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
"Johnny Dangerously" is a sort of hit and miss comedy that has it's laughs and "huh?". But I suggest to give it a chance. I think it is greatly over looked. Not too many people give this movie a chance. It does work. Just think of it as a little parody of "Goodfellas". Michael Keaton is very funny in his role. And he does it well. Johnny Dangerously is a gangster who wants to go higher in life. He just works his way up from the big bosses to a beautiful wife. And of course like a lot of the mob movies, someone wants him dead. 90% of the jokes get a laugh. Like, I said give it a chance. Just take your favortie gangster movies and mix a comedy in. You have "Johnny Dangerously".
7/10


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


user
Sure it may not be a classic but it's one full of classic lines. One of the few movies my friends and I quote from all the time and this is fifteen years later (Maybe it was on Cinemax one too many times!) Michael Keaton is actually the worst actor in this movie--he can't seem to figure out how to play it-- but he's surrounded by a fantastic cast who know exactly how to play this spoof. Looking for a movie to cheer you up? This is it but rent it with friends--it'll make it even better.


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


user
All of those who voted less than 5 are obviously not fans of clean, tongue-in-cheek humor. Keaton is brilliant in this - as in most of his work. This is not a blockbuster, bigger-than-life affair. This is campy, slapstick humor played out by some of Hollywood's best (and very versatile) actors. Piscopo was equally on the mark as the top dog wannabee, once.
If you want to see the funniest attempt at not really cussing ever filmed, you gotta see Dimitri do his piece as Morone.
I gave it a 7.


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


user
This movie is just a lot of fun. I've seen it a couple of times, but it always has something funny that I remember. The "duckies and bunnies" car scene is one of my favorites, and I still quote Morone's versions of certain words!
There are so many running jokes, that it's amazing. But I love Michael Keaton anyhow!


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


user
This movie is utterly hilarious. Its cast clicks immediately with frame one and takes us on a wonderful ride through spoofing gangster films. The conflict of brother vs. brother appears when Johnny's brother becomes a do-gooder D.A. However, the best character is Johnny's crimelord rival, the overly accented Moroni. As Johnny says "That man should be arrested for butchering the English language."
Check it out on video. It's worth a look.


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


user
If this movie proves only one thing, it's that Keaton is, was and always will be a comic at heart, even when dodging bullets, heading for the electric chair and getting at the wrong end of an information line in prison.
But "Johnny Dangerously" goes on to prove even more. In the '80s, the ZAZ boys (Zucker, Abrahams, Zucker) were the pinnacle in the world of genre spoofs. But there were several pretenders to the throne. This time, Amy ("Fast Times at Ridgement High") Heckerling tries her hand, with an amazing amount of television writers behind the script (go and check).
This slap-happy slapstick spoof of the 1930's cops-and-"gag"sters movies throws just about every cliche for a loop and even adds a few cliches that didn't exist way back when.
And not only is the ever-dependable Keaton on hand as the Johnny of the title, but so are such funny guys and dolls as Piscopo, Henner, Stapleton, Boyle, Dunne, DeVito, Walston and just about every other actor in Hollywood that happened to walk into the immediate vicinity. You'd be surprised by how many faces you'll recognize. I know I was.
And the jokes? Well, when they start out, they come at you fast and furious, like a machine gun. There are too many to count in the beginning, topped off with a crazy theme song by Weird Al Yankovic. But you have to watch for when they reload. And they have to reload a little too often.
Everyone tries, they seem to be having fun and I was laughing a good amount of the time. In the end, though, there was plenty of time to think about how certain scenes could have been funnier - not usually the best thing to think about after watching a comedy.
But for a slow night when there's nothing good on TV, pop in "Johnny" and be ready for some "Dangerously" serious laughter.
Eight stars. Check out "Johnny Dangerously"... don't be a "bastidge".


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


user
"Roman Troy Moronie" is my comment on the movie. What else is there to say?
This character really brings out the moron in Moronie. A tough gangster with an inability to pronounce profane words, well, it seems that it would have been frustrating to be tough and yet not be able to express oneself intelligently.
Roman Moronie will go down in the annals of movie history as one of the greatest of all morons.
There is of course great comedy among the other characters. Michael Keaton is F.A.H. and so is Joe Piscipo.
I just like the fact that Moronie kept the movie from an "R" rating because he could not pronounce profanity.


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


user
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.


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


user
This did for crime what "Not Another Teen Movie" did for school. I laughed all the way through as 2 inept gangs warred with each other and among themselves. An unsubtle comedy using overt jokes and gags that kept me rolling all the way. I suppose the biggest gag in the entire film was that time never seemed to go forward leaving the characters trapped in the 30's.


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


user
Just like wine, "Johnny Dangerously" gets better and better with every day. This clever, witty, well-acted film could very well stand on its own - but as a parody of the gangster genre, it's truly outstanding. In fact, it's quite obviously the best film of its kind... the funniest spoof of mob movies and even the respective period - although, admittedly, this position is probably easier to achieve when its main competitors are such primitive, vulgar and dull pseudocomedies as "Jane Austen's Mafia".


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


user
Michael Keaton is "Johnny Dangerously" in this take-off on gangster movies done in 1984. Maureen Stapleton plays his sickly mother, Griffin Dunne is his DA brother, Peter Boyle is his boss, and Marilu Henner is his girlfriend. Other stars include Danny DeVito and Joe Piscopo. Keaton plays a pet store owner in the 1930s who catches a kid stealing a puppy and then tells him, in flashback, how he came to own the pet store. He turned to thievery at a young age to get his mother a pancreas operation ($49.95, special this week) and began working for a mob boss (Boyle). Johnny uses the last name "Dangerously" in the mobster world.
There are some hilarious scenes in this film, and Stapleton is a riot as Johnny's foul-mouthed mother who needs ever organ in her body replaced. Peter Boyle as Johnny's boss gives a very funny performance, as does Griffin Dunne, a straight arrow DA who won't "play ball" with crooked Burr (Danny De Vito). As Johnny's nemesis, Joe Piscopo is great. Richard Dimitri is a standout as Moronie, who tortures the English language - but you have to hear him do it rather than read about it. What makes it funny is that he does it all with an angry face.
The movie gets a little tired toward the end, but it's well worth seeing, and Keaton is terrific as good boy/bad boy Johnny. For some reason, this film was underrated when it was released, and like Keaton's other gem, "Night Shift," you don't hear much about it today. With some performances and scenes that are real gems, you'll find "Johnny Dangerously" immensely enjoyable.


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


user
even though this movie is quite old, no matter how many times i watch it, it still makes me laugh.
one particular quote in the movie stands out.
when Danny( Joe Piscopo) pulls up to the d.a's office & parks in a disabled spot, Danny's partner says
" can't park here, it's for the handicapped".
Danny replies " i am handicapped,i'm psychotic".
that is one of the many lines in the movie that no matter how many times you watch, it'll make you chuckle.
Johnny Dangerously stands in my top 5 comedy/spoof movies of all time.
As an added bonus it also includes the legendary actor Peter Boyle in the cast. So watch this movie & like myself & many others who have watched it, you'll be hooked.


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


user
What ever happened to Michael Keaton? What a great actor and he proves it in this movie. This movie is actually FUNNY! And the reason why this movie is funny is for two reasons: an excellent script and Michael Keaton. This movie is one of the funniest comedies in the history of Hollywood. This movie is the ultimate spoof of gangster movies. In this movie, Hollywood actually pokes fun at itself by using the the gangster movie genre as the basis for a truly original comedy. The rest of the cast is funny too, especially the supporting cast. If you like to laugh and want to watch a movie that contains nonstop humor, then this movie is for you.


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


user
If your a fan of Airplane type movies this is a must see! Set in the 1920's and 30's Johnny Dangerously has not only great actors but great lines. "knock down dat wall,knock down dat wall and knock down dat #@$%#@$ wall." "You shouldn't hang me on a hook johnny" or "Sounds like Johnnys getting laid". Its definitely a spoof of the old James Cagney Movies and references them a lot. There's a great scene when Jhonnys walking down death row and has a priest set up for his escape. Listen closely to the fake priests readings, its pretty funny. Another great scene is when Dom Delauise plays the Pope. Watch his reaction to Johnny after he tips the Pope, a lot said without making a sound.I recommend this movie to all who love to laugh or are old movie buffs.


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


user
Johnny Dangerously falls completely in the hit or miss category with it's overblown gags and complete lack of a comprehensive script or story that makes ANY sense. But that's the point, right?
The cast is likable; Michael Keaton an excellent comic performer before he took himself too seriously as the years passed. Griffin Dunne, Peter Boyle, Joe Piscopo, Marilu Henner and Danny DeVito all perform with enthusiasm and at least get a lot of laughs from me. But the complete scene stealer here is Richard Dimitri (sneaking the word "Iceholes" into movie history) as a mobster who fares best at murdering the English language.
I associate many childhood memories with this film, as I watched it quite often so maybe I'm prone to enjoy it more than many others. Johnny Dangerously is at least a completely innocent gangster film spoof that even relays some well meaning messages about the dangers of smoking (and sex).
I like it but it's hard to recommend.
7 out of 10.


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


user
Although critically maligned, Johnny Dangerously is one of the funniest movies I've ever seen. It's a movie that should be watched closely; some of the funny bits are done in passing and do not have the usual amount of attention drawn to them. For instance, keep an eye on Michael Keaton's use of the pricing gun at the pet store...and also on the documentary-style years that appear at the beginning of scenes. It's one of those rare movies where the humor hits you unexpectedly, even though you know it's a comedy. Amy Heckerling, the director, is really sharp here--If you enjoyed her better known films (Fast Times at Ridgemont High, Clueless, European Vacation, etc.,)you should give this one a look.
Michael Keaton is extremely likable in the title role and the supporting cast (Griffin Dunne, Maureen Stapleton, Joe Piscopo, Peter Boyle) is excellent. Highly recommended.


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


user
This film is one of Michael Keaton's best. Throughout the film he is 'on'. With co-stars like Ms. Henner, Joe Piscopo and Danny DeVito, you can't go wrong. Great laughs, great fun for everyone.


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


user
Twenty five years ago, I showed this film in some children's classes in Entomology and can still remember the excitement of the kids; they were spellbound! It is not just about the termites who have built and live in the "Castles of Clay," but also about the other animals who use the mounds. There is a fantastic scene in which a cobra fights a monitor lizard while a colony of mongooses watch. It is a not only good for entomology classes, but also for teaching about ecology since there is so much about the interactions between the termites and other organisms and the whole ecology of all of the organisms that live in and around the mounds.
I wish it was available on DVD, so that I could watch it again and show others.


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


user
I agree whole-heartedly with the comments so far. I remember this documentary as being one of the most amazing and informative I've ever seen. As stated before, I recall that I began watching, thinking it was just another nature study - interesting, not necessarily special, but I was so wrong. Not only was the story of the colony incredible, but I remember the music as being so much a part of it's appeal. If I remember correctly, it was Native Americn pipes (akin to the music at the end of One Flew Over the Cookoo's Nest). I, too have been looking for a copy. This should be required watching for anybody, but especially the schools. It should be re-released.


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


user
I showed this to my 6th grade class about 17 years ago and the students loved it. I loved it, too. The story of the termites and their interaction with their environment is amazing. The cast of creatures is deep and they all play their parts well. The battle between the two cold-blooded titans is truly classic footage.
Alan Root has done some incredible camera work and this should have won the Best Documentary Oscar. The copy I have doesn't have Orson Welles narrating it (Derek Jacobi) and it isn't called the "Mysterious Castles of Clay," just "Castles of Clay." This makes me think that it must have been done with Welles added for star power and an Oscar push.
I was lucky enough to find this VHS just recently and it is now my children's favorite movie. They brought it to the latest family gathering instead of a Disney movie. If you can find this movie you are indeed lucky.


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


user
Lizzie Borden's Love Crimes is an important film, dealing with the dark side of female sexuality (and including full frontal female nudity, which sure beats the male kind). It flirts with sadomasochism and the captive falling in love with captor theory.
This treatment of feminine libido is sometimes shallow and jerky, but Borden has travelled well beyond feminist dogma of females gaining power through their insatiable lust.
One striking scene exposes the female fetish for horses, when the antagonist, a counterfeit fashion photographer, is seducing an older woman wearing breeches by asking her to show how she rides a horse. He shoves a riding crop between her legs, pressing it against her crotch, and this greatly increases her excitement.
Then suddenly he leaves her home and she swears abjectly at the closed door.
Patrick Bergin plays the con artist, and though he falls a long distance from handsome, he picks on plain Janes and has enough screen presence to make one believe the women could swallow his line. By all reports, Sean Young proves a weird person, and she is scarcely beautiful. Yet in this film as the district attorney her intense face and long-limbed slender body and accentuated hips and periodically disjointed movement alchemize into erotic fascination. Her performance is forceful and complex.
Borden possesses an intriguing worldview, and the fact that it stands so at odds with the modern feckless zeitgeist I truly appreciate.


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


user
This is by far my favorite film of all time. That's mainly because it's not afraid to delve into some very politically incorrect topics (such as spanking and female submissiveness) that other mainstream films are just too timid to touch. Nothing seems to be off-limits in this film as the director freely develops the story without any concern given to possibly offending the viewer. However, I don't think anything was done here purely for shock value or to purposely offend anyone. Sean Young turns in an excellent and courageous performance. Most established mainstream actresses would not have taken on this role or would have asked for some major script changes before accepting it. The other cast members do a fine job as well.
Have you noticed that this movie hasn't appeared on pay cable since an obligatory brief run a year after it hit the theaters? Have you ever wondered why? The obvious reason is that it just doesn't fit today's political atmosphere. It seems quite ironic to me that some premium channels now carry softcore porn (that's getting closer and closer to hardcore porn) but will not carry a mainstream movie like "Love Crimes". Sadly, even though this movie is only 11 years old, it could probably not be made today.



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


user
In Lizzie Borden's "Love Crimes" (1992), Sean Young plays a gritty D.A. in Atlanta. She's a loner who gets herself too deeply involved in the case of a man (Patrick Bergin) who poses as a famous fashion photographer and seduces women, takes compromising photos of them, then leaves them.
Naturally, this tough loner decides to enter the phony shutterbug's life by posing as his prey, intending to bring him to justice. They meet, they make love, then the next thing she knows, she is over his lap, getting spanked. (Note: The spanking scene is only in the "unrated" version of this film. The R-rated version omits it and several other scenes that would make the plot more lucid.) This psychological thriller includes several scenes of female nudity and disturbing images, such as Bergin chasing one of his victims around the room, flailing at her with a riding crop.
As a thriller, "Love Crimes" is at its best when Sean Young is playing her cat-and-mouse game with Bergin, trying to catch him in an incriminating act. It's unfortunate that the film doesn't end, it just stops. That's true. Director Lizzie Borden may have just run out of story to tell, but after 92 minutes the credits roll, and we are left with a puzzling "what just happened?" bewilderment.
The unfolding of Young's plan is played out in engaging style, but the lack of a coherent ending will be a turn-off for some viewers.
Dan (daneldorado@yahoo.com)


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


user
Petter Mattei's "Love in the Time of Money" is a visually stunning film to watch. Mr. Mattei offers us a vivid portrait about human relations. This is a movie that seems to be telling us what money, power and success do to people in the different situations we encounter.
This being a variation on the Arthur Schnitzler's play about the same theme, the director transfers the action to the present time New York where all these different characters meet and connect. Each one is connected in one way, or another to the next person, but no one seems to know the previous point of contact. Stylishly, the film has a sophisticated luxurious look. We are taken to see how these people live and the world they live in their own habitat.
The only thing one gets out of all these souls in the picture is the different stages of loneliness each one inhabits. A big city is not exactly the best place in which human relations find sincere fulfillment, as one discerns is the case with most of the people we encounter.
The acting is good under Mr. Mattei's direction. Steve Buscemi, Rosario Dawson, Carol Kane, Michael Imperioli, Adrian Grenier, and the rest of the talented cast, make these characters come alive.
We wish Mr. Mattei good luck and await anxiously for his next work.


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


user
(Question) What do you call 100 film critics buried up to their necks in sand? (Answer) A good start. Well, I don't know Peter Mattei from Adam but if he is the budding auteur his filmography suggests, "Love in the Time of Money" is a "good start". A classy shoot with whimsical music box style music, this flick looks at a chain of tenuous relationships as it moves from person A to person B to person C...etc...and back again ending with persons A & B in carousel fashion. The film gently probes the unhappy circumstances of nine people with finely rendered shadings beginning and ending with a street whore and her client. The downside of this film is the lack of a story which may have something to do with the many critical slams it received. I watched the behemoth "Angels in America" last night and was bored at the end while this little concatenation of character studies kept me spell bound. Use caution. I may be the only person who really liked this flick. (B)


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


user
Overall, I enjoyed this film and would recommend it to indie film lovers.
However, I really want to note the similarities between parts of this film and Nichols' Closer. One scene especially where Adrian Grenier's character is questioning Rosario Dawson's about her sex life while he was away is remarkably similar to the scene in Closer where Clive Owen's character is questioning Julia Roberts, although it is acted with less harshness and intensity in "Love." Also note that "Anna" is the name of both Dawson's and Roberts' character. Can't be coincidence. Now Closer is based on Patrick Marber's play and supposedly this film is loosely based on Arthur Schnitzler's "Reigen" so I'm not sure how this connection formed.
Anyone have an idea?


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


user
Terrfic film with a slightyly slow start - give it a chance to start cooking. Story builds in interest and complexity. Characters and storyline subvert expectation and cliche at all the right moments. Superb New York City locations - gritty, real - are a fantastic antidote to the commercial imperatives of "Sex in the City" - in fact, the entire film is an antidote to the HBO/Hollywood notion of New York City , sex and relationships. It's a rare film that treats its characters so honestly and compassionately. LOVED IT! Great cast with notable performances by Steve Buscemi, Rosario Dawson, and her love interest (forgot his name!).


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


user
Terrific film with a slightly slow start - give it a chance to get cooking. Story builds in interest and complexity. Characters and story line subvert expectation and cliche at all the right moments. Superb New York City locations - gritty, real - are a fantastic antidote to the commercial imperatives of "Sex in the City" - in fact, the entire film is an antidote to the HBO/Hollywood notion of New York City , sex and relationships. It's a rare film that treats its characters so honestly and compassionately. LOVED IT! Great cast with notable performances by Steve Buscemi, Rosario Dawson, and her love interest (forgot his name!).


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


user
I chose to watch this film at Tribeca based on Judd Hirsch and Scott Cohen and found it to be one of the best movies in the festival. Both leading actors deliver a well rounded sensitive performance that seems to match the characters on a personal level. The director did a great job bringing the characters and story to life with skill that is usually not seen in a first-time production.
One interesting aspect of this film is the love of woodwork and New York City (Brooklyn in specific). The movie revolves around the family furniture making business and weaves delicate cinematography of both carpentry and ordinary Brooklyn life  again kudos to the director on this fine choice.
This is gem and I would whole heartedly recommend it (I'm sure it will make it to the screen).


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


user
I understand this film to be a debut feature and as such, it is very impressive. It has the feel and pacing of a "true indie", yet director Todd Yellin clearly possesses the photographic and editorial vision, command and judgment of a mature and seasoned professional. The shots are well framed and thought out and serve to move the story forward. He, and screenwriter Ivan Solomon deliver a story that has much more depth and lyricism than typical "paint by numbers" type scripts. It's a story that needs Judd Hirsch caliber character talent to have a shot at working. Judd is fantastic as usual; as are Scott Cohen and the beautiful Susan Floyd. The real surprise though is Elliot Korte who plays Adam Groden. Yellin was able to coax nuance out of the young actor in a role that could have been easily devalued by stereotype or overreach. Anyway, I found the film refreshing and entertaining.


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


user
I found this movie thought-provoking, and its ambiguity refreshing in a world of quick-fix films where we are manipulated into loving the "good guy" and hating the "bad guy." Scott Cohen, a very handsome television actor, does a great job of portraying the family black sheep/lost child who aspires to gain his father's love and respect, as well as that of his widowed sister-in-law with whom he apparently has a history. Judd Hirsch plays against his usual good guy image as a father who triangulated his sons and now is left with the one he always rejected.
When I saw this at the Tribeca Film Festival, I was enchanted by the lovely way the sawdust was used to portray a family tradition, as explained by the director.
This is a fitting successor to the classic "Ordinary People." I just realized, Judd Hirsch was in that, too!


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


user
I saw "Brother's Shadow" at the Tribeca Film Festival and found myself still thinking about it two days later. The story of a prodigal son (Scott Cohen) returning to his family's custom furniture business after a stint in jail, it offers all the necessary qualities of a solid drama--memorable characters; sharp, observant dialog; sensitive use of the camera by a filmmaker who thinks visually.
But more than that, it presents something that is all too rare at the multiplex these days: the uncompromising vision of a mature sensibility. The talent of director-screenwriter Todd S. Yellin seems to emerge full-blown, but we get the sense he (like his protagonist) has paid his dues. He knows how real people struggle in this world, and he knows how we yearn to see--or at least, to experience vicariously--success. Yet Yellin respects his audience too much to blow happy smoke up our rear ends. In the end, we see that Jake's triumph doesn't lie in commissions, or even in the esteem of his family, but in "the work" he couldn't abandon if he tried.
It's an essential theme in a world (and especially a movie industry) that can't rise above "the bottom line". This film deserves a wide audience.


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


user
What percentage of movies does a person go to see these days that leave them wondering what happened to their eight to ten dollars? ANSWER: TOO MANY! This movie isn't like that. It is a story about real people that are sometimes a combination of both likable and unlikable.
Downside:
Not enough character development & some plot lines left twisting in the wind.
Upside:
Forces viewers to think about the choices they have made for good or bad in their own lives.
Well acted by: Scott Cohen, Judd Hirsch, Susan Floyd, Ato Essandoh and Elliot Korte.
Contains some good lighthearted humor.


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


user
One of the things that interested me most about this film is the way the characters and their associated histories are developed on the fly. I suppose the writers wanted us to gain interest in the characters by not force feeding their characters. The premise of using the art and craft of furniture design and construction was a unique theme and/or analogy for what families/siblings go through in life. The complexity of having a twin serve as a surrogate father and even husband added great tension towards making this film emotionally interesting. Also, although the story was not one that the masses might directly relate to (i.e. Jewish/twins/family business) the themes are fairly universal as every family has a black sheep in it. That made it very engaging.


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


user
I saw Brother's Shadow at the Tribeca Film Festival and loved it! Judd Hirsch and Scott Cohen are great as father and son. The film follows Scott Cohen from parole in Alaska back to his family in Brooklyn. He shows up there because his brother has died, and he embarks on a journey to slowly repair his estranged relationships with his brother's wife and child and his father who has never forgiven him for being the black sheep of the family. The story takes us deep into the hearts and minds of this family and allows you to more deeply understand the complexity of their lives. Also, the imagery of the woodworking business and the Brooklyn backdrop sets the tone for this rich and revealing family portrait.


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


user
Kudos to the writers of this film for creating a supremely engaging drama. The curious character development is indicative of a nuanced and well schooled writing team. The audience member cannot but help but to feel that (s)he must make wrenching emotional decisions pitting the cerebral against the libidinal. The viewer has an opportunity to develop the character herself, though her predictions are rarely validated.
Credit is also due to the filmmakers for breathing life into the setting. The wood-shop is transformed into a unique persona as the film unfolds, with its own traits, faults, a variety of highly charged relationships, and of course a fate inexorably tied to that of the other principals.
Make sure to catch this one at your local art-house.


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


user
Those who only remember the late Sir Peter Ustinov as Hercule Poirot or a professional raconteur would do well to seek out this charming piece of late '60s satire. Ustinov stars as a convicted embezzler (we first see him during his last day in gaol where he is preparing the prison governor's tax return) who, sensing that the future is in computers, poses (by means of a deft piece of identity theft) as a computer expert and sets out to infiltrate an American multinational.
Ustinov (who co-wrote the script) is on top form, as is the delightful Maggie Smith, here unusually cast as an accident-prone cockney-sparrow dolly bird. Bob Newhart also puts in an amusing performance as a suspicious executive who has designs on Maggie Smith. In addition, Karl Malden is satisfyingly sleazy as Ustinov and Newhart's womanising boss.
What do I particularly like about this film? Not only is it a well-thought-out 'caper movie' but it's also a touching little love story; Ustinov and Smith are very convincing as the two misfits stumbling into love (the whole scene involving the deck of cards is particularly effective.)
So, what is there not to like? Well, the script is no more computer-literate than most films (that is, hardly at all) even though it captures the feel of late '60s 'big iron' business computing quite well. Also there are a couple of small plot glitches that you're not likely to notice until the second or third viewing, but I consider these to be minor niggles.
As I said, this is a film which is well worth seeking out, and after you've seen it once you'll want to see it again at regular intervals.



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


user
If there were two more charming performers than Peter Ustinov and Maggie Smith appearing together in a more charming movie in 1968, I don't know who they were. I first saw this delightful little satiric gem 25 years ago at the age of 16, and I consider any year in which I have failed to sit down to watch it again a wasted one. It's intelligent, quirky, neat, wistful, sweet, gently subversive, and utterly enchanting. The romance of these two social misfits is both richly comic and terribly moving - never more so than in Maggie Smith's desperate attempt to bring up the right card in the deck, a scene that's both ruefully funny and a perfect thumbnail portrait of heartbreaking loneliness. And that final freeze-frame on the anxious, concerned, loving face of Ustinov as he asks, "Are you all right?" - has anyone ever made the look and sound of devotion so perfectly and nakedly honest? I would never want to know anyone well who didn't love this movie.


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


user
This movie is now appearing on digital TV at least once a month, I've watched it a dozen or more times, and it never ceases to delight me. If it was on tomorrow I'd watch it again. Such is the artistry that Peter Ustinov and Maggie Smith, two great magicians of the acting profession can create, helped in no small way by the superb supporting trio of Karl Malden, Bob Newhart and Robert Morley. Not forgetting others in minor roles.
It is a simple tale, simply told, of an ex-con, a lovable embezzler, battling and succeeding with the then "new age technology" i.e computers, and finding affection in the process. Even if it is a tad (tongue in cheek) implausible, even unbelievable, the characters are not. There is no violence, no sex, no bad language, and best of all no awful method acting which is so prevalent today. A real lesson to modern movie-makers on how to make a great show from, and with, virtually nothing...except outstanding talent.


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


user
I recently found this movie on VHS after looking for it for a number of years, I was not disappointed. It gets better every time I see it. Peter Ustinov stars and co-wrote the original screenplay (nominated for an Academy Award). Other stars you've heard of include Karl Malden, Bob Newhart and Cesar Romero. Ustinov plays an accountant/embezzler, just released from England's infamous Wormwood Scrubs prison (he had embezzled from the Conservative Party headquarters, selected because he is a Liberal). He immediately begins a search for a new employer from whom he can embezzle, and discovers that computers are the wave of the future. He social-engineers his way into a London men's club and learns the identity of the best computer experts in town, he steals the identity of one Caesar Smith, who has just left town for South America to pursue his hobby of collecting moths in the wild. He talks his way into Ta-Can-Co, an American conglomerate headed by Carlton Klemper (Karl Malden). Klemper hires Smith and shows him around the computer center, especially its security feature consisting of a flashing blue light. Ustinov asks the computer how to defeat its security and the computer obligingly tells, him, "Disconnect blue light." Using hacking techniques from 30 years in the future, Ustinov breaks into the system and programs the computer to generate checks written to various bogus companies. The scheme starts to unravel when Klemper's assistant Willard G. Gnatpole (Bob Newhart) notices the amount of business Ta-Can-Co appears to be transacting with Ustinov's scam companies. With the help of his secretary Patty Terwilliger (Maggie Smith), Ustinov manages to avoid prosecution and lives happily ever after. To tell you how would spoil this very funny, romantic, intelligent, and ahead-of-its-time picture.


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


user
It's very sly for all of the 60's look to the movie. The humor is quite gentle, but it grew on me much more than I expected. The cast is first-rate and they appear to be having a wonderful time. Ustinov wanders through the film muttering some quite funny things under his breath, and it's all very inconsequential; I'll buy the movie as soon as it comes out on DVD. The plot is that Ustinov as an embezzler released from prison posing as a computer whiz and embezzling money from an American company with an office in London. Maggie Smith is his secretary for a while, and watching her get fired from many different jobs is part of the fun. Bob Newhart is his usual deadpan self, and Karl Malden has fun as the dense and sleazy executive running the London office. The ending is funny and nicely cynical.


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


user
I first saw this film about 11 years ago when my former college Accounting professor recommended it to me. I was amazed that a movie from 1968 could so coherently and hilariously portray computer crime. Maggie Smith is delightful and Ustinov plays the "retro hacker" perfectly. "O Nolo Mio"!!!!!


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


user
"Hot Millions" is a delightful comedy that is made even better by the presence of the marvelous cast assembled for it. The movie is a tribute to the genius of Peter Ustinov, who wrote the screen play and appears as the key figure of an enterprising embezzler. The movie, directed by Eric Till, doesn't show signs of having dated as terribly, as some others from that period.
At the center of the action is a friendly man, Marcus Pendleton, who, before being released from prison, fixes the income tax forms for the warden, who is amazed of the refund he is owed by the government. Marcus, who is a genius at numbers, sees opportunities where others wouldn't. He starts working for a firm that uses the latest computer for its accounting, but Pendleton is a resourceful man who finds a way to take advantage of the system and establishes different phony accounts in different parts of the continent.
Marcus is assigned a secretary, who also happens to have a flat in his building. The inept Patty is seen working as a bus fare taker who manages to make a mess of everything. How she lands a job as a secretary is beyond comprehension, but things are never the same in the office when the creepy Willard Gnatpole decides to go after her, but have no fear, Patty's heart belongs to Marcus, who is an accomplished pianist and she is a flutist and they make beautiful music together.
The best thing in the film is Peter Ustinov. He clearly understood how Marcus should be played and runs away with the film. Mr. Ustinov gives an assured account of the embezzler. The excellent Maggie Smith is also at her best with her take on Patty, the kind woman who adores Marcus and who proves to be a genius herself when it comes to investing the money she finds in Marcus' pockets.
Karl Malden is perfect as the American in charge of the corporation. Bob Newhart also appears as Gnatpole, the man who desires Patty, but can't get her to reciprocate. The marvelous Robert Morley is seen as Caesar Smith, whose identity Marcus has assumed. Cesar Romero appears also in a cameo role as an airport customs inspector.
"Hot Millions" will delight everyone looking for a fun time in the company of that unsavory, but charming character, Marcus Pendleton.


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


user
I saw the description of the movie on TCM and only let it run because I like both Peter Ustinov and Maggie Smith, so I was delightfully surprised to find that I really liked the movie and found it quite exceptional. Of course, it is seriously dated, but as a period piece it is well worth watching just for the subtle humour in insight into life and lifestyle almost forty years ago. Now the only problem is trying to find it on DVD so I can watch it more often. I also was quite taken with the performances of Smith and Ustinov as the leads, and of Karl Malden, Bob Newhart, and the cameo appearances by Robert Morley and Cesar Romero.


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


user
I just saw Hot Millions on TCM and I had completely forgotten this gem. Ustinov creates a clever and divisive plot that has him cleverly going from two bit con man to ingenious... Well you'll see. Maggie Smith is perfect as the bumbling secretary/neighbor who has a tough time holding a job but has a warm and vibrant personality that beams through in this picture. She creates a fine portrayal of a warm, witty and real person who in the long run...well...
Molden and Newhart as top executives take on the challenge of making what could be banal roles and make them come out into a comic life of their own.
Robert Morley and Ceasar Romero are just a pleasure to see and I know at least in Romero's case Ustinov is extending a helping hand of work.
This film is meant to be a shot back at the rising computer age and it's problems for the average con man or man for that matter but in fact the characters are so involving and so much fun to watch that the computer sub plot is almost lost...I say almost.
Let down your usual expectations of modern comedy and look for the great performances and friendly, forgiving and deeply involving plot in this picture.


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


user
I can only echo the praise of the other reviews here. It's a delightful film with a feelgood factor that it achieves without crossing the line into soppy sentimentality. Naturally sweet - no added sugar.
One small point: it seems to me that the mild objections raised about Ustinov's character Pendelton being able to walk in and defeat the system security ignore the fact that Pendelton is clearly a genius/savant at this sort of thing. Yes, the film was pretty computer illiterate, but it did show Pendelton 'studying computers' at his flat, and I believe the implication was supposed to be that his gifts allowed him to simply engulf the whole subject, practically overnight.
There were a few odd moments when it appeared in some scenes that Gnatpole was trying to test Pendelton's knowledge and call his bluff. I'm not sure whether we were supposed to believe that Pendelton cunningly weaselled his way out of these situations, or whether he was actually knowledgeable enough to pass the tests - it was a little unclear.
Certainly he had to know enough to set up the dummy accounts. Presumably Wallach and Ustinov were relying on their own rather foggy notion of how computers worked in those days, and in order to understand in detail what they were getting at, it's necessary to know quite what their concept was. They knew there was something about 'procedures' which was important; they thought that the 'smart light' could actually control security, rather than just indicate its state; they thought that the (dumb) user terminal's features would strongly influence what could be done on the mainframe itself - though apart from things like graphics feature I don't see it meself.
Mostly, I think they tried to avoid the subject of actual computer operations as far as they could, and they did that rather well. Allowing them a bit of artistic license, I don't think their efforts had any flaws worthy of note.
CD


assistant
1