MLP-SEMO/CSR_datasets · Datasets at Hugging Face

sentence stringlengths 3 2.65k
I never want to see another version of a Christmas Carol again.
They keep on making movies with the same story, falling over each other in trying to make the movie better then the rest, but sadly fail to do so, as this is not a good story.
Moralistic, old-fashioned, conservative happy-thinking.
As if people learn.
The numerous different versions of this film prove that we don´t.
It was 9:30 PM last night at my friend's camping trailer and we were so hyped to watch South Park (a new episode).
The thing is, in my country, South Park airs at 10:30 PM and we decided to kill time by watching the show now airing, Father of the Pride.
I'll start by saying that I have only watched to episodes.
The first time I watched it, I found it unfunny and crude for nothing, so I thought ''Holy sh*t, I have a football game early tomorrow, so I have to stop watching stupid cartoons'.'
But yesterday, I tried to give Father of the Pride a second chance.
I find that it's a complete rip-off of The Simpsons, only replacing yellow human characters by lions instead.
The second thing is I wonder why it got it's TV-14 rating.
I find The Simpsons a lot more vulgar, and the only real vulgarity in this show is a few homosexual (unfunny) jokes.
The Simpsons is also a lot more violent (Halloween specials) and crude.
I also heard that the creator of the series has also directed Shrek 2, well I've got news for him: Shrek 2 was way better and I think he stayed too much in the family thematic.
However, I must admit that Father of the Pride did make me smile (even burst out laughing once) three or four times.
All in all, I don't mind Father of the Pride.
I don't hate it, but I don't like either.
I've seen way better from ''The Simpsons'.'
3.5/10
This is blatantly a futuristic adaptation of Jules Verne's "Mysterious Island."
The sound editing is pretty bad.
You hear the dialogue on set and you hear the voices being recorded on a recording booth at the same time!
This is an amateur film with actors from Boston and shot around New Hampshire.
For those living in New Engalnd and who is reading this comment will be wowed with a capital W. This film is full of flaws.
You get to hear the director's voice giving directions and giving out directions to the actress.
"OK now stand up."
As for the other characters.
There is this guy who talks with his mind instead of his voice and this blue alien.
The alien guy talks with a deep voice.
When he is yawning or grunting when he is fighting you hear the actor's voice.
As for the special effects, man!
This was Brett Piper's early work for crying out loud!
The creatures are good but the animation is jerky.
Really jerky.
Sort of like Karl Zeman animation in JOURNEY TO BEGINNING OF TIME (1955).
The special effects are imaginative.
Thge music is good.
Bottom line, this film makes EQUINOX or PLANET OF THE DINOSAURS look like a Ray Harryhausen epic.
Did you know MYSTERIOUS PLANET was a home movie and was on a shoes string budget?
A must watch for aspiring film makers.
Beyond a shadow of a doubt Mysterious Planet is one of the worst movies ever made, yet retains an affection in my heart because the poverty of its special effects and astoundingly awful sound track in the first 15 minutes (and to be honest that's all you need to see) combine to create something that is hilariously side-splitting.
The opening scene in 'space' is just about as unfathomable as cinematography gets, as washing-up liquid bottles whiz past your eyes to muffled dialogue.
Before you've had time to work out whether it's you who's gone mad, the credits roll and the action struggles to life.
And aside from the double-headed plasticine giant snail that terrorises our heroes, you also get the added double bonus of having both the original actors voices AND the dubbed voices at the same time.
Pure genius.
The sad thing for fans of this kind of fare is that I've only ever seen one copy, so the chances of ever seeing it yourself is highly unlikely.
Perhaps I own the only copy in existence.
The silent one-panel cartoon Henry comes to Fleischer Studios, billed as "The world's funniest human" in this dull little cartoon.
Betty, long past her prime, thanks to the Production Code, is running a pet shop and leaves Henry in charge for far too long -- five minutes.
A bore.
William Russ is the main character throughout this made for TV movie.
He left his family behind to only reappear and begin paying off his debts.
But he tries to keep away from his family.
Thats where Peter Falk (Colombo) comes in, playing several different roles, to convince him to come home.
The story is average and they actually managed to get a former star (Peter Falk) and use him to a fairly nice degree.
But William Russ wasn't truly a star.
However, it appears his acting is still OK.
I found the delivery and story very cheesy in how everything was predictable.
In fact, the last 20 minutes I could almost dictate word for word before it happened.
A good movie should never be like that.
Overall, it was a sub-par movie.
In a letter grading system, it would receive a "D."
From a poorly contrived plot line that makes almost no sense to bad dialogue and disjointed scenes to the ultimate downer, bad acting (even Peter Falk can't find his way) "Finding John Christmas" is better left lost.
Ms. Bertinelli's performance is without depth or emotion as are her co-stars, William Russ as brother Hank and David Cubitt as love interest Noah.
Jennifer Pisana as Soccoro, the daughter of single dad Noah is almost unbearable to watch let alone listen to singing.
But who can blame them with material like this.
Michael J. Murray's script is juvenile at best.
Each year at this time I search the TV guides and wait anxiously for some of the really classic Christmas and inspirational holiday films to appear on the small screen.
Films like "Miracle on 34th Street", Ernst Lubitsch's delightful "The shop around the corner" and, of course the 1951 version of "Scrooge."
There's Frank Capra's classics "It's a wonderful life" and "Meet John Doe."
Hey, forget the classics.
What about "Home Alone" or " Home for the Holidays" with Holly Hunter and a great performance by Robert Downey Jr.?
My present to you is by way of advice.
Your time would be better spent searching out these films than finding "Finding John Christmas."
Merry Christmas!
In director Sooraj Barjatya's Vivah,20-something Delhi boy Shahid Kapur finds himself smitten by the demure, small-town girl his father has selected for him to marry.
Drawn to her innocence and simplicity, Shahid agrees to the marriage barely moments after he's met her at her home in Madhupur, and the young lady in question Amrita Rao seems equally floored by her charming suitor.
The marriage is fixed for six months later, and the couple find themselves in the first throes of young, budding love, their geographical distance notwithstanding.
But Amrita, who's been raised by her uncle and her aunt after her parents' death, is struck by a horrible calamity just hours before the marriage.
And then, it's up to Shahid to play the honourable lover and to embrace her unconditionally.
Much in the same vein as Hum Aapke Hain Koun and Hum Saath Saath Hain, Barjatya's new film Vivah too is on one level a family drama with an extremely idealistic premise.
But sadly, the plot of this new film comes off looking way too outdated, even more far-fetched than those regressive Ekta Kapoor soaps.
And the problem is clear you just can't relate to such squeaky-clean characters who don't have one bad bone in their bodies.
There are many things that work in favour of and against Hindi films, and timing is one such important factor.
Twenty-five years ago, perhaps the plot of Vivah may not have felt like such a stretch, but today it just seems like the product of a mind stuck in a time warp.
Perhaps the film's only saving grace is the fact that it oozes sincerity from start to finish, you can make out right away that the filmmaker's intention is not to deceive.
Judging both by Barjatya's previous films and by closely examining this new one you can safely declare that Barjatya believes in a perfect world, he believes in his good-as-gold characters, he believes that large families can live together happily under the same roof without the slightest bumps.
But alas, he's unable to translate his vision to the screen.
It's difficult to overlook how one-dimensional his protagonists are Shahid and Amrita, both virtuous and virginal I mean, think about it, the first time they hold hands is an hour and twenty minutes into the film.
Barjatya may think he's returning to his Maine Pyar Kiya roots with Vivah, but truth is that the reason we embraced Salman and Bhagyashree in that film, or even Salman and Madhuri in Hum Aapke Hain Koun is because they had such fantastic chemistry.
Because although they were created out of the same mould as Shahid and Amrita in Vivah, those pairs had mischief and masti.
Shahid and Amrita are just insipid and boring.
For a film that relies so heavily on music to narrate its story, the filmmaker chooses a string of 70s-style tunes that only further slacken the film's deadening pace.
But if I had to choose just one reason to explain why Vivah doesn't work for me, it's because I'm not sure I can relate to any of the characters who inhabit Barjatya's story.
To some perhaps, Vivah will give hope, that a perfect world like this is actually out there somewhere.
But I'm a little cynical I guess.
So, give me the coquettish Madhuri of Hum Aapke Hain Kaun, give me the bratty Salman of Maine Pyar Kiya, I'll even take that mischievous Karisma Kapoor of Hum Saath Saath Hain.
But save me from these dullards.
You know, some marriages aren't made in heaven.

I never want to see another version of a Christmas Carol again.

They keep on making movies with the same story, falling over each other in trying to make the movie better then the rest, but sadly fail to do so, as this is not a good story.

Moralistic, old-fashioned, conservative happy-thinking.

As if people learn.

The numerous different versions of this film prove that we don´t.

It was 9:30 PM last night at my friend's camping trailer and we were so hyped to watch South Park (a new episode).

The thing is, in my country, South Park airs at 10:30 PM and we decided to kill time by watching the show now airing, Father of the Pride.

I'll start by saying that I have only watched to episodes.

The first time I watched it, I found it unfunny and crude for nothing, so I thought ''Holy sh*t, I have a football game early tomorrow, so I have to stop watching stupid cartoons'.'

But yesterday, I tried to give Father of the Pride a second chance.

I find that it's a complete rip-off of The Simpsons, only replacing yellow human characters by lions instead.

The second thing is I wonder why it got it's TV-14 rating.

I find The Simpsons a lot more vulgar, and the only real vulgarity in this show is a few homosexual (unfunny) jokes.

The Simpsons is also a lot more violent (Halloween specials) and crude.

I also heard that the creator of the series has also directed Shrek 2, well I've got news for him: Shrek 2 was way better and I think he stayed too much in the family thematic.

However, I must admit that Father of the Pride did make me smile (even burst out laughing once) three or four times.

All in all, I don't mind Father of the Pride.

I don't hate it, but I don't like either.

I've seen way better from ''The Simpsons'.'

3.5/10

This is blatantly a futuristic adaptation of Jules Verne's "Mysterious Island."

The sound editing is pretty bad.

You hear the dialogue on set and you hear the voices being recorded on a recording booth at the same time!

This is an amateur film with actors from Boston and shot around New Hampshire.

For those living in New Engalnd and who is reading this comment will be wowed with a capital W. This film is full of flaws.

You get to hear the director's voice giving directions and giving out directions to the actress.

"OK now stand up."

As for the other characters.

There is this guy who talks with his mind instead of his voice and this blue alien.

The alien guy talks with a deep voice.

When he is yawning or grunting when he is fighting you hear the actor's voice.

As for the special effects, man!

This was Brett Piper's early work for crying out loud!

The creatures are good but the animation is jerky.

Really jerky.

Sort of like Karl Zeman animation in JOURNEY TO BEGINNING OF TIME (1955).

The special effects are imaginative.

Thge music is good.

Bottom line, this film makes EQUINOX or PLANET OF THE DINOSAURS look like a Ray Harryhausen epic.

Did you know MYSTERIOUS PLANET was a home movie and was on a shoes string budget?

A must watch for aspiring film makers.

Beyond a shadow of a doubt Mysterious Planet is one of the worst movies ever made, yet retains an affection in my heart because the poverty of its special effects and astoundingly awful sound track in the first 15 minutes (and to be honest that's all you need to see) combine to create something that is hilariously side-splitting.

The opening scene in 'space' is just about as unfathomable as cinematography gets, as washing-up liquid bottles whiz past your eyes to muffled dialogue.

Before you've had time to work out whether it's you who's gone mad, the credits roll and the action struggles to life.

And aside from the double-headed plasticine giant snail that terrorises our heroes, you also get the added double bonus of having both the original actors voices AND the dubbed voices at the same time.

Pure genius.

The sad thing for fans of this kind of fare is that I've only ever seen one copy, so the chances of ever seeing it yourself is highly unlikely.

Perhaps I own the only copy in existence.

The silent one-panel cartoon Henry comes to Fleischer Studios, billed as "The world's funniest human" in this dull little cartoon.

Betty, long past her prime, thanks to the Production Code, is running a pet shop and leaves Henry in charge for far too long -- five minutes.

A bore.

William Russ is the main character throughout this made for TV movie.

He left his family behind to only reappear and begin paying off his debts.

But he tries to keep away from his family.

Thats where Peter Falk (Colombo) comes in, playing several different roles, to convince him to come home.

The story is average and they actually managed to get a former star (Peter Falk) and use him to a fairly nice degree.

But William Russ wasn't truly a star.

However, it appears his acting is still OK.

I found the delivery and story very cheesy in how everything was predictable.

In fact, the last 20 minutes I could almost dictate word for word before it happened.

A good movie should never be like that.

Overall, it was a sub-par movie.

In a letter grading system, it would receive a "D."

From a poorly contrived plot line that makes almost no sense to bad dialogue and disjointed scenes to the ultimate downer, bad acting (even Peter Falk can't find his way) "Finding John Christmas" is better left lost.

Ms. Bertinelli's performance is without depth or emotion as are her co-stars, William Russ as brother Hank and David Cubitt as love interest Noah.

Jennifer Pisana as Soccoro, the daughter of single dad Noah is almost unbearable to watch let alone listen to singing.

But who can blame them with material like this.

Michael J. Murray's script is juvenile at best.

Each year at this time I search the TV guides and wait anxiously for some of the really classic Christmas and inspirational holiday films to appear on the small screen.

Films like "Miracle on 34th Street", Ernst Lubitsch's delightful "The shop around the corner" and, of course the 1951 version of "Scrooge."

There's Frank Capra's classics "It's a wonderful life" and "Meet John Doe."

Hey, forget the classics.

What about "Home Alone" or " Home for the Holidays" with Holly Hunter and a great performance by Robert Downey Jr.?

My present to you is by way of advice.

Your time would be better spent searching out these films than finding "Finding John Christmas."

Merry Christmas!

In director Sooraj Barjatya's Vivah,20-something Delhi boy Shahid Kapur finds himself smitten by the demure, small-town girl his father has selected for him to marry.

Drawn to her innocence and simplicity, Shahid agrees to the marriage barely moments after he's met her at her home in Madhupur, and the young lady in question Amrita Rao seems equally floored by her charming suitor.

The marriage is fixed for six months later, and the couple find themselves in the first throes of young, budding love, their geographical distance notwithstanding.

But Amrita, who's been raised by her uncle and her aunt after her parents' death, is struck by a horrible calamity just hours before the marriage.

And then, it's up to Shahid to play the honourable lover and to embrace her unconditionally.

Much in the same vein as Hum Aapke Hain Koun and Hum Saath Saath Hain, Barjatya's new film Vivah too is on one level a family drama with an extremely idealistic premise.

But sadly, the plot of this new film comes off looking way too outdated, even more far-fetched than those regressive Ekta Kapoor soaps.

And the problem is clear you just can't relate to such squeaky-clean characters who don't have one bad bone in their bodies.

There are many things that work in favour of and against Hindi films, and timing is one such important factor.

Twenty-five years ago, perhaps the plot of Vivah may not have felt like such a stretch, but today it just seems like the product of a mind stuck in a time warp.

Perhaps the film's only saving grace is the fact that it oozes sincerity from start to finish, you can make out right away that the filmmaker's intention is not to deceive.

Judging both by Barjatya's previous films and by closely examining this new one you can safely declare that Barjatya believes in a perfect world, he believes in his good-as-gold characters, he believes that large families can live together happily under the same roof without the slightest bumps.

But alas, he's unable to translate his vision to the screen.

It's difficult to overlook how one-dimensional his protagonists are Shahid and Amrita, both virtuous and virginal I mean, think about it, the first time they hold hands is an hour and twenty minutes into the film.

Barjatya may think he's returning to his Maine Pyar Kiya roots with Vivah, but truth is that the reason we embraced Salman and Bhagyashree in that film, or even Salman and Madhuri in Hum Aapke Hain Koun is because they had such fantastic chemistry.

Because although they were created out of the same mould as Shahid and Amrita in Vivah, those pairs had mischief and masti.

Shahid and Amrita are just insipid and boring.

For a film that relies so heavily on music to narrate its story, the filmmaker chooses a string of 70s-style tunes that only further slacken the film's deadening pace.

But if I had to choose just one reason to explain why Vivah doesn't work for me, it's because I'm not sure I can relate to any of the characters who inhabit Barjatya's story.

To some perhaps, Vivah will give hope, that a perfect world like this is actually out there somewhere.

But I'm a little cynical I guess.

So, give me the coquettish Madhuri of Hum Aapke Hain Kaun, give me the bratty Salman of Maine Pyar Kiya, I'll even take that mischievous Karisma Kapoor of Hum Saath Saath Hain.

But save me from these dullards.

You know, some marriages aren't made in heaven.