Datasets:
MLP-SEMO
/
CSR_datasets

Dataset card Data Studio Files Community
2
sentence
stringlengths
3
2.65k
A film in which all the characters are derived from racist minstrel shows, the cast comprised of lecherous men (always beaming with devilish smiles and toothy grins), stereotypical fat mammies, jazz bands and gospel choirs.
This is a film in which black people are naturally childlike, readily and happily accepting their social conditions.
A film in which black people are over-sexed, carnal sensualists dominated by violent passions.
A film in which poverty and class issues are entirely invisible (Albert lives in a huge house) and black men are completely inept.
This is not the Old South, this is the Old South as derived from "Gone With The Wind", MGM Muscals, "Song of the South", Warner Cartoons, "Halleluha!"
and banned Disney movies.
In other words, it's the South as seen by a child raised on 50s TV.
It's all so cartoonish, so racist in the way it reduces these human beings to one dimensional ethnic stereotypes, that black novelist Ishmael Reed famously likened it to a Nazi conspiracy.
Of course, in typical Spielberg fashion the film ends with family bonds being healed.
This reconciliation was in Walker's novel, but Spielberg goes further by having every character in the story reconcile with their kin.
Beyond Walker's hate letter to black men and Spielberg's bizarre caricaturing of black life, we are shown nothing of the black community.
We have only the vaguest ideas as to how any of these characters make a living and no insight into how they interact with others in their community.
Instead, Spielberg's camera jumps about, desperately fighting for our attention (one of Celie's kitchen contraptions seems like it belongs in a "Home Alone" movie), every emotion over played, the director never stopping to just observe something or to allow a little bit of life to simply pass by.
Couple this with Quincy Jones' ridiculously "white" music, and you have one of the strangest films in cinema history: an angry feminist tract filmed by a white Jew in the style of Disney and Griffith, scored by a black man trying to emulate John Williams.
Problematic too is the lack of white characters.
Consider this: the men in this film aren't portrayed as being rough to each other, nor do they dominate women because they are brutalised by a racist society which reduces their manhood.
No, they are cruel by nature.
And the women, whether quietly suffering like Celie or rebellious and tough like her sister, persevere and survive only because the men are too stupid to destroy them.
A better film would not have focused solely on the oppression of women as it occurs among the oppressed, rather, it would have shown that it is societal abuse which has led to spousal abuse, that enslaved black women are forced to perform the very same tasks as their male counterparts (whilst still fulfilling traditional female roles) and that African American domestic violence occurs largely because of economic factors, women unable to support themselves and their children alone.
And so there's a hidden ideology at work here.
Late in the film one character tells another that since he didn't respect his wife, she wound up getting severely beaten and imprisoned by whites.
The implication is that blacks need to return to their African roots to restore their own dignity and that it is their fault that whites unjustly crush them.
ie- Respect one another in your poor minority community and you won't run afoul of the dominant white culture.
3/10 - A failure to confront sex and lesbianism, inappropriate musical numbers, countless sequence loaded with extraneous visual pizazz, incongruous comic business, emphatic music cues, and wildly hyped emotionality, all contribute to rendering "The Color Purple" worthless.
You may consider a couple of facts in the discussion to be spoilers.
I'm sorry, but Spielberg didn't deserve to win any Oscar for this piece, and I think the Academy was right in that vote.
(Other Oscars for best actor nominations and such...
that I don't know about.
But it would be hard to justify, given what they were told to do and what you see in the final product.) The way Spielberg directs this is so contrived, so meddlesome.
While watching this movie a distinction made during a Film as Art course I have taken was screaming at me: "Sentiment is honest emotion honestly rendered.
Sentimentality is sugary and unreal, a false view of life."
This is over-the-top sentimentality.
When in real life to two people ever begin to read out loud in synchronicity, as Celie and Shug Avery do when sitting on the bed going over the letters from Nettie they have found?
There are examples of this type of faux behavior throughout the film: all the men crowding around Miss Millie's car and then jumping in unison like a flock of birds taking off when she goes to drive away;
Harpo falling through the roofs of various buildings he's working on (a cheap slapstick gag);
the whole troop of revelers heading from the Jook Joint en masse to the chapel, as if magically entranced by the choir's singing...
on and on.
Nothing rings true.
I even wondered if Harpo's name was chosen purposefully because it's his wife Sophia's real name, "Oprah," backwards.
Spielberg isn't above such "cuteness."
It's not that Spielberg is incapable of honestly rendered action and emotion.
Schindler's List was amazing, deeply touching for me, and I greatly admire Saving Private Ryan too for its realism, even if the story is a bit contrived.
This is really terrible.
The only redeeming feature about this movie is that the next time people ask me what is the worst vampire movie I have ever watched, I would have a suitable reply.
I think it is filmed on 35 mm so it is already tacky like hell.
I wouldn't have bothered commenting but I noticed some fanboys (probably connected to the movie) had claimed that this was the best movie since the Matrix.
Let me debunk the myths and lies.
There is nothing good in the movie.
Everything yells tacky.
The actress is ugly.
The fight choreography is the worst I have ever seen.
The fight scenes are unbelievably amateurish.
Imagine a girl flailing her arms around in a circle helplessly and delivering weak kicks which wouldn't hurt a kitten.
Obviously, the director just pulled people off the street to give them roles in the movie.
I know the director did not have much budget for the movie but still better movies have been made on smaller budget before.
Unforgivable.
Dude, really!!!!
where have you guys been the past 20 years, this is shocking in all kind of ways, horror ?
This is a joke, there is nothing wrong with being low budget, but this is a laugh, If you want to look at the classics, Freaks of Tod Browning, the victims of Dracula and Frankenstein, the Undying Monster, Ernest Thesiger, Paul Wegener's The Golem and the passengers of The Ghost Train, you can't compare it, it gives it a bad name, bad acting, bad screenplay etc.
Total waist of money and free time, have watched a lot of movies, were as horror is my all time favorite, I really am speechless, have nothing more to say that please don't do the effort to watch something so daft, please understand
Well, you know the rest!
This has to be the worst movie I've seen in a long long time.
I can only imagine that Stephanie Beaham had some bills to pay when taking on this role.
The lead role is played by (to me) a complete unknown and I would imagine disappeared right back into obscurity right after this turkey.
Bruce Lee led the martial arts charge in the early 70's and since then fight scenes have to be either martial arts based or at least brutal if using street fighting techniques.
This movie uses fast cuts to show off the martial arts, however, even this can't disguise the fact that the lady doesn't know how to throw a punch.
An average 8 year old boy would take her apart on this showing.
Sorry, the only mystery on show here is how this didn't win the golden raspberry for its year.
I'm in Iraq right now doing a job that gives plenty of time for watching movies.
We also have access to plenty of pirated movies, this gem came along with 11 other movies, and this is easily the worst I've seen in a long time.
I've seen a few other reviews that claim this movie doesn't take itself too seriously, but really, I think that's a cover up for the fact that its horrible.
It's not tongue in cheek, the writers really thought they were improving on the movie Blade.
This movie is just one notch above Vampire Assassin, which if you haven't seen, i recommend.
At least that movie is so unbelievably bad that you'll laugh harder than you thought possible.
This is right at that cusp of no redeeming qualities what so ever.
from the bad acting, to cliché visual (ie opening credits), to the adobe premier special effects.
they couldn't even get blanks for the guns, which may have to do with where the movie was filmed, but if you're going to use effects, make them close to accurate.
as for the cast, it seems like they just went to a tae bo class and picked up the first not to ugly chick that walked out.
Once again, like Ron Hall in Vampire Assassin, don't let stunt folk act, they can't.
Also, the comment about this being a "return of old vampire movies."..
no, it's not.
This is exactly what all new vampire movies are about.
Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Blade, Underworld, they're all about some super star fighting the vampires.
This is the newest vampire genre, with bad blood, fake screams, and cheesy over acting.
obviously anyone who wrote a good review about this is somehow connected to the movie, or friends of the cast.
But what do I care, I paid 33 cents for it.
Anyway, to wrap this up, someone in their first semester of film school decided to make a movie, I give them credit because it's better than I could do.
Of course I also know I can't make movies so I don't try.
I do know how to watch movies though.
I work 12 hour nights, 6 days a week, I've seen several thousand in the year I've been out here and this was so bad that half way through i was hoping for a mortar attack.
"Valentine" is another horror movie to add to the stalk and slash movie list (think "Halloween", "Friday the 13th", "Scream", and "I Know What You Did Last Summer").
It certainly isn't as good as those movies that I have listed about, but it's better than most of the ripoffs that came out after the first "Friday the 13th" film.
One of those films was the 1981 Canadian made "My Bloody Valentine", which I hated alot.
"Valentine" is a better film than that one, but it's not saying much.
The plot: a nerdy young boy is teased and pranked by a couple of his classmates at the beginning of the film.
Then the film moves years later when those classmates are all grown up, then they're picked off one-by-one.
The killer is presumed to be the young boy now all grown up looking for revenge.
But is it him?
Or could it be somebody else?
"Valentine" has an attractive cast which includes Denise Richards, David Boreanaz, Marley Shelton, Jessica Capshaw, and Katherine Heigl.