-for-video-look. It works in hiphop-movies and Jet Li movies, but seems out of place in this flick.
I would have liked this film 10 years ago. I was 11 then.


assistant
0
system
classify the user's feedback by responding with only a single number: 1 for positive or 0 for negative


user
The only reason any of the hundred or so users watched this movie was because they belong to the crew, were friends to the crew, or were obsessive fans of either Lance Henriksen or Lorenzo Lamas. I personally follow the "cult of Lance", so I was disappointed to see that despite being the headliner, it's in name only. Playing rich criminal Newcastle, Lance is a joy to watch but all of his screen time is relegated to the beginning of the movie. Newcastle sets up a 747 heist which includes Ketchum (Lamas) and a bunch of forgettable characters. The biggest shock to this viewer was that the pre-heist scenes were not all that bad. With the exception of somewhat obnoxious and rather confused looking Aviva Gale, who times every line with the finesse of a grade school play actress, acting was decent all around, and none of the lines really made me cringe.
But once the heist occurs, the movie falls asleep. Not only is their plan the most ridiculous thing ever captured on film, but it's dragged out for far too long. This isn't a very deep movie, and you have to fill out your 90 minutes, but these scenes are so boring I nearly nodded off at two in the afternoon. One particular sequence in which we watch each and every one of the characters perform the same task over and over again is especially difficult to get through. The movie's name is "Rapid Exchange", but the exchange is far from rapid - it's overlong and bloated to extremes. Perhaps it would have worked if any of the characters had real personalities, but come on, there's only so much you can ask out of a straight-to-video movie airing of Showtime Extreme.
Thankfully, there are several laughs, intentional and unintentional (Lorenzo Lamas is seemingly a master of disguise, which makes for a couple of incredibly bizarre scenarios), and Lance returns in the film's end, albeit for a brief period of time. It's a bad movie, and I probably didn't have to tell you that myself, but it's far from the worst thing I've ever seen. I wouldn't put it too high on the list of Henriksen films, since he's been in some real gems with greater screen time, and either way the movie loses a lot of steam once the heist begins, but the best thing I can say for Rapid Exchange is that the last two films I watched before it were the mainstream Hostage and the overrated, pretentious Crash - and this was better than both.


assistant
0
system
classify the user's feedback by responding with only a single number: 1 for positive or 0 for negative


user
I found this to be a watchable all be it very predictable movie. There was some good stunt work that gave a fair degree of excitement and suspense to the story. One did however have to suspend ones credulity on a number of occasions for the plot to work. For example despite losing their transfer cable, couplings and harness when the pilot retracted the undercarriage manually, they fortunately found a spare on-board the aircraft complete with Caribbeans. According to the plot drilling a hole in the ceiling of the vault would disable the alarm system in the vault when the system was reactivated (I can't think why), according to Daltry there battery operated drill would be unable to drill through the vault ceiling however they just happened to have a hydraulic drill complete with hoses and fittings to fit the equally convenient take off points in the planes hydraulic system located above the vault. As the plane has a closed hydraulic system it is hard to see how this could be accomplished without affecting the control systems or at least setting hydraulic pressure alarms in the cockpit. Accepting this for the sake of the plot it takes them several minutes to drill a small hole through the top of the vault (tension will they be able to drill through before FED's get there to check the false alarm), yet from the time the vault door closed and before the FED's had walked the few feet to the second security door they had cut a squire hole in the roof of the vault big enough for them to get through. One can accept all theses and other inconsistencies for the sake of a good yarn, however what spoiled the movie for me was when what appears to have been an effort by the script writers to discuses what up to that point was a fairly predictable ending, they killed off the two hero's (If one can refer to crocks as hero's) Ketchum & Brooks one was shot and thrown out of a 747 at 10,000 feet the other wiliest sliding down the cable between the two planes the villain Daltry with one hand manages to unhook the cable carrying the weight of a full grown man with the air pressure of several hundred miles per hour pressing on him, and letting him fall to his death. And yet in the next sequence these two without any kind of explanation (however tenuous or implausible) have miraculously survived the full from 10.000 feet and had time to set up an elaborate scam to get the money. The only comment on there survival was to Sophie that her brother is a bad shot. Don't expect an Oscar nomination for this one.


assistant
0
system
classify the user's feedback by responding with only a single number: 1 for positive or 0 for negative


user
I did have a good time the first 45 min. or so, but then suddenly it was all down hill. The suspense somewhat started to get thin and the jokes somewhat the same all over. What kept it going were the good actors.
But the problem with this film is that it is trying to be cleverly funny,like Tarantino and god is that outdated stuff. Tarantino being a bit overrated sometimes, this movie comes ten years too late. At best it is for teenagers, and I am sure many of them find the character of Johann funny, which he is for the first 30 min. The other problem I have with it is that the story fades away towards the end more and more, thou I tried to find a recovery point. Maybe it didn't recover because the lack of passion comes with the effort of trying to be cleverly funny. Also, like in many movies, sure, good actors who can afford it don't seem to demand a better dialogue, or just turn down the script.


assistant
0
system
classify the user's feedback by responding with only a single number: 1 for positive or 0 for negative


user
Badly shot, badly edited, clumsy dialogue, flat characters, unsuccessful adaption of a novel. It doesn't really get much worse. Decent acting and good popcorn saved me for this hour and a half - felt more like three hours - of boredom. Occasional good one-liners.
David is a dim-witted young man, who has never recovered from losing his brother at an early age. He puts his faith in a Chinese philosophy mumbo jumbo video, although that doesn't seem to help him much in real life. David is a member of a debt-collectors gang, where every member has an IQ below sea level. A lacking script, along with uncreative shooting and even worse editing, make what could have been quite funny incidents of failed debt-collecting look like a amateurish homemade reality show.
David rents an apartment from an elementary school teacher, Haraldur, who by dropping a couple of sentences about his own importance convinces David he is dealing with the most dangerous criminal in Iceland. A severely lacking script doesn't offer David anything to base his opinion on. A couple of scenes SHOWING Haraldur doing something that David could have misinterpreted would have done the work. The potentials of film as media, as opposed to the text of the book this film is based on, are not exploited.
At first, David's connection with Haraldur raises his status within the debt-collectors gang, but the prevailing paranoia in the criminal world forces David to show where his loyalty lies.
The plot of the film is fine, but then it is based on the book. This could have been a much better film. A good screenwriter could have made something of this material. Sadly, that is not the case.
The acting is generally good. Pétur Jóhann is excellent and credible as David. Eggert Þorleifsson doesn't get much to work with, but does his best with what little material he has. Ingvar Sigurðsson and Michael Imperioli (in a tiny role) manage alright.
Overall opinion: What could have been quite a funny and entertaining film about a dim-witted anti-hero in a debt-collectors gang, becomes a boring, badly-crafted film made after a poor manuscript. Staring at your toes for an hour and a half would be more enjoyable.


assistant
0
system
classify the user's feedback by responding with only a single number: 1 for positive or 0 for negative


user
Well, I set out with a few friends to see this movie, we went an hour before the show started to get good seats. So as you can probably imagine we where exited to see this movie :). But that excitement soon turned to horror, this movie is a complete failure, it just try's to hard to be funny that its sad, the script is poorly written and relies to heavy on the actors to make up for it...
The only good acting in the whole movie was from Stefan C. Schaefer who was great, the plot was weak and even the "funny" scenes felt forced and unnatural, considering that the main actors are some of Iceland's best comedians it's well special...
I would not Recommend this movie to any one, because it try's to hard and never really delivers.


assistant
0
system
classify the user's feedback by responding with only a single number: 1 for positive or 0 for negative


user
Nothing to watch here. It's all been done (and better) before. Who cares about this woman - deficient in every way - as a mother as a wife and as a friend? In one instant when she could have taken the high road - she jumped into re-addiction with both feet and held her breath - for no better a reason than "me, too!" If she wasn't the pretty and young person she portrays on screen - but looked more like the real human wreckage that is represented by our family members, neighbors and friends who really suffer from additions we'd change channels in a nanosecond.
This movie starts out at the bottom and goes downhill. Nothing redeeming, no lessons taught - nothing uplifting in any way. None of the main characters even evoke sympathy, let alone empathy. (Well, maybe the snake.) I would have had more fun if I'd shut a door on my hand. Who needs drivel like this?


assistant
0