TASK DEFINITION: In this task, you must classify if a given review is positive/negative, indicating your answer as P or N.
PROBLEM: cradle will rock is the latest effort from director / actor tim robbins .
while he may have had an oscar worthy film back in 1995 ( dead man walking ) ,
he gets a little overconfident and sloppy here .
the story is confusing , and filled with many subplots , so i 'll try my best and explain it as simply as possible .
the film is based on a " mostly " true story about a federal theater in the 1930s , that produced a play ( the cradle will rock ) that apparently was offensive to some , so the government shuts it down .
it 's during the time of the depression , and all this theater wants to do is entertain and cheer up those who do not have jobs , or are poor .
between this conflict lies what seems like 10 subplots , about those who work in theater , or those associated .
also along the way are some other messages mashed together to create an even more overwhelming experience .
tim robbin 's just keeps piling on political views , and characters , that we just give up on the film , or in some cases walk out .
for robbin 's it may be a nice achievement , but to me it seemed more like a friendly get together with slightly more sophisticated dialogue , and fancy outfits .
i thought the main reason for seeing the film would be for the outstanding cast ,
unfortunately are all uninteresting , except for a few .
let me recap what each important character does , so please bear with me
( it 's the least you can do , especially if you were considering seeing this ) .
i 'll begin with those involved with the play .
there 's orson welles ( angus macfadyen ) who of course is the director of the play , the producer john houseman ( cary elwes ) , marc blitzstein ( hank azaria ) the writer of the play , emily watson , a woman who gets her break by playing the main part in cradle will rock .
outside the play there 's the : ventriloquist ( bill murray ) who wants a relationship with a federal theater clerk ( joan cusack ) , another subplot involving a painter diego rivera ( ruben blades ) who 's unhappy that his painting is too be destroyed by nelson rockefeller because he feels it to be an outrage ( john cusack ) .
there 's a few other actresses and actors who have their own stories ( susan sarandon , philip baker hall too name a few ) but those that i mentioned , were the most significant to the story .
anyway , most of these talented hollywood stars were completely wasted , except for emily watson , who does another great job , and one of my personal favorite actors john cusack , who always delivers through thick and thin .
now although most of the film was weak to say the least , there were some nice moments and some involving subjects , but all this is overblown
.
sure the free speech segment was a nice feature , but not when it becomes repetitive .
the whole film is like this , and it 's basically nothing but a headache
.
on the brighter side , tim robbin 's direction was masterful .
his camera direction seemed reminiscent to the works of paul thomas anderson 's latest magnolia , only smoother in my opinion , but even that ca n't make a movie that much better .
although it has it 's moments ( not many of them , but they 're there ) , cradle will rock stays true to it 's title , because the cradle rocked too far and tipped over .

SOLUTION: N

PROBLEM: take two old and dying men , a lifetime of regrets , a house full of sins , a thoroughly despicable man , enough lies , insecurities and other character defects to keep a team of psychiatrists gainfully employed , then add a inexplicable meteorological and amphibian - based phenomenon and you will have summed up magnolia , the newest film from paul thomas anderson ( boogie nights ) .
the movie tells multiple stories , weaving them together , or overlapping them during the course of its three hour running time .
would that the stories were worth the telling .
earl partridge ( jason robards , a thousand acres ) is dying of cancer .
bedridden , in much pain , it is obvious that his time is growing short .
his much younger wife played by julianne moore ( an ideal husband ) is surprised to find herself struggling with his impending death .
having married for money , she discovers that she has actually fallen in love with the old guy and regrets having cheated and lied .
earl regrets having cheated on his first wife and estranging himself from his only son ( tom cruise , eyes wide shut ) , now a misogynist self - help guru who teaches men how to " seduce and destroy , " his sexual and vulgar perspective on male / female relationships is so over - the - top as to be utterly unbelievable .
meanwhile , jimmy gator ( philip baker hall , the insider ) is also dying of cancer .
not as physically incapacitated as earl , jimmy is still able to perform his duties as the lovable host of a long - running quiz show which pits adults against children .
the current whiz - quiz - kid is stanley spector ( jeremy blackman in his film debut ) who is tired of the pressure of performing and is willing to call it quits .
on the other hand , quiz kid donnie smith ( william macy , mystery men ) would like nothing more than to return to the spotlight when he was a " somebody .
"
his pathetic life is souring as he can no longer capitalize on his brief 15 minutes of fame which stanley is all too eager to relinquish .
jimmy has his own family crisis as his drug - addict daughter ( melora walters , boogie nights ) refuses to have anything to do with him for reasons which are not disclosed to us until the end of the film .
grabbing at one last attempt at happiness she reaches out to a softhearted cop ( john c .
reilly , never been kissed ) even as she tries to push herself away from him because she deems herself not worthy of his affection .
this dysfunctional group carries on for what seems to be an interminable two - thirds of the movie .
and then it gets worse , literally raining frogs .
yes , frogs . assuming it to be an intended deus - ex - machina device ,
it is an ineffective one because it does n't seem to faze the characters much .
oh , they may step gingerly around the splattered frog corpses littering the streets , but otherwise , the frog shower did n't seem to change their behavior or pattern of living ( or dying ) .
there is simply too much going on in this movie and most of it is distasteful to watch .
mr .
anderson further obscures the film by incorporating a loud and intrusive sound track that often drowned out the dialogue , a character who apparently rapped a significant clue to a plot development which was completely unintelligble , and a heavy handed segment of " historical " occurances containing ironic twists which set up absolutely nothing .
one of the recurring themes is found in a line donnie quotes : " we may be done with the past , but the past is not done with us .
"
this is an absolute lie .
god is in the forgiveness business .
in fact , as we humbly ask for forgiveness and repent or change our offending mindset , god 's word says that he not only forgives , he also forgets .
"
i , even i , am he that blotteth out thy transgressions for mine own sake , and will not remember thy sins .
" isaiah 43
: 25 [ kjv ] the spiritual one who keeps bringing up our unrighteous past is the same one who wants to keep us in a state of condemnation .
do n't let him .
next time your spiritual adversary reminds you of your past , take great pleasure in reminding him of his future .
he hates that .

SOLUTION: N

PROBLEM: back in february at the monthly los angeles comic book and science fiction convention , new line cinema put on a lavish presentation for its big - screen update of the cult 1960s sci - fi tv show lost in space , complete with in - person appearances by cast members mimi rogers , matt leblanc , lacey chabert , jack johnson , and even gary oldman .
that should have set off my warning alarms -- the last time such an extravagant film presentation took place at the convention was nearly five years ago , when none other than arnold schwarzenegger made an in - person cameo to peddle . . .
last action hero .
but no ,
like millions of others , i bought into the hype and " got lost .
" if only i had gotten lost -- literally -- on the way to theatre and spared myself
the tedium of this sloppily slapped - together blockbuster wannabe .
you may find yourself wondering if director stephen hopkins and screenwriter akiva goldsman were lost themselves when they made the film .
at the convention , goldsman claimed to be a rabid fan of the original television series , and if that really is the case , i 'd hate to see what he does with concepts he only has mild interest in .
to say that his script lacks narrative cohesion is to imply that there is a narrative to begin with -- which there most certainly is not .
after the setup , in which the robinson family -- father john ( william hurt , looking and sounding as spaced out as he does in interviews ) , mother maureen ( rogers , wasted ) , daughters judy ( heather graham , ditto ) and penny ( a heavily made - up chabert , looking like a junior version of neve campbell in wild things ) , and son will ( young newcomer johnson , making the best of it )
--and pilot don west ( leblanc ,
doing a bad han solo impression ) find themselves lost in space after their ship is sabotaged by evil stowaway dr .
smith ( a watered - down but still - lively oldman , cashing a paycheck and loving every minute ) , the script 's " stream " of events becomes so fragmented and random that it seems to be made up as it goes along -- and hopkins does little to make what does go on the slightest bit interesting .
they encounter another ship .
they board it .
alien spiders attack them .
they return to their ship .
the other one explodes .
they land on a deserted planet .
and so on .
an attempt at a plot involving time travel occurs in the third act , but goldsman does n't seem to understand the rules that come with using such a story device ; when one character 's past self dies , the future incarnation inexplicably lives on .
the look and effects should be lost in space 's ace - in - the - hole , but hopkins
even manages to botch that . for a big - budget film , the visual effects are incredibly shoddy .
in one composite background shot , i could see the blue outline around oldman ; the various digital effects for the space battle scenes look like . . .
digital effects .
but nothing in those shots is as jaw - droppingly unconvincing as blawp , a monkey - like space creature that becomes penny 's pet .
entirely computer - generated and every inch showing it , blawp looks like it was lifted directly from a sony playstation game .
apparently hopkins thought the same and tried desperately to hide it ; how else can one explain the graininess of blawp 's composite shots with the human actors ?
but in doing so , the seams are that much more obvious .
you have to be severely visually impaired to not be distracted when a grainy shot of penny and blawp is immediately followed by a crystal - clear solo reaction shot of judy .
new line is hoping lost in space will become a big franchise much like the long - running star trek cash cow at paramount .
i do n't think so .
in a few years , the lost in space movie will likely live on not as a series but as the obscure answer to a trivia question : what film ended titanic 's 15-week reign at the top of the weekend box office ?

SOLUTION:
N