Example collocations logo

Quality in sentence

4328 examples of Quality in a sentence

No character in this movie has a single redeeming quality save for the Icelandic girl who doesn't even have a single line in English.
None of them had one singing redeeming quality.
When you're used to Lana Turner in the Postman Always Rings Twice, and compare it to this low budget, low talent, low quality film, well, I was just embarrassed for Ida Lupino's 'singing' (more like talking) and non-piano playing scenes.
I also noticed that their was defects in the film quality.
Cloying and sappy, the only redeeming quality of the film was its use of puppets in an attempt (albeit a failed one) to structure some kind of narrative.
The film quality and camera work was horrid; the dialog murky, the script seemed thrown together without much thought and the plot was thin if not nonexistent.
That is a movie that respects all the required quality's's of an MOVIE.
A good deal of discussion has been stimulated by the movie's final sequences that are apparently not expected by a viewer based upon what has come before, but in reality these comprise probably the only thoughtful portions of a poorly cobbled screenplay, and bids fair to make the work almost watchable, despite the shabby quality of the production as a whole.
I mean this is so-so quality home movie / student film stuff if you want to pass it around to family and friends for free.
The only redeeming quality of this film was the chick that smoked all the time.
It practically screams "low-budget" yet oddly I still found myself liking the film because although it lacked quality it abounded with energy.
There's simply no redeeming quality about this film.
I trusted that an actor (any of them) would judge the script and would not agree to participate in such low/now quality production.
He throws Ed Wood's name around like he can somehow compare, but he is far far from anything of that quality.
Famous as the British film so bad it had to be given away for free with a newspaper, the quality of this sub-Children's Film Foundation "thriller" can be guessed from the abnormal number of 10/10 votes it gets and the large number of rave reviews from posters with no posting history and no other reviews to their name.
Because Disney more often than not, ignores the animation quality and a need for a good plot in their sequels, this was actually a nice surprise.
I like the fact that they used little special effects which were bad, but they used none that were quality.
This movie is in a word, annoying to watch, from the terrible camera angles to the quality of dialogue and pacing.
But overall the result is disappointing, and it seems a lifetime ago that Neil Jordan was making quality movies of the likes of Mona Lisa.
The film quality, there isn't any.
The quality of "Our Gang" nosedived soon after moving from Hal Roach to MGM, and this short is a perfect example.
So the gems are of great value not only because of their quality and size, but also because of the tie to the Greatest conquerer the world has ever known.
Well, this movie actually did have one redeeming quality.
As a Film Four production - the anticipated quality was indeed delivered.
the casting and directing in this film seem to be sewn together seamlessly and the quality of the shooting is quite impressive.
The acting is of a high quality and will most likely come away with a trinity of oscar noms for Law, Kidman and Zellweger, even though Portman's few scenes may be the most powerful in the film.
While I have a small quality problem myself with this movie and that is that the movie was not as detail oriented as the short movies, I still believe that it managed quite well for a full feature film.
The sets and colours are just wonderful and everything seems so "neat" in the production quality.
This is an absolute contemporary film that can be also regarded at the same level of quality as the Italian masterpieces of the past, needless to quote any name.
One reasons why they call the 80's, "The Awesome 80's" is quality television.
BackNext