Initial commit

review_polarity/poldata.README.2.0

@@ -0,0 +1,118 @@
+
+=======
+
+Introduction
+
+This README v2.0 (June, 2004) for the v2.0 polarity dataset comes from
+the URL http://www.cs.cornell.edu/people/pabo/movie-review-data .
+
+=======
+
+What's New -- June, 2004
+
+This dataset represents an enhancement of the review corpus v1.0
+described in README v1.1: it contains more reviews, and labels were
+created with an improved rating-extraction system.
+
+=======
+
+Citation Info 
+
+This data was first used in Bo Pang and Lillian Lee,
+``A Sentimental Education: Sentiment Analysis Using Subjectivity Summarization 
+Based on Minimum Cuts'',  Proceedings of the ACL, 2004.
+
+@InProceedings{Pang+Lee:04a,
+  author =       {Bo Pang and Lillian Lee},
+  title =        {A Sentimental Education: Sentiment Analysis Using Subjectivity Summarization Based on Minimum Cuts},
+  booktitle =    "Proceedings of the ACL",
+  year =         2004
+}
+
+=======
+
+Data Format Summary 
+
+- review_polarity.tar.gz: contains this readme and  data used in
+  the experiments described in Pang/Lee ACL 2004.
+
+  Specifically:
+
+  Within the folder "txt_sentoken" are the 2000 processed down-cased
+  text files used in Pang/Lee ACL 2004; the names of the two
+  subdirectories in that folder, "pos" and "neg", indicate the true
+  classification (sentiment) of the component files according to our
+  automatic rating classifier (see section "Rating Decision" below).
+
+  File names consist of a cross-validation tag plus the name of the
+  original html file.  The ten folds used in the Pang/Lee ACL 2004 paper's
+  experiments were:
+
+     fold 1: files tagged cv000 through cv099, in numerical order
+     fold 2: files tagged cv100 through cv199, in numerical order     
+     ...
+     fold 10: files tagged cv900 through cv999, in numerical order
+
+  Hence, the file neg/cv114_19501.txt, for example, was labeled as
+  negative, served as a member of fold 2, and was extracted from the
+  file 19501.html in polarity_html.zip (see below).
+
+  Each line in each text file corresponds to a single sentence, as
+  determined by Adwait Ratnaparkhi's sentence boundary detector
+  MXTERMINATOR.
+
+  Preliminary steps were taken to remove rating information from the
+  text files, but only the rating information upon which the rating
+  decision was based is guaranteed to have been removed. Thus, if the
+  original review contains several instances of rating information,
+  potentially given in different forms, those not recognized as valid
+  ratings remain part of the review text.
+
+- polarity_html.zip: The original source files from which the
+  processed, labeled, and (randomly) selected data in
+  review_polarity.tar.gz was derived.
+
+  Specifically:  
+
+  This data consists of unprocessed, unlabeled html files from the
+  IMDb archive of the rec.arts.movies.reviews newsgroup,
+  http://reviews.imdb.com/Reviews. The files in review_polarity.tar.gz
+  represent a processed subset of these files. 
+
+=======
+
+Rating Decision (Appendix A)
+
+This section describes how we determined whether a review was positive
+or negative.
+
+The original html files do not have consistent formats -- a review may
+not have the author's rating with it, and when it does, the rating can
+appear at different places in the file in different forms.  We only
+recognize some of the more explicit ratings, which are extracted via a
+set of ad-hoc rules.  In essence, a file's classification is determined
+based on the first rating we were able to identify.
+
+
+- In order to obtain more accurate rating decisions, the maximum
+	rating must be specified explicitly, both for numerical ratings
+	and star ratings.  ("8/10", "four out of five", and "OUT OF
+	****: ***" are examples of rating indications we recognize.)
+
+- With a five-star system (or compatible number systems):
+	three-and-a-half stars and up are considered positive, 
+	two stars and below are considered negative.
+- With a four-star system (or compatible number system):
+	three stars and up are considered positive, 
+	one-and-a-half stars and below are considered negative.  
+- With a letter grade system:
+	B or above is considered positive,
+	C- or below is considered negative.
+
+We attempted to recognize half stars, but they are specified in an
+especially free way, which makes them difficult to recognize.  Hence,
+we may lose a half star very occasionally; but this only results in 2.5
+stars in five star system being categorized as negative, which is 
+still reasonable.
+
+

review_polarity/txt_sentoken/neg/cv000_29416.txt

@@ -0,0 +1,35 @@
+plot : two teen couples go to a church party , drink and then drive . 
+they get into an accident . 
+one of the guys dies , but his girlfriend continues to see him in her life , and has nightmares . 
+what's the deal ? 
+watch the movie and " sorta " find out . . . 
+critique : a mind-fuck movie for the teen generation that touches on a very cool idea , but presents it in a very bad package . 
+which is what makes this review an even harder one to write , since i generally applaud films which attempt to break the mold , mess with your head and such ( lost highway & memento ) , but there are good and bad ways of making all types of films , and these folks just didn't snag this one correctly . 
+they seem to have taken this pretty neat concept , but executed it terribly . 
+so what are the problems with the movie ? 
+well , its main problem is that it's simply too jumbled . 
+it starts off " normal " but then downshifts into this " fantasy " world in which you , as an audience member , have no idea what's going on . 
+there are dreams , there are characters coming back from the dead , there are others who look like the dead , there are strange apparitions , there are disappearances , there are a looooot of chase scenes , there are tons of weird things that happen , and most of it is simply not explained . 
+now i personally don't mind trying to unravel a film every now and then , but when all it does is give me the same clue over and over again , i get kind of fed up after a while , which is this film's biggest problem . 
+it's obviously got this big secret to hide , but it seems to want to hide it completely until its final five minutes . 
+and do they make things entertaining , thrilling or even engaging , in the meantime ? 
+not really . 
+the sad part is that the arrow and i both dig on flicks like this , so we actually figured most of it out by the half-way point , so all of the strangeness after that did start to make a little bit of sense , but it still didn't the make the film all that more entertaining . 
+i guess the bottom line with movies like this is that you should always make sure that the audience is " into it " even before they are given the secret password to enter your world of understanding . 
+i mean , showing melissa sagemiller running away from visions for about 20 minutes throughout the movie is just plain lazy ! ! 
+okay , we get it . . . there 
+are people chasing her and we don't know who they are . 
+do we really need to see it over and over again ? 
+how about giving us different scenes offering further insight into all of the strangeness going down in the movie ? 
+apparently , the studio took this film away from its director and chopped it up themselves , and it shows . 
+there might've been a pretty decent teen mind-fuck movie in here somewhere , but i guess " the suits " decided that turning it into a music video with little edge , would make more sense . 
+the actors are pretty good for the most part , although wes bentley just seemed to be playing the exact same character that he did in american beauty , only in a new neighborhood . 
+but my biggest kudos go out to sagemiller , who holds her own throughout the entire film , and actually has you feeling her character's unraveling . 
+overall , the film doesn't stick because it doesn't entertain , it's confusing , it rarely excites and it feels pretty redundant for most of its runtime , despite a pretty cool ending and explanation to all of the craziness that came before it . 
+oh , and by the way , this is not a horror or teen slasher flick . . . it's 
+just packaged to look that way because someone is apparently assuming that the genre is still hot with the kids . 
+it also wrapped production two years ago and has been sitting on the shelves ever since . 
+whatever . . . skip 
+it ! 
+where's joblo coming from ? 
+a nightmare of elm street 3 ( 7/10 ) - blair witch 2 ( 7/10 ) - the crow ( 9/10 ) - the crow : salvation ( 4/10 ) - lost highway ( 10/10 ) - memento ( 10/10 ) - the others ( 9/10 ) - stir of echoes ( 8/10 ) 

review_polarity/txt_sentoken/neg/cv001_19502.txt

@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
+the happy bastard's quick movie review 
+damn that y2k bug . 
+it's got a head start in this movie starring jamie lee curtis and another baldwin brother ( william this time ) in a story regarding a crew of a tugboat that comes across a deserted russian tech ship that has a strangeness to it when they kick the power back on . 
+little do they know the power within . . . 
+going for the gore and bringing on a few action sequences here and there , virus still feels very empty , like a movie going for all flash and no substance . 
+we don't know why the crew was really out in the middle of nowhere , we don't know the origin of what took over the ship ( just that a big pink flashy thing hit the mir ) , and , of course , we don't know why donald sutherland is stumbling around drunkenly throughout . 
+here , it's just " hey , let's chase these people around with some robots " . 
+the acting is below average , even from the likes of curtis . 
+you're more likely to get a kick out of her work in halloween h20 . 
+sutherland is wasted and baldwin , well , he's acting like a baldwin , of course . 
+the real star here are stan winston's robot design , some schnazzy cgi , and the occasional good gore shot , like picking into someone's brain . 
+so , if robots and body parts really turn you on , here's your movie . 
+otherwise , it's pretty much a sunken ship of a movie . 

review_polarity/txt_sentoken/neg/cv002_17424.txt

@@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
+it is movies like these that make a jaded movie viewer thankful for the invention of the timex indiglo watch . 
+based on the late 1960's television show by the same name , the mod squad tells the tale of three reformed criminals under the employ of the police to go undercover . 
+however , things go wrong as evidence gets stolen and they are immediately under suspicion . 
+of course , the ads make it seem like so much more . 
+quick cuts , cool music , claire dane's nice hair and cute outfits , car chases , stuff blowing up , and the like . 
+sounds like a cool movie , does it not ? 
+after the first fifteen minutes , it quickly becomes apparent that it is not . 
+the mod squad is certainly a slick looking production , complete with nice hair and costumes , but that simply isn't enough . 
+the film is best described as a cross between an hour-long cop show and a music video , both stretched out into the span of an hour and a half . 
+and with it comes every single clich ? . 
+it doesn't really matter that the film is based on a television show , as most of the plot elements have been recycled from everything we've already seen . 
+the characters and acting is nothing spectacular , sometimes even bordering on wooden . 
+claire danes and omar epps deliver their lines as if they are bored , which really transfers onto the audience . 
+the only one to escape relatively unscathed is giovanni ribisi , who plays the resident crazy man , ultimately being the only thing worth watching . 
+unfortunately , even he's not enough to save this convoluted mess , as all the characters don't do much apart from occupying screen time . 
+with the young cast , cool clothes , nice hair , and hip soundtrack , it appears that the film is geared towards the teenage mindset . 
+despite an american 'r' rating ( which the content does not justify ) , the film is way too juvenile for the older mindset . 
+information on the characters is literally spoon-fed to the audience ( would it be that hard to show us instead of telling us ? ) , dialogue is poorly written , and the plot is extremely predictable . 
+the way the film progresses , you likely won't even care if the heroes are in any jeopardy , because you'll know they aren't . 
+basing the show on a 1960's television show that nobody remembers is of questionable wisdom , especially when one considers the target audience and the fact that the number of memorable films based on television shows can be counted on one hand ( even one that's missing a finger or two ) . 
+the number of times that i checked my watch ( six ) is a clear indication that this film is not one of them . 
+it is clear that the film is nothing more than an attempt to cash in on the teenage spending dollar , judging from the rash of really awful teen-flicks that we've been seeing as of late . 
+avoid this film at all costs . 

review_polarity/txt_sentoken/neg/cv003_12683.txt

@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
+ " quest for camelot " is warner bros . ' first feature-length , fully-animated attempt to steal clout from disney's cartoon empire , but the mouse has no reason to be worried . 
+the only other recent challenger to their throne was last fall's promising , if flawed , 20th century fox production " anastasia , " but disney's " hercules , " with its lively cast and colorful palate , had her beat hands-down when it came time to crown 1997's best piece of animation . 
+this year , it's no contest , as " quest for camelot " is pretty much dead on arrival . 
+even the magic kingdom at its most mediocre -- that'd be " pocahontas " for those of you keeping score -- isn't nearly as dull as this . 
+the story revolves around the adventures of free-spirited kayley ( voiced by jessalyn gilsig ) , the early-teen daughter of a belated knight from king arthur's round table . 
+kayley's only dream is to follow in her father's footsteps , and she gets her chance when evil warlord ruber ( gary oldman ) , an ex-round table member-gone-bad , steals arthur's magical sword excalibur and accidentally loses it in a dangerous , booby-trapped forest . 
+with the help of hunky , blind timberland-dweller garrett ( carey elwes ) and a two-headed dragon ( eric idle and don rickles ) that's always arguing with itself , kayley just might be able to break the medieval sexist mold and prove her worth as a fighter on arthur's side . 
+ " quest for camelot " is missing pure showmanship , an essential element if it's ever expected to climb to the high ranks of disney . 
+there's nothing here that differentiates " quest " from something you'd see on any given saturday morning cartoon -- subpar animation , instantly forgettable songs , poorly-integrated computerized footage . 
+ ( compare kayley and garrett's run-in with the angry ogre to herc's battle with the hydra . 
+i rest my case . ) 
+even the characters stink -- none of them are remotely interesting , so much that the film becomes a race to see which one can out-bland the others . 
+in the end , it's a tie -- they all win . 
+that dragon's comedy shtick is awfully cloying , but at least it shows signs of a pulse . 
+at least fans of the early-'90s tgif television line-up will be thrilled to find jaleel " urkel " white and bronson " balki " pinchot sharing the same footage . 
+a few scenes are nicely realized ( though i'm at a loss to recall enough to be specific ) , and the actors providing the voice talent are enthusiastic ( though most are paired up with singers who don't sound a thing like them for their big musical moments -- jane seymour and celine dion ? ? ? ) . 
+but one must strain through too much of this mess to find the good . 
+aside from the fact that children will probably be as bored watching this as adults , " quest for camelot " 's most grievous error is its complete lack of personality . 
+and personality , we learn from this mess , goes a very long way . 

review_polarity/txt_sentoken/neg/cv004_12641.txt

@@ -0,0 +1,37 @@
+synopsis : a mentally unstable man undergoing psychotherapy saves a boy from a potentially fatal accident and then falls in love with the boy's mother , a fledgling restauranteur . 
+unsuccessfully attempting to gain the woman's favor , he takes pictures of her and kills a number of people in his way . 
+comments : stalked is yet another in a seemingly endless string of spurned-psychos-getting-their-revenge type movies which are a stable category in the 1990s film industry , both theatrical and direct-to-video . 
+their proliferation may be due in part to the fact that they're typically inexpensive to produce ( no special effects , no big name stars ) and serve as vehicles to flash nudity ( allowing them to frequent late-night cable television ) . 
+stalked wavers slightly from the norm in one respect : the psycho never actually has an affair ; on the contrary , he's rejected rather quickly ( the psycho typically is an ex-lover , ex-wife , or ex-husband ) . 
+other than that , stalked is just another redundant entry doomed to collect dust on video shelves and viewed after midnight on cable . 
+stalked does not provide much suspense , though that is what it sets out to do . 
+interspersed throughout the opening credits , for instance , a serious-sounding narrator spouts statistics about stalkers and ponders what may cause a man to stalk ( it's implicitly implied that all stalkers are men ) while pictures of a boy are shown on the screen . 
+after these credits , a snapshot of actor jay underwood appears . 
+the narrator states that " this is the story of daryl gleason " and tells the audience that he is the stalker . 
+of course , really , this is the story of restauranteur brooke daniels . 
+if the movie was meant to be about daryl , then it should have been called stalker not stalked . 
+okay . so we know who the stalker is even before the movie starts ; no guesswork required . 
+stalked proceeds , then , as it begins : obvious , obvious , obvious . 
+the opening sequence , contrived quite a bit , brings daryl and brooke ( the victim ) together . 
+daryl obsesses over brooke , follows her around , and tries to woo her . 
+ultimately rejected by her , his plans become more and more desperate and elaborate . 
+these plans include the all-time , psycho-in-love , cliche : the murdered pet . 
+for some reason , this genre's films require a dead pet to be found by the victim stalked . 
+stalked is no exception ( it's a cat this time -- found in the shower ) . 
+events like these lead to the inevitable showdown between stalker and stalked , where only one survives ( guess who it invariably always is and you'll guess the conclusion to this turkey ) . 
+stalked's cast is uniformly adequate : not anything to write home about but also not all that bad either . 
+jay underwood , as the stalker , turns toward melodrama a bit too much . 
+he overdoes it , in other words , but he still manages to be creepy enough to pass as the type of stalker the story demands . 
+maryam d'abo , about the only actor close to being a star here ( she played the bond chick in the living daylights ) , is equally adequate as the " stalked " of the title , even though she seems too ditzy at times to be a strong , independent business-owner . 
+brooke ( d'abo ) needs to be ditzy , however , for the plot to proceed . 
+toward the end , for example , brooke has her suspicions about daryl . 
+to ensure he won't use it as another excuse to see her , brooke decides to return a toolbox he had left at her place to his house . 
+does she just leave the toolbox at the door when no one answers ? 
+of course not . 
+she tries the door , opens it , and wanders around the house . 
+when daryl returns , he enters the house , of course , so our heroine is in danger . 
+somehow , even though her car is parked at the front of the house , right by the front door , daryl is oblivious to her presence inside . 
+the whole episode places an incredible strain on the audience's suspension of disbelief and questions the validity of either character's intelligence . 
+stalked receives two stars because , even though it is highly derivative and somewhat boring , it is not so bad that it cannot be watched . 
+rated r mostly for several murder scenes and brief nudity in a strip bar , it is not as offensive as many other thrillers in this genre are . 
+if you're in the mood for a good suspense film , though , stake out something else .