Datasets:

ELVISIO
/

incorrect_triplet

doc_regexclean01 stringlengths 126 1.04k	anchor stringlengths 126 1.04k	positive stringclasses 2 values	negative stringclasses 2 values
if this is supposed to be a portrayal of the american serial killer and it comes across as decidedly average. a journalist [duchovny] travels across country to california to document america most famous murderers and unaware that one of his white trailer trash travelling companions [pitt] is a serial killer himself. rather predictable throughout and this has its moments of action and pitt and lewis portray their roles well and but i would not bother to see it again.	if this is supposed to be a portrayal of the american serial killer and it comes across as decidedly average. a journalist [duchovny] travels across country to california to document america most famous murderers and unaware that one of his white trailer trash travelling companions [pitt] is a serial killer himself. rather predictable throughout and this has its moments of action and pitt and lewis portray their roles well and but i would not bother to see it again.	This is a semantically positive review.	This is a semantically negative review.
the humor implicit in the complete title proverb derives from the sunday school dictum that one would be better advised to prepare before youre dead for the devil scrutiny and i. e. so the devil doesn not care when youre dead. there no percentage in trying to beat the devil. the characters apparently do not pay attention at sunday school and and find themselves forced into crisis management and having eschewed crisis avoidance. but even a seasoned ceo would have difficulty managing these crises. throwing dice is far more unpredictable than flipping a coin while when people are involved and the list of possible outcomes becomes even longer than the long list of unforgettable sidney lumet films. until now and hawke may not have been an unforgettable actor but here perhaps had an eye toward earning billing among other lumet all stars like steiger and pacino.	the humor implicit in the complete title proverb derives from the sunday school dictum that one would be better advised to prepare before youre dead for the devil scrutiny and i. e. so the devil doesn not care when youre dead. there no percentage in trying to beat the devil. the characters apparently do not pay attention at sunday school and and find themselves forced into crisis management and having eschewed crisis avoidance. but even a seasoned ceo would have difficulty managing these crises. throwing dice is far more unpredictable than flipping a coin while when people are involved and the list of possible outcomes becomes even longer than the long list of unforgettable sidney lumet films. until now and hawke may not have been an unforgettable actor but here perhaps had an eye toward earning billing among other lumet all stars like steiger and pacino.	This is a semantically positive review.	This is a semantically negative review.
just saw the movie and and the scary thing was and the people talking during the movie sounded just like the actors. the movie had its moments and but also lagged and was rather sick. it was all meant to be a farce and but once you see the pathetic lives of the people in the movie and you think to yourself people like this are all around us all attempts at getting the audience sympathy are dashed as the actors do one stupid thing after another. on the plus side and there are some great (and funny) insults. i think i would wait for video but it was a good laugh. warning jerry takes his shirt off during the movie. (not a pretty sight. ).	just saw the movie and and the scary thing was and the people talking during the movie sounded just like the actors. the movie had its moments and but also lagged and was rather sick. it was all meant to be a farce and but once you see the pathetic lives of the people in the movie and you think to yourself people like this are all around us all attempts at getting the audience sympathy are dashed as the actors do one stupid thing after another. on the plus side and there are some great (and funny) insults. i think i would wait for video but it was a good laugh. warning jerry takes his shirt off during the movie. (not a pretty sight. ).	This is a semantically positive review.	This is a semantically negative review.
i just do not understand why this movie is getting beat up in here. jeez. it is mindless and it isn not polished and it is (as i am reading) wasted on some. the cast of this movie plays their characters to the t (if you watched permanent midnight and became a ben stiller fan then yes you will be disappointed). these are misunderstood and well intentioned misfits trying to save the city or world with nothing but grit and determination. the problem is they do not realize their limits until the big showdown and that the point. this is 3 times the movie that the spy who shagged me was yet gets panned by the same demographic group and likely the same people who feel the first ap movie pales in comparison to the sequel. i just do not get it. the jokes work on more then one level while if you do not get it i know what level youre at.	i just do not understand why this movie is getting beat up in here. jeez. it is mindless and it isn not polished and it is (as i am reading) wasted on some. the cast of this movie plays their characters to the t (if you watched permanent midnight and became a ben stiller fan then yes you will be disappointed). these are misunderstood and well intentioned misfits trying to save the city or world with nothing but grit and determination. the problem is they do not realize their limits until the big showdown and that the point. this is 3 times the movie that the spy who shagged me was yet gets panned by the same demographic group and likely the same people who feel the first ap movie pales in comparison to the sequel. i just do not get it. the jokes work on more then one level while if you do not get it i know what level youre at.	This is a semantically positive review.	This is a semantically negative review.
johnny and june carter cash financed this film which is a traditional rendering of the gospel stories. the music is great and you get a real feel of what the world of jesus looked like (i have been there too) and and june gets into the part of mary magdalene with a passion. cash narration is good too. but. 1. the actor who played jesus was miscast. 2. there is no edge to the story like cash puts in some of his faith based music. 3. because it is uncompelling and i doubt we will see this ever widely distributed again. i would love to buy the cd. tom paine texas and usa.	johnny and june carter cash financed this film which is a traditional rendering of the gospel stories. the music is great and you get a real feel of what the world of jesus looked like (i have been there too) and and june gets into the part of mary magdalene with a passion. cash narration is good too. but. 1. the actor who played jesus was miscast. 2. there is no edge to the story like cash puts in some of his faith based music. 3. because it is uncompelling and i doubt we will see this ever widely distributed again. i would love to buy the cd. tom paine texas and usa.	This is a semantically positive review.	This is a semantically negative review.
i haven not seen this in over 20yrs but i still remember things about it. this film could not have been made in color. the stark grays are what make it and and was life really that simple in the 1950 . what stands out the most in my memory is perry smith going to the gallows. his breathing under the hood just before they sprung the trap. i do not think i could watch that again. once is plenty. it like that unnamed guy at the beginning of papillon who is dragged out in terror to the guillotine. the guy that said watch this on a double bill with dead man walking should have added the last 10 minutes of i want to live as well. some of my ancestors being aristos went to the guillotine in 1794 95 so my feelings on the death penalty are rather intense.	i haven not seen this in over 20yrs but i still remember things about it. this film could not have been made in color. the stark grays are what make it and and was life really that simple in the 1950 . what stands out the most in my memory is perry smith going to the gallows. his breathing under the hood just before they sprung the trap. i do not think i could watch that again. once is plenty. it like that unnamed guy at the beginning of papillon who is dragged out in terror to the guillotine. the guy that said watch this on a double bill with dead man walking should have added the last 10 minutes of i want to live as well. some of my ancestors being aristos went to the guillotine in 1794 95 so my feelings on the death penalty are rather intense.	This is a semantically positive review.	This is a semantically negative review.
while there aren not any talking animals and big lavish song production numbers and or villians with half white or half black hair . it does have 1 thing . realistic people acting normally in a strange circumstance and and walt and roy did in their eras with the studio. if you thought think the castaways or the island at the top of the world weren not identical and or you hold them to a higher authority than atlantis and then your idealism is just as whacked as keeping your kids up till midnight to watch a friggin cartoon.	while there aren not any talking animals and big lavish song production numbers and or villians with half white or half black hair . it does have 1 thing . realistic people acting normally in a strange circumstance and and walt and roy did in their eras with the studio. if you thought think the castaways or the island at the top of the world weren not identical and or you hold them to a higher authority than atlantis and then your idealism is just as whacked as keeping your kids up till midnight to watch a friggin cartoon.	This is a semantically positive review.	This is a semantically negative review.
this is the second film i have seen of ida lupino as a director after 53 the hitch hiker. i think this one was a better film then that one. this one has a girl who is about to get married and she is then sexually assaulted and doesn not like everyone looking and talking about her so she runs away and and is taken in by a family. i think leonard maltin review is right only to give it 2 and 1/ negative .	this is the second film i have seen of ida lupino as a director after 53 the hitch hiker. i think this one was a better film then that one. this one has a girl who is about to get married and she is then sexually assaulted and doesn not like everyone looking and talking about her so she runs away and and is taken in by a family. i think leonard maltin review is right only to give it 2 and 1/ negative .	This is a semantically positive review.	This is a semantically negative review.
i have a 19 month old and got really tired of watching care bears all the time. rooney is a great dancer and who cares if he is gay. this guy must have been a cheerleader or something. beats barney and cant get the songs out of my head. must. stop singing. doodlebops songs. now. must have 10 lines of text so i must continue. what about when the say all the canadian stuff like ooout aboooot. whacky canadians. jazmine is rhyming too much and she must be dutch. knock knock and who there and dee dee and super hottiebus driver bob cannot dance and take lessons from rooney.	i have a 19 month old and got really tired of watching care bears all the time. rooney is a great dancer and who cares if he is gay. this guy must have been a cheerleader or something. beats barney and cant get the songs out of my head. must. stop singing. doodlebops songs. now. must have 10 lines of text so i must continue. what about when the say all the canadian stuff like ooout aboooot. whacky canadians. jazmine is rhyming too much and she must be dutch. knock knock and who there and dee dee and super hottiebus driver bob cannot dance and take lessons from rooney.	This is a semantically positive review.	This is a semantically negative review.
found this flick in a videostore and it cost $2 to buy. the whole movie stinks really bad. the so called colonel and who would the hero here if the cover could have been trusted and must be in his eighties and is barely able to walk. he nevertheless manages to shoot some of the dumbest ninjas in the world. then the story leaves the colonel and which makes sense given the old man inability to do anything worth mentioning and a now two terrifyingly eighties looking guys take over and in what must have been some sort of story. i got lost a hundred times but do not mind and because the movie is so bad and it real fun to watch. zero budget trash with actors not deserving that name. go check it out.	found this flick in a videostore and it cost $2 to buy. the whole movie stinks really bad. the so called colonel and who would the hero here if the cover could have been trusted and must be in his eighties and is barely able to walk. he nevertheless manages to shoot some of the dumbest ninjas in the world. then the story leaves the colonel and which makes sense given the old man inability to do anything worth mentioning and a now two terrifyingly eighties looking guys take over and in what must have been some sort of story. i got lost a hundred times but do not mind and because the movie is so bad and it real fun to watch. zero budget trash with actors not deserving that name. go check it out.	This is a semantically positive review.	This is a semantically negative review.
okay and like many other such films and spawned out of a snl skit. but tim meadows does a fairly fantastic job of making a 3 minute one dimensional character into a moderately viable comedic movie character. he drops amusingly consistently threated one liners with fair frequency and billy dee williams is in it though his lando days are long gone and and the entire thing is shot pretty well. true and it not great art and but if you went into wayne world looking for the gone with the wind and you did something wrong. enjoyable for what it is.	okay and like many other such films and spawned out of a snl skit. but tim meadows does a fairly fantastic job of making a 3 minute one dimensional character into a moderately viable comedic movie character. he drops amusingly consistently threated one liners with fair frequency and billy dee williams is in it though his lando days are long gone and and the entire thing is shot pretty well. true and it not great art and but if you went into wayne world looking for the gone with the wind and you did something wrong. enjoyable for what it is.	This is a semantically positive review.	This is a semantically negative review.
verhoeven movie was utter and complete garbage. he a disgusting hack of a director and should be ashamed. by his own admission and he read 2 chapters of the book and got bored and and decided to make the whole thing up from scratch. heinlein would have never supported that trash if he would been alive to see it. it basically steals the name and mocks politics of the book (which is a good portion of it) and and throws in some t and a so the average idiot american moviegoer doesn not get bored. this anime isn not perfect and but it at least mostly accurate and as best i can tell.	verhoeven movie was utter and complete garbage. he a disgusting hack of a director and should be ashamed. by his own admission and he read 2 chapters of the book and got bored and and decided to make the whole thing up from scratch. heinlein would have never supported that trash if he would been alive to see it. it basically steals the name and mocks politics of the book (which is a good portion of it) and and throws in some t and a so the average idiot american moviegoer doesn not get bored. this anime isn not perfect and but it at least mostly accurate and as best i can tell.	This is a semantically positive review.	This is a semantically negative review.
i would give this show a ten out of ten if it was not for the fart jokes. you people are so damn sensitive it is inane. so quick to point out the racism of the show and the jokes and yet are also so quick to say ridiculously sexist and pig headed crap like well and duh and some of these other shows do these jokes so much better because at least they have hot women. so disgusting. abortion jokes are great because and really and who takes abortion seriously anyways. at least i am not aboreson. i hear that reba mcentire and sarah silverman are teaming up to do a movie about sisters taking a road trip together. talk about a movie of the year.	i would give this show a ten out of ten if it was not for the fart jokes. you people are so damn sensitive it is inane. so quick to point out the racism of the show and the jokes and yet are also so quick to say ridiculously sexist and pig headed crap like well and duh and some of these other shows do these jokes so much better because at least they have hot women. so disgusting. abortion jokes are great because and really and who takes abortion seriously anyways. at least i am not aboreson. i hear that reba mcentire and sarah silverman are teaming up to do a movie about sisters taking a road trip together. talk about a movie of the year.	This is a semantically positive review.	This is a semantically negative review.
the first of two jim thompson adaptations released in 1990 (the other being the more well known grifters) and after dark has all of thompson hallmarks represent dangerous women and the confidence game and and characters that are either not as dim as others suspect them of being and or not as harmless. jason patric is superb as a former boxer disqualified from the sport for life due to an incident in the ring (director james foley uses raging bull esquire sequences to flesh out the back story) and the too little seen rachel ward also delivers a great performance. but bruce dern is the film secret weapon represent his sweet talking grifter uncle bud subtly commands each of his scenes. there almost no comic relief in this film and so watch it prepared to be sucked into the void.	the first of two jim thompson adaptations released in 1990 (the other being the more well known grifters) and after dark has all of thompson hallmarks represent dangerous women and the confidence game and and characters that are either not as dim as others suspect them of being and or not as harmless. jason patric is superb as a former boxer disqualified from the sport for life due to an incident in the ring (director james foley uses raging bull esquire sequences to flesh out the back story) and the too little seen rachel ward also delivers a great performance. but bruce dern is the film secret weapon represent his sweet talking grifter uncle bud subtly commands each of his scenes. there almost no comic relief in this film and so watch it prepared to be sucked into the void.	This is a semantically positive review.	This is a semantically negative review.
the luzhin defence is a good film with fine central performances and but too much of the novel and not enough of the filmmaker craft shines through. it felt through most of the film that the characters just helped to push the narrative along. marlene gorris could perhaps have examined the psyche of luzhin and rather than depicting him as a tortured innocent victim torn apart by the cruel motives of others. adapting literature for the screen is clearly a difficult task and especially a novel written in the early 20th century. this film does not go deeply enough into the relationship between luzhin and natalia. natalia rift with her mother comes across a churlish disagreement by the mother rather than a dramatic flashpoint in the film. i felt that i was put through luzhin torment and eventual tragic end and without being given the pleasure of having his unusual and complex personality unravelled. however and this was a moving and enjoyable film but certainly not a great one.	the luzhin defence is a good film with fine central performances and but too much of the novel and not enough of the filmmaker craft shines through. it felt through most of the film that the characters just helped to push the narrative along. marlene gorris could perhaps have examined the psyche of luzhin and rather than depicting him as a tortured innocent victim torn apart by the cruel motives of others. adapting literature for the screen is clearly a difficult task and especially a novel written in the early 20th century. this film does not go deeply enough into the relationship between luzhin and natalia. natalia rift with her mother comes across a churlish disagreement by the mother rather than a dramatic flashpoint in the film. i felt that i was put through luzhin torment and eventual tragic end and without being given the pleasure of having his unusual and complex personality unravelled. however and this was a moving and enjoyable film but certainly not a great one.	This is a semantically positive review.	This is a semantically negative review.
i think that the movie was kind of weird. in the opening scene and a person is killed for no reason. he doesn not get mentioned again. the special effects could have also be better but i enjoyed watching an older horror movie. it isn not the best example of a classic horror movie but it still was an alright movie. i give it about a 5 out of 10 of the scale.	i think that the movie was kind of weird. in the opening scene and a person is killed for no reason. he doesn not get mentioned again. the special effects could have also be better but i enjoyed watching an older horror movie. it isn not the best example of a classic horror movie but it still was an alright movie. i give it about a 5 out of 10 of the scale.	This is a semantically positive review.	This is a semantically negative review.
the thing i remember most about this film is that it used to air on local ktla tv (ch. 5) during every christmas season during the mid to late 70s and mainly due to the fact that the true story took place on or near christmas eve. it was always a bit disturbing to see the hell that this girl goes through and being the lone survivor of a plane crash in the peruvian jungle. the graphic scene of this young girl pulling leeches out of her infected leg made quite an impression on this young viewer. not quite the kind of christmas cheer i was used to seeing at the time. definitely not a rankin bass production.	the thing i remember most about this film is that it used to air on local ktla tv (ch. 5) during every christmas season during the mid to late 70s and mainly due to the fact that the true story took place on or near christmas eve. it was always a bit disturbing to see the hell that this girl goes through and being the lone survivor of a plane crash in the peruvian jungle. the graphic scene of this young girl pulling leeches out of her infected leg made quite an impression on this young viewer. not quite the kind of christmas cheer i was used to seeing at the time. definitely not a rankin bass production.	This is a semantically positive review.	This is a semantically negative review.
here is the explanation screenwriter pamela katz gave me for why mvt introduced jg as a specific character in the film represent. the historical record is very clear represent joseph goebbels was directly responsible for the release of the rosenstrasse prisoners and so we needed a way to get goebbels himself into our film. for a woman like lena and a woman from an aristocratic family with connections and it wasn not unthinkable that she would make an attempt to go to the top. the idea of getting to goebbels wasn not impossible for her and so that became our hook. those of you who insist on seeing an actual sex act here can read my new thread below and then fire away. jan lisa huttner films for two.	here is the explanation screenwriter pamela katz gave me for why mvt introduced jg as a specific character in the film represent. the historical record is very clear represent joseph goebbels was directly responsible for the release of the rosenstrasse prisoners and so we needed a way to get goebbels himself into our film. for a woman like lena and a woman from an aristocratic family with connections and it wasn not unthinkable that she would make an attempt to go to the top. the idea of getting to goebbels wasn not impossible for her and so that became our hook. those of you who insist on seeing an actual sex act here can read my new thread below and then fire away. jan lisa huttner films for two.	This is a semantically positive review.	This is a semantically negative review.
a highly atmospheric cheapie and showing great ingenuity in the use of props and sets and effects (fog and lighting and focus) to create an eerie and moody texture. the story is farfetched and the acting is merely functional and but it shows how imaginative effects can develop an entire visual narrative. this movie is recommended for its mood and texture and not for its story.	a highly atmospheric cheapie and showing great ingenuity in the use of props and sets and effects (fog and lighting and focus) to create an eerie and moody texture. the story is farfetched and the acting is merely functional and but it shows how imaginative effects can develop an entire visual narrative. this movie is recommended for its mood and texture and not for its story.	This is a semantically positive review.	This is a semantically negative review.
i am gonna tip the scales here a bit and say i enjoyed this. however and the cartoon is really only going to appeal to those who have very absurdist tendencies. it definitely something that most people will not get and as is the nature of absurdism. the animation is horrible and but yes and that the point. the main character is foul mouthed and violent and and stupid. no redeeming qualities whatsoever. his wife shrieks and wails and apparently just barely capable of the most basic communication skills. most of these stories completely lack any kind of point. but again and that the point while )if non sequiters and foul language and and complete and utter randomness are your thing and youre going to love this. it is really short and so i would probably rent instead of buying.	i am gonna tip the scales here a bit and say i enjoyed this. however and the cartoon is really only going to appeal to those who have very absurdist tendencies. it definitely something that most people will not get and as is the nature of absurdism. the animation is horrible and but yes and that the point. the main character is foul mouthed and violent and and stupid. no redeeming qualities whatsoever. his wife shrieks and wails and apparently just barely capable of the most basic communication skills. most of these stories completely lack any kind of point. but again and that the point while )if non sequiters and foul language and and complete and utter randomness are your thing and youre going to love this. it is really short and so i would probably rent instead of buying.	This is a semantically positive review.	This is a semantically negative review.
if there is one thing to recommend about this film is that it is intriguing. the premise certainly draws the audience in because it is a mystery and and throughout the film there are hints that there is something dark lurking about. however and there is not much tension and and williams mild mannered portrayal doesn not do much to makes us relate to his obsession with the boy. collete fares much better as the woman whose true nature and intentions are not very clear. the production felt rushed and holes are apparent. it certainly feels like a preview for a much more complete and better effort. the book is probably better. one thing is certain represent taupin must have written something truly good to have inspired at least one commendable effort.	if there is one thing to recommend about this film is that it is intriguing. the premise certainly draws the audience in because it is a mystery and and throughout the film there are hints that there is something dark lurking about. however and there is not much tension and and williams mild mannered portrayal doesn not do much to makes us relate to his obsession with the boy. collete fares much better as the woman whose true nature and intentions are not very clear. the production felt rushed and holes are apparent. it certainly feels like a preview for a much more complete and better effort. the book is probably better. one thing is certain represent taupin must have written something truly good to have inspired at least one commendable effort.	This is a semantically positive review.	This is a semantically negative review.
this movie started slowly and then gained momentum towards the middle. however and the fact that the movie ran over two nights broke that momentum at its peak. the second part really got interesting and but then gave way to a simply pathetic ending. playing football in the yard. really and could it get any more sappy and maudlin. now i hear plans for a similar movie based on the 70s. i would not make any great efforts to tune into that one if it anything like the 60s.	this movie started slowly and then gained momentum towards the middle. however and the fact that the movie ran over two nights broke that momentum at its peak. the second part really got interesting and but then gave way to a simply pathetic ending. playing football in the yard. really and could it get any more sappy and maudlin. now i hear plans for a similar movie based on the 70s. i would not make any great efforts to tune into that one if it anything like the 60s.	This is a semantically positive review.	This is a semantically negative review.
overall and i agree wholly with ebert review. in a sense and i feel that i should not even be commenting since it is so much a vet movie and i am not a vet (i was a resister). the flaw is that martha is badly underdeveloped and does not act consistently. my guess is that stephen metcalfe is a vet himself and spent too little planning time on her character.	overall and i agree wholly with ebert review. in a sense and i feel that i should not even be commenting since it is so much a vet movie and i am not a vet (i was a resister). the flaw is that martha is badly underdeveloped and does not act consistently. my guess is that stephen metcalfe is a vet himself and spent too little planning time on her character.	This is a semantically positive review.	This is a semantically negative review.
i give this movie positive because the villains were interesting in their roles and the unknown batwoman creates an interesting guess who game. the movie and however and needs more robin in it. he appeared in the movie in the beginning and sporadically throughout the rest. i always thought the new animated series did little justice to the neat new robin character and let alone knightwing. this movie just continues that bad tradition. the movie spends too much time on bruce wayne and his romance which do not be so bad in one movie if the romance wasn not so unbelievable. it is still a good movie if you are a batman fan and i would recommend watching it.	i give this movie positive because the villains were interesting in their roles and the unknown batwoman creates an interesting guess who game. the movie and however and needs more robin in it. he appeared in the movie in the beginning and sporadically throughout the rest. i always thought the new animated series did little justice to the neat new robin character and let alone knightwing. this movie just continues that bad tradition. the movie spends too much time on bruce wayne and his romance which do not be so bad in one movie if the romance wasn not so unbelievable. it is still a good movie if you are a batman fan and i would recommend watching it.	This is a semantically positive review.	This is a semantically negative review.
this film was seen by my wife and i when it came out in 1978. it was a revelation to us. we actually thought that we were the only gay and lesbian couple who had ever married and had children. obviously we were wrong. love may come from where you do not expect it and maybe do not want it. but we both chose that love anyway. and no and it never changed our sexual orientation. that kind of stuff is for the christian wackos. when we were young we both had affairs and but never with the opposite sex. as we aged we stopped having extramarital affairs. this story is not far fetched. however and the suggestion that they became heterosexuals seems pretty unrealistic to me. my wife and i have been sleeping together for the last 40 years. we are still gay. end of story.	this film was seen by my wife and i when it came out in 1978. it was a revelation to us. we actually thought that we were the only gay and lesbian couple who had ever married and had children. obviously we were wrong. love may come from where you do not expect it and maybe do not want it. but we both chose that love anyway. and no and it never changed our sexual orientation. that kind of stuff is for the christian wackos. when we were young we both had affairs and but never with the opposite sex. as we aged we stopped having extramarital affairs. this story is not far fetched. however and the suggestion that they became heterosexuals seems pretty unrealistic to me. my wife and i have been sleeping together for the last 40 years. we are still gay. end of story.	This is a semantically positive review.	This is a semantically negative review.
in cinema retro magazine #2 and it is revealed that mark lester voice was actually dubbed by a 20 year old female and kathe green. although leste was considered perfect for the title role and director carol reed was not at all pleased with his singing abilities. the secret was revealed by on a 2004 uk documentary titled oliver. after they were famous. greene was paid 400 pounds for her work and she had to agree to keep her participation secret and as did mark lester. they kept their word and only revealed this fact as part of the tv show decades after release of the film. for the record and mark lester retired from acting and is a practicing osteopath in england.	in cinema retro magazine #2 and it is revealed that mark lester voice was actually dubbed by a 20 year old female and kathe green. although leste was considered perfect for the title role and director carol reed was not at all pleased with his singing abilities. the secret was revealed by on a 2004 uk documentary titled oliver. after they were famous. greene was paid 400 pounds for her work and she had to agree to keep her participation secret and as did mark lester. they kept their word and only revealed this fact as part of the tv show decades after release of the film. for the record and mark lester retired from acting and is a practicing osteopath in england.	This is a semantically positive review.	This is a semantically negative review.
big s isn not playing with taboos or forcing an agenda like and say mencia or chapelle (though i like them both). she states the obvious in subtle and near subliminal remarks. her show would not change the world and nor is it meant to. but and along with the hilarious brian posehn and paget brewster ex boyfriend jay johnston of mr. show fame and this is one mean show with an appetite for destruction. my side were thoroughly wrecked by the first episode. look and i love this woman and like her famed boyfriend and jimmy kimmel and she just delivers the lines and lets the viewer run with it. the best kind of comedy around. spoofing anything and anyone and like mary poppins in the second episode when she sings to the fake birds on to quick hitting commentary on society and college aged existential nonsense. this one is highly recommended and but only for those who still have a funny bone (and do not lose it in their most recent lippo suction treatment or boob job).	big s isn not playing with taboos or forcing an agenda like and say mencia or chapelle (though i like them both). she states the obvious in subtle and near subliminal remarks. her show would not change the world and nor is it meant to. but and along with the hilarious brian posehn and paget brewster ex boyfriend jay johnston of mr. show fame and this is one mean show with an appetite for destruction. my side were thoroughly wrecked by the first episode. look and i love this woman and like her famed boyfriend and jimmy kimmel and she just delivers the lines and lets the viewer run with it. the best kind of comedy around. spoofing anything and anyone and like mary poppins in the second episode when she sings to the fake birds on to quick hitting commentary on society and college aged existential nonsense. this one is highly recommended and but only for those who still have a funny bone (and do not lose it in their most recent lippo suction treatment or boob job).	This is a semantically positive review.	This is a semantically negative review.
this is a movie that has a lot of things that only japanese people can understand. even well translated and there are some things that are obviously private jokes or regional symbolism. my guess is that it tried to send a message of some sort and but that just got wasted on me. what i felt that is basically this is a mediocre movie with nice special effects. some kid becomes the one and in the end has almost no relevance to a yokai war that makes no sense whatsoever anyway. it would have been nice to understand what the hell they were talking about and but between the azumi bean washing yokai and the one that looks like a big tongued umbrella (rihanna eat your heart out. ) i couldn not really discern the plot. bottom line represent nice visuals and the kid screams a lot and the river princess is terrible cute and the rest is crap.	this is a movie that has a lot of things that only japanese people can understand. even well translated and there are some things that are obviously private jokes or regional symbolism. my guess is that it tried to send a message of some sort and but that just got wasted on me. what i felt that is basically this is a mediocre movie with nice special effects. some kid becomes the one and in the end has almost no relevance to a yokai war that makes no sense whatsoever anyway. it would have been nice to understand what the hell they were talking about and but between the azumi bean washing yokai and the one that looks like a big tongued umbrella (rihanna eat your heart out. ) i couldn not really discern the plot. bottom line represent nice visuals and the kid screams a lot and the river princess is terrible cute and the rest is crap.	This is a semantically positive review.	This is a semantically negative review.
i reached the end of this and i was almost shouting no and no and no and no. it cannot end here. there are too many unanswered questions. the engagement of the dishwashers. mona disappearance. helmer comeuppance. the zombie. was little brother saved by his father. and what about the head. argh. then i read that at least two of the cast members had passed on and i have to say and i know it probably do not be true to lars von trier vision and but i would gladly look past replacement actors just to see the ending he had planned. granted and it would be hard to find someone to play helmer as the character deserves. helmer and the doctor you love to hate. i think i have yet to see a more self absorbed and oblivious and self righteous character on screen. but and i could overlook a change in actors. i just have to know how it ends.	i reached the end of this and i was almost shouting no and no and no and no. it cannot end here. there are too many unanswered questions. the engagement of the dishwashers. mona disappearance. helmer comeuppance. the zombie. was little brother saved by his father. and what about the head. argh. then i read that at least two of the cast members had passed on and i have to say and i know it probably do not be true to lars von trier vision and but i would gladly look past replacement actors just to see the ending he had planned. granted and it would be hard to find someone to play helmer as the character deserves. helmer and the doctor you love to hate. i think i have yet to see a more self absorbed and oblivious and self righteous character on screen. but and i could overlook a change in actors. i just have to know how it ends.	This is a semantically positive review.	This is a semantically negative review.
i totally got drawn into this and couldn not wait for each episode. the acting brought to life how emotional a missing person in the family must be and together with the effects it would have on those closest. the only problem we as a family had was how quickly it was all explained at the end. we couldn not hear clearly what was said and have no idea what gary part in the whole thing was. why did kyle phone him and why did he go along with it. having invested in a series for five hours we felt cheated that only five minutes was kept back for the conclusion. i have asked around and none of my friends who watched it were any the wiser either. very strange but maybe we missed something crucial .	i totally got drawn into this and couldn not wait for each episode. the acting brought to life how emotional a missing person in the family must be and together with the effects it would have on those closest. the only problem we as a family had was how quickly it was all explained at the end. we couldn not hear clearly what was said and have no idea what gary part in the whole thing was. why did kyle phone him and why did he go along with it. having invested in a series for five hours we felt cheated that only five minutes was kept back for the conclusion. i have asked around and none of my friends who watched it were any the wiser either. very strange but maybe we missed something crucial .	This is a semantically positive review.	This is a semantically negative review.
whilst reading through the comments left for this show and i couldn not help but notice that a large percentage of the reviewers had either not actually watched any episodes of the show either all the way through or of their own free will. the thing about kerching. is that it a children show and for children so obviously if your older it is going to seem cheesy and forced and and probably stupid. i even found one person saying the sets were stupid and but i remember as an eight year old wondering why taj had ikea icecube moulds on his wall and and also wondering if my parents would let me stick some on mine (they do not). yeah and it can be annoying and the acting could be better and some of the characters do really weird things with their hair and but as a kids show and i rate it positive . compared to the stuff they air in its place today and well and lets just say i wish it would be re aired. dvd release and anyone.	whilst reading through the comments left for this show and i couldn not help but notice that a large percentage of the reviewers had either not actually watched any episodes of the show either all the way through or of their own free will. the thing about kerching. is that it a children show and for children so obviously if your older it is going to seem cheesy and forced and and probably stupid. i even found one person saying the sets were stupid and but i remember as an eight year old wondering why taj had ikea icecube moulds on his wall and and also wondering if my parents would let me stick some on mine (they do not). yeah and it can be annoying and the acting could be better and some of the characters do really weird things with their hair and but as a kids show and i rate it positive . compared to the stuff they air in its place today and well and lets just say i wish it would be re aired. dvd release and anyone.	This is a semantically positive review.	This is a semantically negative review.
this movie completely ran laps around the original dolemite. it had everything that makes a movie great. except for real actors. (ernie hudson couldn not do it alone and you know that. lol) i admit that i have killed my first video tape of this movie and i plan to buy the dvd version again as soon as possible. this movie has so many catchy lines it pitiful. i am embarrassed to say that i know the theme song backwards and forwards. i love jimmy lynch character to death and and he should have won the best supporting actor award in blaxploitation and but the oscars were never ready for this. this is a random film consisting of crooked cops and breasts and chases and bad editing and and of course martial arts. (being that it the 70 and i can say everyone knew some kind of martial arts). i think this movie should be restored and shown one night in the midst of a marathon in local theaters.	this movie completely ran laps around the original dolemite. it had everything that makes a movie great. except for real actors. (ernie hudson couldn not do it alone and you know that. lol) i admit that i have killed my first video tape of this movie and i plan to buy the dvd version again as soon as possible. this movie has so many catchy lines it pitiful. i am embarrassed to say that i know the theme song backwards and forwards. i love jimmy lynch character to death and and he should have won the best supporting actor award in blaxploitation and but the oscars were never ready for this. this is a random film consisting of crooked cops and breasts and chases and bad editing and and of course martial arts. (being that it the 70 and i can say everyone knew some kind of martial arts). i think this movie should be restored and shown one night in the midst of a marathon in local theaters.	This is a semantically positive review.	This is a semantically negative review.
after and i watched the films. i thought and why the heck was this film such a high success in the korean box office. even thought the movie had a clever or unusal scenario and the acting wasn not that good and the characters weren not very interesting. for a korean movie. i liked the fighting scenes. if you want to watch a film without thinking and this is the film for you. but i got to admit. the film was kind of childish. positive .	after and i watched the films. i thought and why the heck was this film such a high success in the korean box office. even thought the movie had a clever or unusal scenario and the acting wasn not that good and the characters weren not very interesting. for a korean movie. i liked the fighting scenes. if you want to watch a film without thinking and this is the film for you. but i got to admit. the film was kind of childish. positive .	This is a semantically positive review.	This is a semantically negative review.
honestly and when i saw this movie years ago i immediately wanted to turn it off. as i sat there for the next 10 minutes or so and i realized that the actor playing navin stole the show. his facial expressions and comedic demeanor makes me shake my head as to why he hasn not been in more comedies. he has this marty feldman thing going for him but much and much more talent. taking nothing away from marty. the movie really shocked me by how close it was to the original jerk and but then again and it was so much more. i really think that if this movie was released first and and i saw the steve martin movie 2nd and i would think the 2nd was a cheap rip off. i know it sounds like a bold statement and but it true. i actually like steve martin a great deal and but his performance is 2nd to the actor in the jerk too. i wish i could get a copy of it for my collection. i urge you to see it if you can find it.	honestly and when i saw this movie years ago i immediately wanted to turn it off. as i sat there for the next 10 minutes or so and i realized that the actor playing navin stole the show. his facial expressions and comedic demeanor makes me shake my head as to why he hasn not been in more comedies. he has this marty feldman thing going for him but much and much more talent. taking nothing away from marty. the movie really shocked me by how close it was to the original jerk and but then again and it was so much more. i really think that if this movie was released first and and i saw the steve martin movie 2nd and i would think the 2nd was a cheap rip off. i know it sounds like a bold statement and but it true. i actually like steve martin a great deal and but his performance is 2nd to the actor in the jerk too. i wish i could get a copy of it for my collection. i urge you to see it if you can find it.	This is a semantically positive review.	This is a semantically negative review.
pretty good picture about a man being in the wrong place at the wrong time. if the murderer wanted to whack the dame and why not just off her and let the cops try to figure out whodunnit. involving all these characters in the plot is dangerous and not to mention all the mouths you would have to worry about staying shut. why did the depressed lady go out to the bar when she could barely sit up in a chair or say a word. are there really cops out there who are wise cracking and gum popping and grinning apes who approach a suspect in such a glib manner. this probably played well back before the wheel was invented and but it is so corny and unbelievable today. catch the manic drum break by elisha cook while his frenetic hammering never once matched the recording. his mad facial expressions made up for the off kilter stick sync.	pretty good picture about a man being in the wrong place at the wrong time. if the murderer wanted to whack the dame and why not just off her and let the cops try to figure out whodunnit. involving all these characters in the plot is dangerous and not to mention all the mouths you would have to worry about staying shut. why did the depressed lady go out to the bar when she could barely sit up in a chair or say a word. are there really cops out there who are wise cracking and gum popping and grinning apes who approach a suspect in such a glib manner. this probably played well back before the wheel was invented and but it is so corny and unbelievable today. catch the manic drum break by elisha cook while his frenetic hammering never once matched the recording. his mad facial expressions made up for the off kilter stick sync.	This is a semantically positive review.	This is a semantically negative review.
as is nearly always the case and when britain comes up with an entertaining and or or successful sit com or quiz show and the yanks will come along and poach the format and produce their own and grossly inferior and version. man about the house is and of course and no exception to that rule. the yanks version ( three company ) was unwatchable and braindead pap that seem to run forever. a prime example of quantity over ( non existent ) quality. the original and on the other hand and is a fondly remembered gem that had the savvy ( like fawlty towers ) to pull the plug at precisely the right time ( unlike the 637 episodes of hilarity that three company came up with ). jo was cute and there was brilliant chemistry between the ropers and richard osullivan made it all look so easy and the scripts and whilst not exactly oscar wilde standard and were consistently funny and chrissy was the most drop dead gorgeous woman who has walked the face of this planet since the dead sea was merely feeling unwell. nuff said.	as is nearly always the case and when britain comes up with an entertaining and or or successful sit com or quiz show and the yanks will come along and poach the format and produce their own and grossly inferior and version. man about the house is and of course and no exception to that rule. the yanks version ( three company ) was unwatchable and braindead pap that seem to run forever. a prime example of quantity over ( non existent ) quality. the original and on the other hand and is a fondly remembered gem that had the savvy ( like fawlty towers ) to pull the plug at precisely the right time ( unlike the 637 episodes of hilarity that three company came up with ). jo was cute and there was brilliant chemistry between the ropers and richard osullivan made it all look so easy and the scripts and whilst not exactly oscar wilde standard and were consistently funny and chrissy was the most drop dead gorgeous woman who has walked the face of this planet since the dead sea was merely feeling unwell. nuff said.	This is a semantically positive review.	This is a semantically negative review.
so and fox pulled the plug midway through a drama or mystery. how lame is that. do they expect us to invest our time in their new shows when there is a realistic risk of never finding out what happens. why weren not the remaining and already filmed episodes aired in the us. they were broadcast elsewhere. hey and fox. are you listening. this was a great show and but you left us hanging. if youre going to introduce new drama or mysteries and at least air a conclusion before abruptly ending mid theme. every time something like this happens (and it seems to happen a lot with you i. e. and fox) and there are more of those who will wait and see before investing their time. this means you will see an artificially low interest share and and are more likely to end the series. see. it is a vicious cycle. don not let us down again.	so and fox pulled the plug midway through a drama or mystery. how lame is that. do they expect us to invest our time in their new shows when there is a realistic risk of never finding out what happens. why weren not the remaining and already filmed episodes aired in the us. they were broadcast elsewhere. hey and fox. are you listening. this was a great show and but you left us hanging. if youre going to introduce new drama or mysteries and at least air a conclusion before abruptly ending mid theme. every time something like this happens (and it seems to happen a lot with you i. e. and fox) and there are more of those who will wait and see before investing their time. this means you will see an artificially low interest share and and are more likely to end the series. see. it is a vicious cycle. don not let us down again.	This is a semantically positive review.	This is a semantically negative review.
bad script and bad direction and over the top performances and overwrought dialogue. what more could you ask for. for laughs and it just doesn not get any better than this. zadora over acting combined with the cliched scenarios she finds herself in make for an hilarious parody of the hollywood machine. almost as funny as spinal tap even though it was clearly not intended as such. don not miss ray liotta debut film line and looks like a penis.	bad script and bad direction and over the top performances and overwrought dialogue. what more could you ask for. for laughs and it just doesn not get any better than this. zadora over acting combined with the cliched scenarios she finds herself in make for an hilarious parody of the hollywood machine. almost as funny as spinal tap even though it was clearly not intended as such. don not miss ray liotta debut film line and looks like a penis.	This is a semantically positive review.	This is a semantically negative review.
after seeing this film for the 3rd time now i think it is almost adam worst film punch drunk love is poor in comparison to this i must say at the end when dickie gets thrown of the boat it is so funny (the hair is different to his and i like it when he flips everyone off. this film should only be brought if your a true adam sandler fan. the characters are poor in comparison to his funny films like the waterboy and which has the same people in it (peter dante) who is one of the assassins trying to kill the australian bird. this film lack depth and a decent story line and deserves to be in the bottom 100.	after seeing this film for the 3rd time now i think it is almost adam worst film punch drunk love is poor in comparison to this i must say at the end when dickie gets thrown of the boat it is so funny (the hair is different to his and i like it when he flips everyone off. this film should only be brought if your a true adam sandler fan. the characters are poor in comparison to his funny films like the waterboy and which has the same people in it (peter dante) who is one of the assassins trying to kill the australian bird. this film lack depth and a decent story line and deserves to be in the bottom 100.	This is a semantically positive review.	This is a semantically negative review.
i saw once no man land (1987) imdb link http represent or or us. imdb. com or title. 0093638 and found it ok. the film is about a guy who steals only porsches. gone in sixty seconds comes 13 years after and adds nothing to it. in fact and it has a lot of scenes that are worthless. and the ending is very and very bad. the sphinx has a magnetic screen presence that should have been better used.	i saw once no man land (1987) imdb link http represent or or us. imdb. com or title. 0093638 and found it ok. the film is about a guy who steals only porsches. gone in sixty seconds comes 13 years after and adds nothing to it. in fact and it has a lot of scenes that are worthless. and the ending is very and very bad. the sphinx has a magnetic screen presence that should have been better used.	This is a semantically positive review.	This is a semantically negative review.