MLP-SEMO/CSR_datasets · Datasets at Hugging Face

sentence stringlengths 3 2.65k
(don't read if you ever intend to seriously watch this film or to ever watch this film seriously due to the spoilers) First of all, I felt myself rolling my eyes repeatedly at the Liberal stereotypes: the cops are all sadistic and frame this black guy with no evidence.
The coroner, witnesses and even the lawyer of the accused collaborate against him (he is accused of the rape and murder of a young girl) because he is black.
Connery is a Harvard law prof who gives impassioned speeches about the injustices against blacks and against the barbarous death penalty.
He is approached by the convicted man's grandmother to defend him and re-open the trial.
Connery is stonewalled (yawn...
) by the small town officials and the good IL' boys club but finds that the case against Blair, the alleged killer, now on death row, was all fabricated.
The main evidence was his confession which was beaten out of him.
The beating was administered by a black cop (!) who even played Russian roulette to get the confession out of him.
Connery finds out that another inmate on death row actually did the murder and after a few tete a tetes with a seriously overacting, Hannibal Lecter-like Ed Harris, he finds out where Harris hid the murder weapon.
He gets a re-trial and Blair is freed.
I think...
film over....
Then suddenly!
It turns out that Blair IS a psychotic psycho and that he used "white guilt" to enlist Connery.
He concocted the story with Ed Harris in return for Blair carrying out a few murders for Harris.
now Blair is on the loose again, thanks to Connery's deluded PC principles!
The final 30 min.
are a weird action movie tacked onto a legal drama, Connery and Fishburne fighting the serial killer in an alligator skinning house on stilts (yes, you read that right) in the everglades.
That was one weird film.
So the whole system is corrupt and inefficient, the cops are all just bullies and Abu Graib type torturers, but the criminals are really psychotics and deserve to fry.
Truly depressing on every level!
The system is completely rotten and the PC white guilt types who challenge it are seriously deluded too.
Two thumbs down.
Connery obviously had to make a mortgage payment or something.
The form of the film is that of a suspense shocker.
There are surprises, twists and turns, reverses and excitements.
At times, this is truly an "edge-of-the-seat" film.
But it disappoints, and disappoints severely.
The villain of the piece is not believeable;
his character does not hold together.
I refuse to "spoil" the film, but will only say that the character we meet at the beginning just could not be he whom we see at the end.
The second major disappointment of the film is that--finally, it becomes little more that a bloody slasher film.
There is little qualitative difference between this and one of the "Friday the 13th" films.
Not that every film need always be totally tasteful, but this film does drip gore on occasion.
Though the film features the magnificent Sean Connery, even he does not measure up to his usual standard, and often just seems to be walking through the paces.
Just Cause is one of those films that at first makes you wonder quite why it was so heavily slated when it came out - nothing special but competent enough and with an excellent supporting performance from Ed Harris.
Then you hit the last third and everything starts to get increasingly silly until you've got a killer with a flashlight strapped to his forehead threatening to fillet Sean Connery's wife (a typically mannered and unconvincing Kate Capshaw) and kid (a very young Scarlet Johannsen) in an alligator skinner's shack.
The kind of movie that's probably best seen on a plane, and even then only once.
Look carefully at the wonderful assortment of talent put together to make this movie: Connery, Fishburne, Capshaw, Harris, Underwood, Beatty, Thigpen, even cameos by Slezak, Lange, and Plimpton.
They prove, in spades, the adage that a good cast cannot save a bad script.
The story line requires so many leaps of faith from the audience that its implausibility should have exceeded even Hollywood standards.
It's not particularly original, and the "twists" are downright cruel.
As other reviewers have noted the film dies in the last 1/2 hour.
However before that it suffers from predictability and a stunningly vapid performance by Kate Capshaw, who clearly never found her character and ruins every scene she's in.
Connery is fine as is Fishbourne, but most scenes are manipulated for effect rather than truth which overlays the entirety with a sense of unreality.
And the ending is simply bizarre.
The film makers apparently knew when they pieced this mess together that all they needed were sweet potatoes and pumpkin pie to have Thanksgiving dinner, so to compensate they added an overloud "dramatic" score.
Every little jump is accompanied by a crescendo of orchestration, to the point where it becomes laughable.
If you want an example of major league bad film this is one to see, otherwise skip it.
Seems that the cast should ensure at least an average movie.
And so I sat down for 102 minutes of unbelief.
Beside Ed Harris no-one seems to own the skills of acting.
Even Sean Connery, who I normally worship, must have had an off-day during the entire filming of Just Case.
Not once in during the whole movie one actor could convince me.
This made this movie look cheap and unreal.
The story makes up a little.
It is thrilling, and the plot is unexpected.
Conclusion only watch this movie if you really have nothing more useful to do.
1st watched 2/16/2002 - 4 out of 10(Dir-Arne Glimcher): Mystery??
/Thriller with too many ridiculous plot twists.
Despite the very talented cast this movie is way too predictable and just downright under-estimates it's audience.
The movie-going public is not stupid and I hope will not keep filling certain stars pockets again and again despite what they are involved with.
We think that this movie is going to be about something with Connery's conviction against capitol punishment in the beginning but it turns out to be nothing but a standard, contrived for the audience's sake, run of the mill, let's never get it over with, thriller.
We are pulled into every silly switch in character, as they are portrayed to us when it's needed in the story, and we're ready for this thing to be over way before it ends.
Yes there is some good acting here, especially from Blair Underwood, Fishburne, and Ed Harris in a psycho-supporting role but the story does not work from almost the beginning to the very long-awaited end.
The performances of Fishbourne (who appears strangely funny somehow) and (short featured)Ed Harris are remarkable, unlike Connery's who doesn't appear to find sense in his role and ends up in the motorial behaviour of a 80yr old man.
In fact the screenplay doesn't make sense;
imagine a 60 min.
happy ending-plot plus a sudden turn appendix without any argumental structure in respect to the characters.
It's more an accident than a screenplay and may be good for examination purposes at screen-wrights' schools.
The more you remind the details the stronger this impression gets.
The capital punishment is not an issue here, although it is a subject from the beginning;
it sort of fades away without further comment.
The subject-matter and environment could have been good.
A pot - boiler if ever I saw one.
A supposed thriller borrowing from "A Time to Kill", "Silence of the Lambs", even an inverted "In the Heat of the Night" with a little reverse murder, a la "Strangers on a Train" thrown in, it fails abysmally where all the above, to a large degree, succeeded.
Namely, in delivering thrills.
The plot seems condensed from a bigger book, making the plot developments obvious and uninvolving, while the direction lacks pace and verve.
To rein in any kudos, a major twist had to be delivered along the way and here it fails palpably too.
Connery is clearly slowing down in his old age, barely bothering with his attempt at a US accent and besides seems too old to be the husband of Hope Lange and the father of those gosh - darn kids of his.
He even has a father in law who seems younger than him.
Laurence Fishburne barely gets the chance to inhabit his role and you're confused from the outset as to whether he's a bad guy or a good guy.
Someone once said that flashbacks shouldn't lie - they do, confusedly, here.
The rest of the playing is merely average by a reasonable cast in their underwritten stereotyped roles.
The supposed climax managed too, to roll by leaving me firmly entrenched in the back, not as should have been the aim, front edge of my seat.
Mediocre sloppy Hollywood film making for sure.
This movie is a crappy and forgettable Sean Connery vehicle.
The performances are generally crappy especially by Capshaw, Fishburne, and the usually solid Ed Harris.
Connery seems miscast as a Harvard Academic.
The movie absolutely gets worse as it goes along.
It is a third rate mystery that becomes extremely contrived by the time it unravels.
The movie squanders an excellent supporting cast.
George Plimpton also turns up in a minor role to add some gravitas to Connery as they debate the death penalty.
The violence and the atmosphere pepper a third rate mystery/thriller that is manipulation to the highest degree.
The scripting and direction are extremely poor.
Connery's charisma and screen presence are the film's only virtue.
Manipulative, Violent, and Ridiculous.
2/10 Avoid It.
This is just a case of a previously worthless island changed into something worthwhile.
Jesus Christ people lets throw a big fit over 2000 islanders big deal.

(don't read if you ever intend to seriously watch this film or to ever watch this film seriously due to the spoilers) First of all, I felt myself rolling my eyes repeatedly at the Liberal stereotypes: the cops are all sadistic and frame this black guy with no evidence.

The coroner, witnesses and even the lawyer of the accused collaborate against him (he is accused of the rape and murder of a young girl) because he is black.

Connery is a Harvard law prof who gives impassioned speeches about the injustices against blacks and against the barbarous death penalty.

He is approached by the convicted man's grandmother to defend him and re-open the trial.

Connery is stonewalled (yawn...

) by the small town officials and the good IL' boys club but finds that the case against Blair, the alleged killer, now on death row, was all fabricated.

The main evidence was his confession which was beaten out of him.

The beating was administered by a black cop (!) who even played Russian roulette to get the confession out of him.

Connery finds out that another inmate on death row actually did the murder and after a few tete a tetes with a seriously overacting, Hannibal Lecter-like Ed Harris, he finds out where Harris hid the murder weapon.

He gets a re-trial and Blair is freed.

I think...

film over....

Then suddenly!

It turns out that Blair IS a psychotic psycho and that he used "white guilt" to enlist Connery.

He concocted the story with Ed Harris in return for Blair carrying out a few murders for Harris.

now Blair is on the loose again, thanks to Connery's deluded PC principles!

The final 30 min.

are a weird action movie tacked onto a legal drama, Connery and Fishburne fighting the serial killer in an alligator skinning house on stilts (yes, you read that right) in the everglades.

That was one weird film.

So the whole system is corrupt and inefficient, the cops are all just bullies and Abu Graib type torturers, but the criminals are really psychotics and deserve to fry.

Truly depressing on every level!

The system is completely rotten and the PC white guilt types who challenge it are seriously deluded too.

Two thumbs down.

Connery obviously had to make a mortgage payment or something.

The form of the film is that of a suspense shocker.

There are surprises, twists and turns, reverses and excitements.

At times, this is truly an "edge-of-the-seat" film.

But it disappoints, and disappoints severely.

The villain of the piece is not believeable;

his character does not hold together.

I refuse to "spoil" the film, but will only say that the character we meet at the beginning just could not be he whom we see at the end.

The second major disappointment of the film is that--finally, it becomes little more that a bloody slasher film.

There is little qualitative difference between this and one of the "Friday the 13th" films.

Not that every film need always be totally tasteful, but this film does drip gore on occasion.

Though the film features the magnificent Sean Connery, even he does not measure up to his usual standard, and often just seems to be walking through the paces.

Just Cause is one of those films that at first makes you wonder quite why it was so heavily slated when it came out - nothing special but competent enough and with an excellent supporting performance from Ed Harris.

Then you hit the last third and everything starts to get increasingly silly until you've got a killer with a flashlight strapped to his forehead threatening to fillet Sean Connery's wife (a typically mannered and unconvincing Kate Capshaw) and kid (a very young Scarlet Johannsen) in an alligator skinner's shack.

The kind of movie that's probably best seen on a plane, and even then only once.

Look carefully at the wonderful assortment of talent put together to make this movie: Connery, Fishburne, Capshaw, Harris, Underwood, Beatty, Thigpen, even cameos by Slezak, Lange, and Plimpton.

They prove, in spades, the adage that a good cast cannot save a bad script.

The story line requires so many leaps of faith from the audience that its implausibility should have exceeded even Hollywood standards.

It's not particularly original, and the "twists" are downright cruel.

As other reviewers have noted the film dies in the last 1/2 hour.

However before that it suffers from predictability and a stunningly vapid performance by Kate Capshaw, who clearly never found her character and ruins every scene she's in.

Connery is fine as is Fishbourne, but most scenes are manipulated for effect rather than truth which overlays the entirety with a sense of unreality.

And the ending is simply bizarre.

The film makers apparently knew when they pieced this mess together that all they needed were sweet potatoes and pumpkin pie to have Thanksgiving dinner, so to compensate they added an overloud "dramatic" score.

Every little jump is accompanied by a crescendo of orchestration, to the point where it becomes laughable.

If you want an example of major league bad film this is one to see, otherwise skip it.

Seems that the cast should ensure at least an average movie.

And so I sat down for 102 minutes of unbelief.

Beside Ed Harris no-one seems to own the skills of acting.

Even Sean Connery, who I normally worship, must have had an off-day during the entire filming of Just Case.

Not once in during the whole movie one actor could convince me.

This made this movie look cheap and unreal.

The story makes up a little.

It is thrilling, and the plot is unexpected.

Conclusion only watch this movie if you really have nothing more useful to do.

1st watched 2/16/2002 - 4 out of 10(Dir-Arne Glimcher): Mystery??

/Thriller with too many ridiculous plot twists.

Despite the very talented cast this movie is way too predictable and just downright under-estimates it's audience.

The movie-going public is not stupid and I hope will not keep filling certain stars pockets again and again despite what they are involved with.

We think that this movie is going to be about something with Connery's conviction against capitol punishment in the beginning but it turns out to be nothing but a standard, contrived for the audience's sake, run of the mill, let's never get it over with, thriller.

We are pulled into every silly switch in character, as they are portrayed to us when it's needed in the story, and we're ready for this thing to be over way before it ends.

Yes there is some good acting here, especially from Blair Underwood, Fishburne, and Ed Harris in a psycho-supporting role but the story does not work from almost the beginning to the very long-awaited end.

The performances of Fishbourne (who appears strangely funny somehow) and (short featured)Ed Harris are remarkable, unlike Connery's who doesn't appear to find sense in his role and ends up in the motorial behaviour of a 80yr old man.

In fact the screenplay doesn't make sense;

imagine a 60 min.

happy ending-plot plus a sudden turn appendix without any argumental structure in respect to the characters.

It's more an accident than a screenplay and may be good for examination purposes at screen-wrights' schools.

The more you remind the details the stronger this impression gets.

The capital punishment is not an issue here, although it is a subject from the beginning;

it sort of fades away without further comment.

The subject-matter and environment could have been good.

A pot - boiler if ever I saw one.

A supposed thriller borrowing from "A Time to Kill", "Silence of the Lambs", even an inverted "In the Heat of the Night" with a little reverse murder, a la "Strangers on a Train" thrown in, it fails abysmally where all the above, to a large degree, succeeded.

Namely, in delivering thrills.

The plot seems condensed from a bigger book, making the plot developments obvious and uninvolving, while the direction lacks pace and verve.

To rein in any kudos, a major twist had to be delivered along the way and here it fails palpably too.

Connery is clearly slowing down in his old age, barely bothering with his attempt at a US accent and besides seems too old to be the husband of Hope Lange and the father of those gosh - darn kids of his.

He even has a father in law who seems younger than him.

Laurence Fishburne barely gets the chance to inhabit his role and you're confused from the outset as to whether he's a bad guy or a good guy.

Someone once said that flashbacks shouldn't lie - they do, confusedly, here.

The rest of the playing is merely average by a reasonable cast in their underwritten stereotyped roles.

The supposed climax managed too, to roll by leaving me firmly entrenched in the back, not as should have been the aim, front edge of my seat.

Mediocre sloppy Hollywood film making for sure.

This movie is a crappy and forgettable Sean Connery vehicle.

The performances are generally crappy especially by Capshaw, Fishburne, and the usually solid Ed Harris.

Connery seems miscast as a Harvard Academic.

The movie absolutely gets worse as it goes along.

It is a third rate mystery that becomes extremely contrived by the time it unravels.

The movie squanders an excellent supporting cast.

George Plimpton also turns up in a minor role to add some gravitas to Connery as they debate the death penalty.

The violence and the atmosphere pepper a third rate mystery/thriller that is manipulation to the highest degree.

The scripting and direction are extremely poor.

Connery's charisma and screen presence are the film's only virtue.

Manipulative, Violent, and Ridiculous.

2/10 Avoid It.

This is just a case of a previously worthless island changed into something worthwhile.

Jesus Christ people lets throw a big fit over 2000 islanders big deal.