Task: Sentiment Analysis
Input (English): " nothing more than a high budget masturbation fantasy " showgirls ( nc-17 ) - contains graphic nudity , profanity , sexual situations and violence .
some people , however , keep their clothes on .
you do not watch porn films for their intellectual values , nor do you write reviews on them .
that 's why this review will be short .
it seems that this film will end up in the porn section when it hits the video stores .
there is no story , script , point or acting .
only naked bodies , which is exactly the point .
here is the so called plot
: nomi , the 23-year - old with a dark past as a hooker , has hitchhiked from somewhere back east to perform in a show where a dancer does n't wear much more than a light coating of powder and a big , fake smile .
no one is twisting nomi 's arm .
no one is holding her grandmother hostage .
she wants to do this .
and that is what she is doing till the end credits .
so what 's the problem then ?
what 's the point ?
what 's the film about ?
is there anyone whose aspirations could inspire less sympathy ?
this film can be described in one sentence :
obscene level of incompetence
, excessive stupidity in the story line , gross negligence of the viewer 's intelligence , a prurient interest in the quick buck .
believe me , after an hour with these characters , acting and script , you 'll start hoping for someone to kill somebody .
elizabeth berkley makes a laughable try
as the heroine of this film , that is bad even for eszterhas ' script .
her character is the only one that is at least half written and she could really have done better .
her character denies the fact that she is a whore for the industry , selling her body to the hungry eyes of the horny public .
"
i am not a whore !
i am a dancer " , she screams , but does it in such an over dramatized way that you 'll start laughing
.
in fact the acting in " showgirls " brings terrible to a new and previously unknown level .
not one single achievement , besides the conventional cinematography , is worth mentioning .
it is a total waste of time and money .
there is not a single moment of what you might call intelligence .
the dialogue is structured of ancient stereotypes and cliches lined up one after another .
its attempt to even imagine to have half a brain results in
a catastrophe .
" in my films , " writes director paul verhoeven ( ' basic instinct ' , ' total recall ' ) , " i hold the mirror up to life .
"
well , excuse me ?
his attempt to go behind the scenes of las vegas , and as he put it " show the naked truth " , is simplified and unreal
.
occasionally , between his collection of mistakes and logical irrationalities , screenwriter joe eszterhas ( the creator of some of the worst screenplays in hollywood history ) inserts some lines of deep morality , that sound something like this :
" hey , i see you .
i see that you 're hiding " - " from what ?
" - " from you " .
yes , and even the only decent line in this film : " nomi is what las vegas is all about " ca n't save ' showgirls ' from going under .
it 's a strange phenomena .
it 's not erotic , because it lacks sensuality .
not dramatic , because it lacks the acting .
and not intelligent because it lacks a story .
it is simply verhoven 's bad excuse for making pornography .
you want to see naked women ?
bare breasts ?
full frontals ?
it 's nothing wrong with that .
but in that case i suggest that you rent a porn film in your local video store , and not waste time surviving through eszterhas ' pathetic dialogue .
b qualities , while it 's only a high budget porn - film .
Output (English): N