{"inputs": "Summarize the following movie reviews:\n\n1. Who defines good? This doc never quite finds the source, but it sure shows us the damage it's done to wallets, egos and follicles.\n2. The subject matter would still be fairly interesting without Rock's involvement, but the comedian brings a accessibility to the material that no amount of facts and figures can replace.\n3. Chris keep the action rocking, the beautiful women and not so handsome men in the cast sometimes matching his humor, joke for joke.\n4. Rock never misses a beat and here's hoping he continues the documentary chapter of his career. There's nothing wrong with a little competition for Michael Moore.\n5. Good Hair is a raucous and rigorous inquiry into the subject of African-American hair -- the stigmas, the secrets, the shocking price of maintenance -- that gets at universal but rarely discussed truths about black femininity.\n6. A wise and wacky dye-laughing doc about black female high maintenance hair that is no laughing matter, the movie finds a PG-13 Rock channeling Michael Moore, while nearly tumbling into a jumbo vat of processor goo.\n7. That many of these hairstyles derive from standards of beauty laid down by white tastemakers is a question that hangs over Good Hair.\n8. [A] breezy, superficial doc.\n9. Whether you have good hair or not, there's plenty to appreciate in Chris Rock's rollicking documentary about what goes on when African-American women hit the salon.\n10. Rock takes aim at the truth and humor of this potent cultural question with a sharp wit and lively curiousity, even if he doesn't pursue vigorously enough its uglier side.", "targets": "Funny, informative, and occasionally sad, Good Hair is a provocative look at the complex relationship between African Americans and their hair."}
{"inputs": "Which movie is the following review about?\n\n[T]he belief that high school athletics is something worth ruining lives over is more likely to strike one as pathetic than praiseworthy.", "targets": "friday night lights"}
{"inputs": "Which movie is the following review about?\n\nWhen he's on, he's hot, and when he's not, he's not.", "targets": "al franken god spoke"}
{"inputs": "Write an ordered list of reviews about \"prince of egypt\".", "targets": "1. Extraordinarily moving.\n2. It is the absolutely stunning visuals that make the movie so compelling!\n3. For a cartoon, the movie is overpowering!\n4. one of the year's most distinctive, lovingly made movies, a picture that turns a familiar story into something suprisingly exciting, moving and -- yes -- even funny. In a word, 'Prince' rules.\n5. Glorious artwork, stirring music and a compact story line make this film a winner.\n6. The 400-member-strong Prince of Egypt team (led by directors Brenda Chapman, Steve Hickner and Simon Wells and ramrodded by executive producer Jeffrey Katzenberg) have created a succession of visual wonders.\n7. It takes a familiar story and recreates it on screen in a bold new fashion.\n8. Maybe we should overlook the fact that the film's music and songs will be forgotten long before its images die away.\n9. Certainly technically-minded cartoon connoisseurs will feel many shivers of admiration on seeing this.\n10. A genuinely great work of art that is also an inspiring and theologically significant narrative."}
{"inputs": "The critic consesnsus is: Bee Movie has humorous moments, but its awkward premise and tame delivery render it mostly forgettable.. What reviews supported this critic consensus?", "targets": "1. Amiable but no more.\n2. Unfortunately, bees just aren't that funny.\n3. A surprisingly unfunny, belabored and unimaginative comedy, Bee Movie is a huge disappointment considering the extent of Seinfeld's participation.\n4. Watching this pun-filled cartoon is like falling into a tray of children's watercolors -- the warm end, where oranges and yellows and ambers wave.\n5. Bee Movie has a few charming moments and a scene or two with legitimate hilarity, but mostly it's just mediocre.\n6. Bee Movie doesn't touch the bar raised so high by Pixar, but it creates a little buzz of its own.\n7. Bee Movie is a cute movie. Not that there's anything ... well, you know the rest. But cute is not what adults expect from Jerry Seinfeld, although children will be delighted.\n8. Feels slight and attenuated, even at a brisk 82 minutes.\n9. The movie has some pretty pictures and a few good jokes, but not nearly enough. And the story suffers from sitcom attention-deficit disorder, veering off in a new direction every half-hour or so.\n10. What I like about Bee Movie is its comfy, off-the-cuff charm: unlike a lot of animated family entertainment, it's not all Thwack Smash Kaboom."}
{"inputs": "Write an ordered list of reviews about \"birthday girl\".", "targets": "1. Would've been nice if the screenwriters had trusted audiences to understand a complex story, and left off the film's predictable denouement. Then Nadia's birthday might not have been such a bad day after all.\n2. An entertaining British hybrid of comedy, caper thrills and quirky romance.\n3. It's the cute frissons of discovery and humor between Chaplin and Kidman that keep this nicely wound clock not just ticking, but humming.\n4. Birthday Girl gets points for strangeness.\n5. Birthday Girl doesn't try to surprise us with plot twists, but rather seems to enjoy its own transparency.\n6. Nicole Kidman isn't bad as a Russian bride in this noirish sex comedy, but her feeble costar could use a good tug.\n7. Kidman is really the only thing that's worth watching in Birthday Girl, a film by the stage-trained Jez Butterworth (Mojo) that serves as yet another example of the sad decline of British comedies in the post-Full Monty world.\n8. Kidman accomplishes a remarkable feat of transformation, adopting not only an accent, but a slightly seedy, faintly feral demeanor that almost makes you forget her icy good looks and fashion model's figure.\n9. Moderately engaging and entertaining.\n10. For a supposedly fast-moving thriller -- and a movie that takes only 93 minutes -- Birthday Girl is surprisingly sluggish."}
{"inputs": "The critic consesnsus is: Led by powerful performances from Kristen Wiig and Bill Hader, The Skeleton Twins effectively mines laughs and tears from family drama.. What reviews supported this critic consensus?", "targets": "1. It plays to the antic gifts of its stars, two Saturday Night Live luminaries reunited in the roles of troubled twins reunited by near-tragedy, yet it also turns them loose to explore deeper regions of hurt and love.\n2. What makes the movie memorable is the open-ended talent of its actors. They supply The Skeleton Twins with flesh and blood, some firm connective tissue and generous heart and soul.\n3. The film is a mite tidy in that Sundance Workshop way, but it's very enjoyable, and Johnson has a deft touch with actors.\n4. Uneven, but not uninteresting.\n5. It's unusual to see two actors we've known for so long giving breakthrough performances. But that's what's happening here.\n6. As we enter this season of big, important awards contenders that \"matter,\" \"The Skeleton Twins\" is a small, intimate gem that might truly matter.\n7. A rickety vehicle for two fantastic performances, the movie works best as a blaring announcement that these players are more than ready for prime time.\n8. It seems unlikely that The Skeleton Twins is aiming for something so simplistic, considering how much suffering it packs into the story, but simplistic is what it is.\n9. If countless movies about brothers and sisters reveal common family traits, \"The Skeleton Twins\" is subtler than most in evoking a mutual sympathy that might be called a cellular understanding.\n10. One of the better movies to come along this year."}
{"inputs": "1. Sandler, it turns out, is great with kids.\n2. Sloppy, choppy, and saved by an affably low-key and typically sophomoric Sandler performance.\n3. A likable but thin Disney vehicle for Adam Sandler that will play best for preteens.\n4. Those other Adam Sandler comedies? Turns out they were the grown-up efforts.\n5. Bedtime Stories champions imagination while having too little originality itself.\n6. It's Little Nicky-awful.\n7. The new Disney movie Bedtime Stories presents a taste test for moviegoers: Do you prefer your Adam Sandler regular strength or in the new mild format?\n8. It's a dispirited, galumphing mess in which Sandler, as a hotel handyman who spins out tall tales for his niece and nephew, pictures himself in assorted historical-kitsch guises.\n9. Bedtime Stories is not my cup of tea. Even the saucer. Fairness requires me to report, however, that it may appeal to, as they say, 'kids of all ages.'\n10. Bedtime Stories is baloney on Wonder Bread with a Kraft Single and some Miracle Whip -- barely lunchable.\n\nWhat is a brief summary of the following reviews?", "targets": "Though it may earns some chuckles from pre-teens, this kid-friendly Adam Sandler comedy is uneven, poorly paced, and lacks the requisite whimsy to truly work."}
{"inputs": "Here are some reviews for a movie: 1. Despite the often-unappealing subject matter, however, the film remains compelling.\n2. Wonderland's finest asset is its cast...\n3. Arrestingly beautiful; you can practically get drunk on its fusion of movement, color, light and sound.\n4. The film's realistic approach to storytelling and the strong performances mesh well with Winterbottom's stylistic flourishes.\n5. [Winterbottom] can't pull this humdrum tragicomedy out of the gutter.\n6. One slice-of-life movie that's sliced entirely too thin.\n7. It's a wonderful feature debut script by Laurence Coriat, inspired by Robert Altman's Short Cuts and with a less sprawling nod to Magnolia.\n8. It becomes one of those movies that hurt so good.\n9. Michael Winterbottom doggedly excavates the innate sadness of his characters -- to the point of numbing his audience.\n10. A depressing and ultimately boring story filled with miserable, depressed and lonely characters.\n\nWhat was the overall consensus about the movie?", "targets": "A film that tackles something as simple as everyday life and succeeds beatifully. The witty script and clever direction keep the film flowing, while the superb acting keeps it alive. It doesn't aim for the sky and for that reason it hits its mark."}
{"inputs": "Summarize the following movie reviews:\n\n1. The games, while plenty rowdy and profane, aren't very realistic.\n2. Seems longer than a rainy Super Bowl.\n3. A new low in the career of director Howard Deutch.\n4. There isn't a Rocky-esque clich\u00e9 the film doesn't tackle, throw gasping to the ground and flog to death.\n5. Mind-achingly mediocre in every regard.\n6. Achieving the dull veneer of your standard TV movie shot on the backlots of Burbank, The Replacements lets Hackman work at about one-fourth his talent level. That still gives him a big lead over Reeves.\n7. The game scenes have little coherence or momentum.\n8. So thick with cliches that it's almost suffocating.\n9. The joke about the cheerleaders recruited from a strip club is funny at first but gets musty the ninth time it's repeated.\n10. The Replacements does have its moments. There just aren't enough of them.", "targets": "The cliched characters and obvious outcome make all the fun and excitement amount to nothing."}
{"inputs": "The critic consesnsus is: A visually stunning film that may be too predictable and politically correct for adults, but should serve children well.. What reviews supported this critic consensus?", "targets": "1. Entertaining for kids (as long as it doesn't scare them) and thankfully short for adults, the film is by no means an animated classic, but it delivers the goods.\n2. A mishmash that is sometimes moving, sometimes absurd and most of the time just oddly off balance.\n3. A fine, rousing, G-rated family film, aimed mainly at little kids but with plenty of entertainment value to keep grown-ups from squirming in their seats.\n4. Adams' hoarse anthems become a betrayal of this horse opera's true potential; fortunately, there is enough fine achievement here to make the film worth seeing.\n5. A robust adventure story, unlike any we've seen told before by Hollywood animators.\n6. A cartoon that's truly cinematic in scope, and a story that's compelling and heartfelt -- even if the heart belongs to a big, four-legged herbivore.\n7. It should satisfy the kids it was made for.\n8. Refusing to condescend to us with the usual cutesy anthropomorphic qualities often foisted on animated animals, Asbury and Cook keep matters realistic.\n9. DreamWorks animators have done a fine job of making their characters visually expressive, words are extraneous.\n10. The animation is dull, the thought is fuzzy, the storytelling is vague and the music just plain stinks."}
{"inputs": "1. Mars Annoys!\n2. It's a perfect fireworks show for the long July 4th weekend, but as with even the most spectacular fireworks, it was not built to last.\n3. Extravagant in movie terms but stingy in emotional ones, it embodies all of Spielberg's bad impulses and almost none of his good ones.\n4. War of the Worlds is an attack-of-the-aliens disaster film crafted with sinister technological grandeur -- a true popcorn apocalypse.\n5. The movie is no fun. There's none of the spirited adrenaline you expect from a bang-up blockbuster. I've docked it a star or so because it is nasty and mean-spirited, and plays on shocking allusions to 9/11 imagery.\n6. ...the film's only sublime moments happen in scenes where the population gets blown up.\n7. This disappointing War of the Worlds limps to a conclusion that mercifully insures there will not be a sequel.\n8. Spielberg is pretty much incapable of making a terrible movie anymore. But he has plainly forgotten a lot of what makes a good popcorn movie since his Jurassic period. Where's the fun?\n9. Fantastic and banal, terrifying and occasionally dull, pure Spielberg and yet at times anonymous, War of the Worlds delivers multiple viewing experiences during its two-hour running time.\n10. In the first two acts, the movie is rousing summer fare.\n\nWrite a one sentence summary of the reviews above.", "targets": "Steven Spielberg's adaptation of War of the Worlds delivers on the thrill and paranoia of H.G. Wells' classic novel while impressively updating the action and effects for modern audiences."}
{"inputs": "Summarize the following movie reviews:\n\n1. There's some fun in this if you stick with it.\n2. If you see only one casual-sex-com featuring a Black Swan alumni this year, make sure it's this one.\n3. Will Gluck does his best with a predictable formula. It doesn't hit the heights but it doesn't sink under the predictability either.\n4. ...it's almost guaranteed that, like most in this genre, the film will feature the same \"boy kisses down girls body/girl kisses up boy's body\" shot that's been a staple of \"R\" rated films since \"Caddyshack.\"\n5. With its central theme of sex without commitment, this attractive screwball comedy has more going for it than its premise implies. It's playful and funny\n6. The central couple's strong chemistry and a stream of lively side characters keep us involved and entertained.\n7. Through its magnetic stars, funny crudity, and observation of people's foibles in relationships, Friends with Benefits consummates the deal that viewers enter with romantic comedies.\n8. Raunchy rom-com carried by chemistry\n9. While I agree with Kunis's character that Katherine Heigl rom-coms are awful, I also think a film needs to be a lot better than Friends with Benefits if it wants to engage in the activity of bashing rival multiplex fillers.\n10. Timberlake and Kunis generate some chemistry, but it's mostly wasted in this R-rated bauble", "targets": "Friends with Benefits adds nothing new to its well-worn rom-com formula, but the chemistry between Justin Timberlake and Mila Kunis is almost enough to carry the movie by itself."}
{"inputs": "1. Traces the band's 20-year odyssey in creating Dada you can dance to.\n2. A documentary that's as heavy on laughs as it is on humble pie.\n3. You'll find yourself donning that wonderful half-smile John L. comfortably dons while singing.\n4. Their sheer existence affirms that all things corporate and bland don't always win out -- that music can be intimate, political and alienating, sometimes all on the same album.\n5. Does ample justice to the complexity, even profundity, of a creative collaboration that has brought deep joy and meaning to generations of fans throughout a career that just entered its third decade.\n6. A gift for those already in the fold, for those who get the joke and just want to savor it with other like-minded fans.\n7. Both of the Johns -- Flansburgh in his ever-present plaid shirts, Linnell with his coy smile and asymmetrical bob -- come across as engaging and intriguing.\n8. The movie provides nearly as much pleasure as a greatest-hits CD -- although not quite as much as hearing 'Don't Let's Start' for the very first time.\n9. The movie offers a generous helping of rock 'n' roll but no sex or drugs on the side, unless you count buckets of coffee, the group's stimulant of choice.\n10. Despite Schnack's half-hearted attempt to divide the film into chapters, his film is too unstructured to hold the interest of non-fans who might have appreciated a somewhat less hagiographic approach.\nBased on these individual reviews, what is the critic consensus?", "targets": "A clever, absorbing documentary about They Might Be Giants, a musical duo whose brainy, idiosyncratic brand of pop has earned them decades of cult success."}
{"inputs": "Write an ordered list of reviews about \"1099622-innocents\".", "targets": "1. No shock tactics here, just the careful creation of sinister atmosphere through decor, Freddie Francis' haunting camerawork, and evocative acting. Kerr, especially, is excellent.\n2. ...sends shivers down the backbone, playing the vertebrae like a skeletal hand tapping on a xylophone.\n3. A real shocker, it chills the heart.\n4. Wonderful adult horror, stylishly well-made and frightening on a couple of levels.\n5. Based on Henry James' story Turn of the Screw this catches an eerie, spine-chilling mood right at the start and never lets up on its grim, evil theme.\n6. This unresolved mystery charges the events ... with a dreadful sense of uncertainty far more thrilling than the simple supernatural chills of a typical haunted house movie -- another \"turn of the screw,\" as James would have said.\n7. If the picture is journeyman James, it is also pitapatational entertainment, the most sophisticated scare show since Diabolique.\n8. This classy English mystery is adorned by a wonderful Deborah Kerr as the governess driven to extremes by a strange, haunted mansion and strange, haunted children,\n9. Too much Freud and too little thought.\n10. Is it the finest, smartest, most visually savvy horror film ever made by a big studio?"}
{"inputs": "Which movie is the following review about?\n\nThis supposed action-comedy is so staggeringly unfunny, unoriginal and uninspired that its title should have been Agent Cody Banks 2: Contractually Obligated Sequel.", "targets": "agent cody banks 2 destination london"}
{"inputs": "Summarize the following movie reviews:\n\n1. ...the film's greatest acting asset is James Franco, going for broke in his own \"Killer Joe\" role.\n2. Spring Breakers is either an inspired satire of the youth movie or the most irresponsible comedy mainstream Hollywood will never make. The bros in your crowd will call it rad -- and radical it is.\n3. All I knew is I couldn't wait to see it a second time.\n4. Girls Gone Wild would have turned the cameras off and called the cops; luckily Harmony Korine was at the helm here to keep the action going in churning out an original movie.\n5. Writer-director Harmony Korine shows progress as a craftsman with this tale, which is at once his most accessible feature as well as deconstructive critique of a popular American subgenre.\n6. Surrendering to the Korine paradox has never been more tempting than it is with Spring Breakers, which is lush and exuberant and gives his admittedly brilliant eye its fullest expression to date.\n7. Whatever other charges you want to level against \"Spring Breakers\" - such as incoherence, plotlessness, salaciousness and mind-numbing monotony - it has no lack of high concept.\n8. Populated with characters who seem to have no interior life..In his own oblique way, Korine offers commentary about just how empty that world is.\n9. Korine manages to make much of the film into a \"Natural Born Killers\"-style pop patchwork with a videogame-influenced lack of morality.\n10. Spring Breakers, beach-party fluff done as an art film by the reliably bizarre Harmony Korine, is a return to form for Franco.", "targets": "Spring Breakers blends stinging social commentary with bikini cheesecake and a bravura James Franco performance."}
{"inputs": "1. This is not an exercise in fabricated nostalgia, but a raucous chronicle of defeat snatched from the jaws of victory.\n2. A spot-on goal.\n3. Through interviews with former players, coaches, and company officials, as well as archival footage, the film traces the club's amazing rise and ultimate disintegration.\n4. Another soccer film? Buy, hey, it's about a NEW YORK soccer team, glorifying the late Steve Ross, the number one corporate viper! For those who believe the world ends at the Hudson River only.\n5. Lively, free-wheeling amusement.\n6. A slick, gossipy documentary that pulses to the strains of James Brown, Parliament and the Love Unlimited Orchestra as it glosses over facts to make its questionable case for the Cosmos.\n7. How that dream was realized and what factors brought it and its league to a horrific crash scarcely a decade later is the intriguing drama that directors Paul Crowder and John Dower are able to reconstruct.\n8. An energetic and often enjoyable documentary, particularly for soccer fans.\n9. Once in a Lifetime does a wonderful job of showing that this collection of foreigners playing a foreign sport forged one of the great American sports stories.\n10. The movie is only so-so, borrowing a little from the VH-1 school of popumentary but lacking the snazzy production values.\n\nWhat is a brief summary of the following reviews?", "targets": "You don't have to be a soccer fan to enjoy this stylish, breezy slice of 1970s sports history."}
{"inputs": "1. An electrifying time-travel thriller worthy of comparison to THE TERMINATOR.\n2. Spectacular. Packed with intelligence and feeling. The year's most excitingly original movie.\n3. The smartest movie of the year and the best action movie of the year.\n4. A mishmash of futuristic conventions and clich\u00e9s cobbled together as something we have never quite seen before.\n5. A disappointment from an ingenious and intelligent filmmaker\n6. An outlandish vision of the near-future which may defy credibility but is bracingly entertaining.\n7. Looper is a classic piece of sci-fi cinema, riddled with brilliant ideas, a complex and satisfying narrative and, most importantly, a heartbeat.\n8. There's a bit of Twelve Monkeys, more than a dash of Terminator 2.\n9. Rian Johnson's 'Looper' is one of the year's best films... a huge jump forward for a filmmaker whose first two films both exhibited a strong, clear voice.\n10. Nothing quite excites and disturbs us as the prospect of time travel. Looper exploits that tension for all its worth.\n\nWhat is a brief summary of the following reviews?", "targets": "As thought-provoking as it is thrilling, Looper delivers an uncommonly smart, bravely original blend of futuristic sci-fi and good old-fashioned action."}
{"inputs": "1. Momma's Man, completely unshakeable, is implicitly nostalgic, about a nostalgic man, but only because it has such an unsentimental commitment to the gap between past and present.\n2. The movie is quiet and minimal in its dialogue, and it has flashes of humor and thoughtfulness. However, it's also unbearably slow and hard to empathize with Mikey.\n3. The production has a patient, observant tone, which almost disguises the fact that Momma's Man can't decide what kind of movie it wants to be.\n4. The main character in Momma's Man shuffles through life like he's been poleaxed, and you may feel the same after you watch this slow-motion indie exercise about a grown-up who returns home and can't leave.\n5. It works from a specific place and lets audiences relate to that place, and the people in it, like trusted intimates.\n6. The film drags at times, and watching Boren take Mikey further and further into a state of absolute immobility is difficult to watch, but his performance is so spot-on that you can't help but be drawn into figuring out what's going on with him.\n7. Azazel Jacobs' lo-fi indie comedy unfolds slowly but with patient precision.\n8. It's a beguiling premise, and one writer-director Azazel Jacobs explores with skill, tenderness, and prodding wit.\n9. Perhaps the most indispensable cast member, however, is the Jacobs' dwelling, their residence since 1966.\n10. Enjoyable, thought-provoking and emotionally engaging independent drama with a great central performance from Matt Boren.\nBased on these individual reviews, what is the critic consensus?", "targets": "Moody yet touching, Momma's Man successfully illustrates with elegant simplicity the struggles of a man consumed with his adolescence."}
{"inputs": "1. [Austin] Powers (coming again July 26) now has competition in pure silliness.\n2. A joyful mix of high and low humor, pulled off with style and an eye for glamour.\n3. One can't help but feel that either the filmmakers missed some golden opportunities or that the source material simply ran dry before the picture could run its course.\n4. \"It's all just an advertisement for the funkadelic soundtrack.\"\n5. It combines relentless energy with an aura of good nature for a formula that works.\n6. Like any one of a number of Saturday Night Live movies, Undercover Brother is fifteen funny minutes of material stretched thin over two hours.\n7. The smartest bonehead comedy of the summer.\n8. It's about keeping it funny, and on that score Undercover Brother is right on.\n9. The enjoyable Undercover Brother, a zany mix of Saturday Night Live-style parody, '70s Blaxploitation films and goofball action comedy gone wild, dishes out a ton of laughs that everyone can enjoy.\n10. A colorful, cool and completely hilarious ride that'll have you rolling through the outtakes.\nBased on these individual reviews, what is the critic consensus?", "targets": "Fast-paced and filled with racial gags, Undercover Brother serves up plenty of laughs and sharp satire."}
{"inputs": "1. Tom Hanks woos Catherine Zeta-Jones and Kumar Pallana spins plates...good times.\n2. Hanks ... is the perfect actor for this role, balancing the absurdist humor and heartbreak of Viktor's predicament and adding his own considerable good nature.\n3. Holds several small treasures and one crown jewel of a performance by Tom Hanks.\n4. There are so many little details that give the movie its humor, its warmth, and its charm. It's full of unexpected surprises - every sentimental moment is perfectly placed.\n5. To watch The Terminal is to be in one -- your plane delayed, your future on hold, your pass in hand and nothing to board.\n6. This terminally bumpy mishmash of every bad contrivance ever made on film never takes flight.\n7. Attention, Academy voters: This film needs to win for Production Design. Also, Tom Hanks is God.\n8. ...a fairytale triumph about the immigrant experience in America...\n9. Alex McDowell's set is so impressive, it outshines everything else in the movie, including Hanks. But as far as the lackluster story goes, it barely gets off the ground.\n10. Spielberg and Hank turn this 'delay' into a delight.\n\nWhat is a brief summary of the following reviews?", "targets": "Tom Hanks and the rest of the amiable cast make this bumpy ride worth sitting through."}
{"inputs": "1. You watch it, figure out how it works, and then never have to interact with it ever again.\n2. A witty, well-made addition to the [time travel] subgenre.\n3. While it isn't that hard to stay a step or two ahead of Timecrimes, the movie is still a nifty little genre piece, an old-fashioned science-fiction mind-game with a healthy dollop of 'Oh, the irony.'\n4. more tantalizing than satisfying\n5. If only American sci-fi filmmaking was this clever and involving.\n6. A grimly funny sci-fi determinist's challenge to the very idea of free will.\n7. By the end, details fall into place with a minimum amount of exposition or explicit explanation, making it the best kind of action movie -- the kind that's actually about action.\n8. Low-budget Spanish thriller about a guy that stumbles hours into the past and winds up trying to correct his last few mistakes can't survive its contrived plot contortions, non-characters, or \"well, duh\" obviousness.\n9. Vigalondo's film wastes little time in foregrounding the act of seeing.\n10. Even though Vigalondo's obvious direction lingers over every carefully arranged tile in the toppling-domino plot, there's still some sinister amusement in watching them stack and fall.\nBased on these individual reviews, what is the critic consensus?", "targets": "Timecrimes is a low-budget thriller that's well-crafted and loaded with dark humor and bizarre twists."}
{"inputs": "1. Dear Frankie is a sticky ball of sap, and you shouldn't let its accent or film-festival appearances convince you otherwise.\n2. It's the lack of sentiment at the right time that proves to be the film's undoing.\n3. It may have you reaching for your Kleenex at the end, but at least Dear Frankie triggers audience sniffles the old-fashioned way: it earns them.\n4. A rarity: a heartstring-puller that's never manipulative, a tearjerker that's never sentimental or maudlin, and a drama that soars whenever it should be in free fall.\n5. A bittersweet bonbon of a drama, full of the old fashioned literary touches that a well-written letter still can deliver in the age of e-mail.\n6. Mortimer creates a complex and sympathetic portrait of a mother struggling to give her son anything she can, while McElhone portrays the son as a wise, perceptive lad who can handle more challenges than his mother is willing to allow.\n7. Dear Frankie will win you over in spite of your reservations.\n8. As the story takes some surprising turns, it works like a slow infection: Patient audience members may find themselves awakening to the story in much the same way the characters awaken to their own capacities for tenderness.\n9. The pain that's evoked in this small, warm film -- the deep and unspoken yearning of child -- is as universal as it is heartbreaking.\n10. A small movie with a big soul and no easy formula for the happiness of its big-hearted characters.\n\nWrite a one sentence summary of the reviews above.", "targets": "Dear Frankie is a small, good-hearted film with fine performances."}
{"inputs": "Which movie is the following review about?\n\nShocking, then powerful.", "targets": "towelhead"}
{"inputs": "1. Over long with a muddled story and a gaggle of wasted talent, Silent Hill is a spectacular misfire.\n2. As a fluke, I took my mom (also named Rose) to the screening. She doesn't like SF or horror and doesn't even know what a video game is, yet she ended up really liking it! How weird is that?\n3. the closest you'll get to actually having a nightmare in a movie theatre outside of a midnight screening of David Lynch's Eraserhead.\n4. There's absolutely nothing of merit here to discuss other than its loyalty to the original source material.\n5. While Gans admittedly shows us some pretty spooky stuff, his energy begins to flag somewhere around the 60-minute mark.\n6. As a nightmarish vision of hell on earth, Silent Hill is a triumph of production and art design. As a coherent story, it's little more than a string of video game scenarios.\n7. Silent Hill is like an endurance test to get to the \"'truth', but it's ultimately a gyp because it still doesn't make sense when you get there.\n8. Just like the game, which is an achievement and a disappointment all in one.\n9. No thrills on this hill\n10. Radha Mitchell is the reason to sit through this overblown Grand Guignol entertainment from the director of the similarly overblown \"Brotherhood of the Wolf.\"\nWhat is the consensus?", "targets": "Silent Hill is visually impressive, but as with many video game adaptations, it's plagued by inane dialogue, a muddled plot, and an overlong runtime."}
{"inputs": "Write an ordered list of reviews about \"dude wheres my car\".", "targets": "1. Leiner's lame-brained travesty shoots for wacky but instead ends up being intensely irritating.\n2. ...has the advantage of being only eighty-three minutes long and the disadvantage of seeming like an eternity.\n3. To paraphrase Bart Simpson, it achieves the impossible by both sucking and blowing at the same time.\n4. The movie consists of a series of really stupid hit and miss jokes, pratfalls and sight gags. Surprisingly, there are more hits than misses.\n5. A painful, wearying slice of pure drivel.\n6. None of the jokes are funny, sex is referred to far too often, and Seann William Scott's acting is beyond the pale.\n7. Just irredeemably bad. It's not smart, it's not original, it's not charming, and it's certainly not funny.\n8. Even if Dude, Where's My Car? would rate a zero on the Laugh-o-Meter, at least it is a fairly good-spirited and colorful film that produces a few smiles.\n9. The definition of aiming low is when the John Hughes film you're ripping off is Weird Science.\n10. Daft and lovable and even kinda daring, Dude deserves its truly clueless studio's belabored support."}
{"inputs": "1. It's well worth seeing, because it is well made -- apart from a few gaps in logic -- and well acted.\n2. Hard Candy is not perfect, but it is a provocative piece of filmmaking with a dark and daring heart that makes it worth seeing.\n3. If Slade's intent is so clever, then why is the film so stupid as to hamfist a two-hour anti-pedophilia PSA down the throats of an entire culture that, by and large, already agrees with the premise...?\n4. A calculated provocation with pretensions to public service value (think of the infamous 'molester' episode of 'Diff'rent Strokes').\n5. ... icky, incoherent thriller ...\n6. The aptly named Hard Candy is a challenging, flawed but strangely engrossing film.\n7. Hard Candy is an exploitation film, with very little happening but a guy getting tortured for about 75 minutes of screen time.\n8. ... a film that gives you something to think about, raising questions that linger long after the theater lights have brightened.\n9. It's cinematic S&M, a bondage-control game masquerading as a thriller.\n10. ... no matter who does what to whom, what you're looking at is My Torture Session with Andrew, in one way or another.\nBased on these individual reviews, what is the critic consensus?", "targets": "Disturbing, controversial, but entirely engrossing, Hard Candy is well written with strong lead performances, especially that of newcomer Ellen Page. A movie that stays with the viewer long after leaving the theater."}
{"inputs": "The critic consesnsus is: Though a minor entry in Eastwood's body of work, Gran Torino is nevertheless a humorous, touching, and intriguing old-school parable.. What reviews supported this critic consensus?", "targets": "1. The genius of Clint Eastwood is evident in the fact that nobody else could get away with this.\n2. A brilliant commentary on a lot of earlier Clint Eastwood roles.\n3. Eastwood directs with his usual relaxed pace and bursts of intensity, a style that's pleasing to watch -- and which, also as usual, never fully compensates for any shortcomings of the script handed to him.\n4. The Eastwood legend is set against false sentiment, pot-pourried politics. There's no Disney in this Walt.\n5. It's a monumentally great film and keeps you spellbound till the lights come back up again.\n6. Impressively directed, emotionally engaging drama with a strong script and a terrific performance from Clint Eastwood.\n7. Gran Torino is made without fuss and acted out with the kind of natural grace only a real titan of the cinema could manage. And Clint is a titan - one of the best directors in America and a performer whose range has extended mightily throughout his career\n8. they don't make movies like this anymore\n9. Eastwood gives us a morbid take on righting wrongs in a world that lends no help to the victimized...\n10. I understand that Eastwood meant well, and it is interesting to fill up a tried-and-true movie formula with this much frank racism in order to make it different, but Gran Torino is just a well-intentioned mess."}
{"inputs": "1. A fine script from director Steven Zaillian gives all involved plenty to chew.\n2. Part of the film's problem may be in Travolta, who is never entirely convincing, and this works against a film that is trying to make the transformation of his character into its centerpiece.\n3. A very nuts-and-bolts look at a civil action against two major corporations as seen through the eyes of the lawyer who brought the action and risked his law firm and his career on the case.\n4. This film's good enough for the big screen, but save some dough and see an early show.\n5. Here is a film not interested in the surprise twists of other courtroom movies, but focuses on the strategy of the law.\n6. Worth seeing for Robert Duvall's performance alone.\n7. The film is so daring because it features a protagonist that we cannot and do not sympathize with.\n8. My only real problem is with the script.\n9. More complex, subtle, perplexing and memorable than the usual courtroom theatrics.\n10. It's not bad, but with everything else out there, I won't recommend it.\nWhat is the consensus?", "targets": "Intelligent and unconventional."}
{"inputs": "Write a one sentence review of the movie \"1146572-honeymooners\".", "targets": "This pointless remake of the classic TV series only offers generic characters and gags."}
{"inputs": "The critic consesnsus is: Grudge Match is sporadically funny but meandering, and its strong cast largely mired in a plot that's overrun with clich\u00e9s.. What reviews supported this critic consensus?", "targets": "1. Mildly hypnotic.\n2. Sly and Bobby duke it out in a massively underwhelming geriatric title fight.\n3. It's a little annoying that this high-concept marketing project (Rocky vs Raging Bull!) is as entertaining as it is: we want to hate it, as tired actors are sending up their own faded images.\n4. Never have I wanted to un-see a film more badly than this.\n5. Stallone looks like someone who chooses his next project with the aid of a blindfold and a dartboard.\n6. An embarrassment from start to finish.\n7. For all its many flaws, Grudge Match wins you over - but it's a points decision!\n8. There's nothing you won't see coming, from the plot to the preponderance of weight gags that generally end with \"but you ate it\".\n9. It's not a travesty but it lacks suspense. You don't care who wins, perhaps because neither Stallone nor DeNiro wanted to play the bad guy.\n10. Grudge Match doesn't quite deliver on its Rocky vs Raging Bull premise but it remains watchable thanks to engaging, committed performances and a script that knows how to effectively marshal its multiple clich\u00e9s."}
{"inputs": "Here are some reviews for a movie: 1. Skip the voting and hand [Spacek] the Oscar now.\n2. Fields' elegant storytelling is layered with profound details\n3. May not be the landmark film some will stupidly, inevitably label it (and it may be too frail to withstand the subsequent backlash), but it stands out as a sharply crafted family ode of bracing candor.\n4. The actors, especially the leads, give performances ... rich, connected and full of nuance and spontaneity.\n5. A rare cinematic creature: a very depressing film that gives you a lift with the sheer magic of its craft.\n6. We sense from its opening minutes that we are in the hands of accomplished storytellers.\n7. Like most movies directed by actors, this is a wonderful acting showcase.\n8. It's a testament to the cast and crew that they pull that off and create such an engaging, moving and ultimately rather shocking experience.\n9. The multi-leveled motivations are so convincingly established that the outcome follows ineluctably.\n10. Todd Field has constructed a remarkable first feature, directing with patient, effective pacing and a good eye for detail.\n\nWhat was the overall consensus about the movie?", "targets": "Expertly crafted and performed, In the Bedroom is a quietly wrenching portrayal of grief."}
{"inputs": "1. Director Tony Scott delivers in this exciting thrill ride.\n2. Scott proves once again that action movies don't need to be a headache-inducing, bright, loud, irritating experience, but instead can be something more when given the right treatment.\n3. The title, then, is probably referring to the human spirit. That's corny, but it works.\n4. Despite Tony Scott managing to maintain his high-octane style, the relative simplicity of the plot gives Unstoppable a more intimate feel than his usual bombastic actioner\n5. Silly, and very satisfying.\n6. Unstoppable is a pure thrill ride from beginning to end. Well-staged action, strong performances and great direction make it one of the most exciting films of the year.\n7. Like the train itself, Unstoppable moves a breakneck speed and delivers good, old fashioned fun.\n8. Unstoppable is the sort of movie in which characters recite dialogue like 'we're not talking about a train, we're talking about a missile the size of The Chrysler Building'... an incredibly fun time at the cinema.\n9. Tony Scott's cheap theatrics have become more cliched and predictable than scheduled stops on railway tracks.\n10. ... As the train picks up speed, the movie does the same.\nBased on these individual reviews, what is the critic consensus?", "targets": "As fast, loud, and relentless as the train at the center of the story, Unstoppable is perfect popcorn entertainment -- and director Tony Scott's best movie in years."}
{"inputs": "1. I wanted to scream at Osama: Look, your life is at stake, stop crying and climb the tree like a boy!\n2. What you see isn't surprising, but living through it -- experiencing the cruel and arbitrary justice of the Taliban through a 12-year-old's eyes -- puts a knot in your stomach that lasts beyond the film's closing credits.\n3. Imagine if we could see films from previous centuries -- records of slavery, the Great Fire of London, the Black Plague. Osama is like a film from some long-ago age.\n4. Despite an absence of subtlety, the film has a very real impact.\n5. Barmak tells his story without a ton of explanation... often, we have no more idea of what's going on than our hero does, which increases the film's sense of danger and fear.\n6. Works simply as the story of one unlucky young girl.\n7. We feel her fear and are moved by her plight because her will and childhood are torn from her not only by the Taliban but her own family.\n8. ...the sad truth is that potential viewers would be far better off watching a documentary on the rise and fall of the Taliban.\n9. captures with a terrifying purity . . . the claustrophobia of being trapped . . .within the confines of one's own body in a land where being female has been criminalized\n10. Derives most of its power from providing a clear window on a previously obscured world.\n\nWrite a one sentence summary of the reviews above.", "targets": "Osama is bitterly honest, deeply disturbing, and utterly worth watching."}
{"inputs": "Write an ordered list of reviews about \"indiana jones and the kingdom of the crystal skull\".", "targets": "1. Crystal Skull is the worst in the series with some really bad twists and dull moments, but the action scenes alone save the film and warrants at least one viewing.\n2. Ford is vitally and vibrantly present every moment on screen.\n3. Awesome production design and death-defying stunts mask the movie's flaws: uninvolving relationships and narrative hodge-podge.\n4. Even with the ponderous dialogue, there is considerable fun, and it's good to see that Indy, though slightly weary, still has the goods.\n5. Even in its inflated and creaky fourth incarnation, the Indy series retains a certain unassuming quality, at least compared to Hollywood's recent monstrous productions.\n6. A rollicking class reunion that stands as the second best entry in the venerable series.\n7. It is a load of old nonsense, of course, but the journey is worth the price of admission.\n8. The role belongs to Ford, and he is his usual sly self, with dry comic delivery and intrepid air, which was always more important than death-defying acrobatics.\n9. It feels as lively and buoyant, as effortlessly entertaining, as you could realistically want in an Indiana Jones flick.\n10. Deft, clever and fast-paced; it hits all the nostalgic touchstones and introduces memorable, worthwhile new players."}
{"inputs": "Write a one sentence review of the movie \"exploding girl\".", "targets": "Its languid pace and willfully understated narrative may test the patience of some viewers, but Bradley Rust Gray's gentle direction and a gripping performance from Zoe Kazan lend The Exploding Girl an appealing, melancholy beauty."}
{"inputs": "Which movie is the following review about?\n\nIt isn't bulletproof by a long shot, but director Nimrod Antal's grungy gang-of-thieves pic is tough and, for this genre, surprisingly ethical.", "targets": "armored"}
{"inputs": "The critic consesnsus is: Uneven, but in terms of epic scope and grand spectacle, Ben-Hur still ranks among Hollywood's finest examples of pure entertainment.. What reviews supported this critic consensus?", "targets": "1. A majestic achievement, representing a superb blending of the motion picture arts by master craftsmen.\n2. ...fairly defines the word 'epic.'\n3. Mr. Wyler and his money-free producers have smartly and effectively laid stress on the powerful and meaningful personal conflicts that are strong in this old heroic tale.\n4. Predictable but magnificent and satisfying.\n5. Widescreen biblical epic is bloated with spectacle and thin on plot.\n6. One of the most exciting action epics ever made, blustery \"Ben-Hur\" is filled with over-the-top performances, but memorable scenes.\n7. Charlton Heston plays Charlton Heston, but his charismatic macho woodeness carries the film like no other actor of his day.\n8. A defini\u0437\u0433o cl\u0431ssica do \u0439pico.\n9. Shows how difficult forgiveness is once the heart has hardened in hate.\n10. If we later came to realize that movies could be a whole lot better than Ben-Hur, that still doesn't detract from the enjoyment the film still provides."}
{"inputs": "1. The bad news (or perhaps this is the good news, if you're a 10-year-old boy) is that the big yucks (in both senses of that word) are derived from fart lighting, elaborate poo gags, and an attenuated bit about a dog who gets his bits frozen to a porch.\n2. Beyond a random laugh or two, this is pretty much a waste of celluloid that all but the most rabid of Spade fans would probably be wise to avoid.\n3. Woefully unfunny.\n4. Life is a garden. If something stinks, bury it.\n5. Director Dennie Gordon tries too hard to milk sympathy for the none-too-bright Joe, who at one point adopts what he thinks is a meteor for a friend. Of course, it turns out to be more toxic waste, like Joe Dirt.\n6. The first Saturday Night Live-related comedy to produce belly laughs in a long, long time.\n7. Joe Dirt knows its audience and doesn't stint on the flatulence jokes, poop jokes, leg-humping dogs and moments of homo-panic.\n8. Dirt's cup runneth over with excrement, fornicating animals and that perennial favorite of Hollywood comedy, homophobic slurs.\n9. You start to wonder if choking to death on popcorn wouldn't be less painful than sitting through this.\n10. Teeters on the fine line between condescending and corrupt.\n\nWrite a one sentence summary of the reviews above.", "targets": "If you fall within the target audience of Joe Dirt, you may find it funny. Otherwise, the jokes will seem like a tired retread."}
{"inputs": "Write an ordered list of reviews about \"1124859-grind\".", "targets": "1. Cinematic fecal matter at its best.\n2. Pretty much a complete waste of time.\n3. If you love skateboarding, feel free to rent Grind, hit the mute button and fast forward through anything that doesn't involve a half-pipe.\n4. Suitable entertainment for boys too young to shave.\n5. First-time director Casey La Scala may have taken his fledgling film's title too literally, grinding together borrowed ingredients like a mischievous chef.\n6. It's the sort of movie that makes American Wedding look... subtle by comparison. [T]his summer's notorious bomb Gigli is starting to look better and better.\n7. Director La Scala can't direct his way out of this can of half-baked beans.\n8. Brings Out The Worst Of A Fringe Sport That Fights For Mainstream Acceptance...this Film Fails So Completely In Almost Every Aspect.\n9. Viewing the earthbound sequences in \"Grind\" is like watching the dialogue portions of pornos. Pity the viewers who catch this one without the benefit of a fast-forward or chapter select button.\n10. You've seen and heard it before, dude."}
{"inputs": "1. The movie deconstructs Woolf in a smug, didactic way, using her whimsical fantasy as the vehicle for a belabored satirical assault upon \"the patriarchy.\"\n2. It is a time-tripping, gender-bending fantasia with a cunning feminist edge, featuring the strikingly androgynous Tilda Swinton in the title role.\n3. Compared with Potter's bold, beautiful, original, and witty first feature, The Gold Diggers, this is safe, crowd-flattering stuff, the Driving Miss Daisy of art pictures -- a film with practically no ideas at all, but lots of fancy trimmings.\n4. It wanders from the frozen London of the 1600s to the battlefields of World War I and has fun all the way. You haven't seen anything like it.\n5. Written and directed by Sally Potter, Orlando takes a droll approach to subject matter usually attended by the utmost solemnity.\n6. What it perhaps lacks in content, the film more than makes up for in its stunning design and accesible, humorous approach.\n7. It seems just as fresh, spry and quirky now as it did back then.\n8. Sally Potter has made a beautiful, if decidedly wobbly, movie out of Virginia Woolfs novel about a 16th-century nobleman who evolves, across some 400 years, into a modern woman in her mid-30s. Swinton plays both male and female Orlando with cool humor.\n9. Tilda Swinton's performance as Orlando in this adaptation of Virginia Woolf's novel is luminous and thrilling, an omnisexual romp through 400 years of history.\n10. Suffocatingly beautiful, Orlando is a precious trifle whose literary pedigree intimidated audiences into ignoring its sublime silliness.\n\nWhat is a brief summary of the following reviews?", "targets": "Orlando can't match its visual delights with equally hefty narrative -- but it's so much fun to watch that it doesn't need to."}
{"inputs": "1. Imagine a Larry Clark movie minus the constant alarmism, given a decent script and competent actors. I know, it's tough.\n2. Director Nick Cassavetes should be commended for the unflinching manner in which he tells the story -- it packs a punch, although it lingers too long to be truly unsettling.\n3. Alpha Dog may be more crass exploitation than an earnest attempt at laying out the facts of a crime, but it's exciting and watchable for anyone willing to romp in the mud for two hours.\n4. Alpha Dog, like most of its cast, is posing.\n5. Wants to be a horror story of sorts, but winds up being tedious and over-indulgent.\n6. Nick Cassavetes' new film, Alpha Dog, has a compelling, ripped-from-the-headlines vibe.\n7. Apart from the grim forebodings of tragedy, writer-director Nick Cassavetes seems to have modeled this ambitious docudrama on Larry Clark's kiddie-porn shockers, but he doesn't know what to leave out, and the movie becomes excessively complicated.\n8. In his best film to date, Nick Cassavetes directs with ferocious energy, taking scenes past their logical stopping points and pushing his actors to, but never over, the precipice of absurdity.\n9. Misses its opportunity to be a smart, investigative crime drama ... a frivolous and shallow affair about partying teens.\n10. Alpha Dog operates without outrage -- not because the behavior of the people in the movie isn't horrifying but because the movie knows it is much too late to save those bouncing, happy kids we glimpsed in the opening seconds.\nBased on these individual reviews, what is the critic consensus?", "targets": "A glossy yet unflinching portrait of violent, hedonistic teenagers. Bruce Willis and Sharon Stone chew the scenery, while Justin Timberlake gives a noteworthy performance."}
{"inputs": "Here are some reviews for a movie: 1. David Frankel directs with a modesty and restraint that favors the people over the situations, and he really captures the chemistry of a family dog in the mix.\n2. Parental Content Review\n3. I honestly believe you'd have to have a heart of stone not to fall in love with Marley & Me.\n4. While the movie was fun and entertaining, don't believe the advertisements because the film may have one of the most emotional endings I have ever seen.\n5. Despite its initial blandness it does evolve in something quite touching.\n6. While Marley is just as guilty of going for the Big Cry as your typical Debra Winger movie, the equal focus on both the adult subject matter and the dog make for a more enjoyable experience than, frankly, I was expecting it to be.\n7. There's cuteness aplenty and tender, unpretentious performances from Aniston, Alan Arkin as Grogan's boss and particularly Wilson.\n8. I'm one of the least sensitive people I know and I wept like a fool.\n9. if you do go and see this film, I would urge you to stop off at your local video store on the way home in order to rent \"My Dog Skip\" and see what a movie of this type looks like when it is done well.\n10. At the end of Marley & Me you don't leave the theater with a sense that anything much has been learned, only that a fixture in the Grogans' comfortable suburban lives has been removed.\n\nWhat was the overall consensus about the movie?", "targets": "Pet owners should love it, but Marley and Me is only sporadically successful in wringing drama and laughs from its scenario."}
{"inputs": "1. ...suffers from an egregiously \"inside\" sensibility that ensures neophytes will periodically be left scratching their heads at the whole thing.\n2. A celebration of Peter Pan-like spirits who felt the freedom to express themselves before anybody cared.\n3. Aaron Rose and Joshua Leonard don't properly contextualize this mini-scene within the larger art world, nor provide basic background on their speakers.\n4. Regardless of Rose's intentions, his underachieving airiness is both entertaining and perfectly fitting for the slacker ennui of his clique's rising years.\n5. The cultural time capsule doubles as a testament to the joys of outsiders bonding, with interviewees emphasizing how they finally felt like they belonged somewhere after years of asphyxiating alone on the fringe.\n6. A product of the movement as much as an ode to it, the film is a gem because of the immaturity and intimacy that it shares with those featured in it.\n7. A shamelessly self-promoting homage documentary to a like-minded group of rebel pop culture artists, who work together in a NYC collective but do independent work.\n8. As you watch the movie wholeheartedly and uncritically celebrate the group's \"nonconformist\" ethos (shouldn't someone gently break it to them?), you can feel the energy being sucked out of you.\n9. An amiable portrait of the artist as a scruffy slacker, and a useful jumping off point for anyone interested in investigating some of the cultural issues that marked the 1990s and the start of the new millennium.\n10. Like the art scene it documents, Beautiful Losers is chaotic, anarchic, rambling and populated by charismatic freaks with statement T-shirts, complicated haircuts and impossibly rare trainers.\nBased on these individual reviews, what is the critic consensus?", "targets": "An insightful if fawning documentary that explores a group of 90s NYC artists."}
{"inputs": "Write a one sentence review of the movie \"timecode\".", "targets": "Not much of a story, but the execution is interesting."}
{"inputs": "Summarize the following movie reviews:\n\n1. A decent version of a comic book brought to the big screen with moments of gleaming intensity.\n2. ...a fundamentally conservative venture that nevertheless should be able to furnish both fans and Philistines alike a few moments of genuine, if shallow, pleasure.\n3. If all you need is the most surface of surface, you might like Daredevil. If you choose to think about it for a second, you can't.\n4. Time to give the Devil his due.\n5. How is a superhero going to protect Gotham . . . um, er, Hell's Kitchen if he can't even hang onto his own movie?\n6. It has the usual pop and zing of its ilk - the moody sets, the flashy edits, the elaborately choreographed fight scenes - but its underlying pulse draws it along in wholly unique ways.\n7. For all its initial originality, Daredevil eventually smacks of more calculation than the Batman series.\n8. When it comes to grading this movie, D is indeed for Daredevil.\n9. Adaptation de bande-dessin\u00e9e acceptable, DAREDEVIL pr\u00e9sente quelques d\u00e9fauts aga\u00e7ants qui l'emp\u0119chent de s'\u00e9lever au rang de SPIDER-MAN.\n10. Too hollow and pedestrian to dramatize the conflict between its hero's vigilante streak and his moral straits imaginatively.", "targets": "While Ben Affleck fits the role and the story is sporadically interesting, Daredevil is ultimately a dull, brooding origin story that fails to bring anything new to the genre."}
{"inputs": "1. Like no Australian film I've seen. Timeless and also utterly contemporary, it will leave hearts bruised, but aching with joy.\n2. Visually stunning, this impressive feature debut places an Aboriginal love on the run tale against a fascinating socio-cultural context that's little known to non-Australians.\n3. Non-actors Rowan McNamara and Marissa Gibson don't so much perform their roles as live out the lives of those who have been around them. Their ability to involve us and to make their characters real is astonishing.\n4. It's not in 3D, you won't have heard of the cast, and I suspect the budget was in the low five figures. However, this tender little gem is as good as anything you'll see this week.\n5. Filled with brusque tenderness and dusty beauty, director Warwick Thornton's first feature is a fine and moving example of outback neorealism.\n6. It couldn't be more powerful.\n7. Director Warwick Thornton has a sharp eye and a big heart but his film is relentlessly grim.\n8. Tender and beautifully acted, it's a unflinchingly bleak glimpse of life on Australia's margins.\n9. Is it hopeful, or entirely hopeless? I don't know - but found myself finally moved by this desperately sad film and by the performances of Rowan McNamara and Marissa Gibson as the lovers themselves.\n10. One of the most original, impressive Australian films for years.\n\nWhat is a brief summary of the following reviews?", "targets": "Alternately beautiful and heartrending, Samson and Delilah is terrifically acted and shot, and presents a complex portrait of what it means to be Australian."}
{"inputs": "The critic consesnsus is: Blending hand-to-hand combat with breathtaking stunts and slapstick comedy, Supercop reminds us why Jackie Chan is one of the world's great entertainers.. What reviews supported this critic consensus?", "targets": "1. Chan is fun to watch, no matter what silliness one has to put up with.\n2. A super-charged, bang-up action flick the likes of which most Americans still have never seen.\n3. An astonishingly fluid and funny movie that makes most American action pictures seem lethargic.\n4. Jackie Chan makes his second leap at the American movie audience, following up Rumble in the Bronx with a far sharper mix of stunts, martial arts and Chan's own brand of breathtaking slapstick comedy.\n5. Capable female action stars are a non-entity in Hollywood, but Khan packs a wallop both literally and in her screen presence.\n6. Supercop is a better movie than Rumble in the Bronx, in large part because it's funnier.\n7. Raucous, hilarious, and choreographed with breathtaking daring and subtlety, Supercop kicks ass with charm and wit.\n8. Super thrills, super spills, super laughs and super stunts.\n9. With martial arts superstar Jackie Chan, older may be better.\n10. The plot is nothing more than an excuse for the series of spectacular action sequences in which Chan shows both his physical skills and great sense of humour."}
{"inputs": "1. Una digna obra, con un suspenso magistralmente llevado, que se gana por completo la recomendaci\u00f3n pero que no llega a ser tan buena como promet\u00eda.\n2. Yes, it's grappling with grown-up subject matter, but did The Interpreter have to be quite so lifeless?\n3. Pollack, has confused subtle with muddled and so the film inhabits [a] middle ground between complex and convoluted.\n4. Subversive, maybe, but hardly explosive.\n5. The smart political thriller; a classic breed of cinema that faces permanent extinction thanks to soulless efforts like this one.\n6. An old pro's demonstration of how a politically relevant big-release flick can still effectively be done.\n7. As far removed from the glory days of 1970s political thrillers as many diplomats are from the suffering which they're presented with. Lost in translation indeed.\n8. A polished and preposterous thriller, The Interpreter offers two excellent actors a chance to show off, but it's not half as important as it thinks it is.\n9. [A] reasonably effective and old-school geopolitical thriller.\n10. Preachy about forgiveness but still an intelligent thriller.\n\nWrite a one sentence summary of the reviews above.", "targets": "A polished and intelligent thriller, though marred by plot implausibilities."}