instruction:
In this task, you must classify if a given review is positive/negative, indicating your answer as P or N.
question:
when the film features richard lynch in the role of chief villain , you know that you can expect nothing more than a b grade action movie .
however , since this film also featured michael madsen , more than capable character actor , this time in the role of protagonist , the author of this review decided to give the film some benefit of the doubt .
however , the very first scenes show
clear b grade action credentials
- madsen plays richard montana , tough policeman who raids a drug warehouse and make life miserable for local crime lord mario gio ( played by lynch ) .
however , the raid was only partially successful , and montana is getting the rap .
so , he begins his own private war against gio , trying to penetrate his organisation pretending to be corrupt .
in the process , he meets gio 's mistress gina zamora ( played by rosie vela ) and starts relationship with her too .
although it does n't stink like many of the similar films can , inside edge is mostly forgettable b grade action routine .
nobody in this film actually puts much effort , including madsen or lynch , and this is especially case with uninspired screenwriter william tannen or director warren clarke .
the only not so forgettable element in this film is presence of former supermodel rosie vela , who , apart from showing her more than impressive looks , shows some of the singing talent too .
however , this is n't reason enough for viewers to spend hour and half watching a film that they would , in most likelihood , forget the next day .
answer:
N


question:
best remembered for his understated performance as dr .
hannibal lecter in michael mann 's forensics thriller , manhunter , scottish character actor brian cox brings something special to every movie he works on .
usually playing a bit role in some studio schlock ( he dies halfway through the long kiss goodnight ) , he 's only occasionally given something meaty and substantial to do .
if you want to see some brilliant acting , check out his work as a dogged police inspector opposite frances mcdormand in ken loach 's hidden agenda .
cox plays the role of big john harrigan in the disturbing new indie flick l .
i .
e . , which lot 47 picked up at sundance when other distributors were scared to budge .
big john feels the love that dares not speak its name , but he expresses it through seeking out adolescents and bringing them back to his pad .
what bothered some audience members was the presentation of big john in an oddly empathetic light .
he 's an even - tempered , funny , robust old man who actually listens to the kids ' problems ( as opposed to their parents and friends , both caught up in the high - wire act of their own confused lives . )
he 'll have sex - for - pay with them only after an elaborate courtship , charming them with temptations from the grown - up world .
l .
i .
e . stands for long island expressway , which slices through the strip malls and middle - class homes of suburbia .
filmmaker michael cuesta uses it as a ( pretty transparent ) metaphor of dangerous escape for his 15-year old protagonist , howie ( paul franklin dano ) .
in his opening voice - over , howie reveals a morbid preoccupation with death on the road , citing the l .
i .
e .
highway deaths of filmmaker alan
j .
pakula , songwriter harry chapin , and his own mother on exit 52 .
he 's both fascinated and disturbed by the l .
i .
e . , and those feelings are projected onto big john ( who follows howie around in his bright red car , but never makes a move to force the boy to do something he does n't want to do .
this makes him much more complex than the usual child molesters seen in movies -- he 's a beast , but ashamed of it . )
l .
i .
e . would have worked best as a half - hour short film about howie 's ill - advised foray into big john 's haven .
there is unnecessary padding with howie 's miserable dad ( bruce altman ) in the hot seat for a white - collar crime , degenerate youngsters who get their kicks from robbing middle - class houses , and some homoerotic shenanigans with wise - ass gary terrio ( billy kay ) , a handsome artful dodger . rather than add to the themes of suburban ennui ( not that we needed another movie on that subject ) , these awkward subplots pad out the running time to adequate feature length .
concurrently , the relationship between howie and big john is evenly paced and exceptionally well acted .
cox , sporting a baseball cap and a faded marine tattoo , is all bluff and bluster .
dano is quiet and at first glance seems so withdrawn as to be transparent .
we 're so used to child actors whose dramatic choices are broad and obvious ( calling haley joel ! ) , it 's surprising to see one who actually listens throughout any given scene .
the restraint is admirable .
but l . i .
e . 's
screenplay does n't always give them the best material .
when howie reads big john a walt whitman poem , the moment feels a bit too precious .
director michael cuesta lingers on an ecstatic reaction shot of big john , who may as well be hearing glenn gould performing bach 's goldberg variations .
it 's too much .
there are also some obvious dramatic contrivances involving big john 's other boy toy ( walter masterson ) , jealous over the newbie .
this plot thread predictably leads to violence .
not content to be a haunting , observational portrait of teen alienation in a royally screwed up world ( like terry zwigoff 's superb ghost world ) , cuesta lacks the confidence in his own work to end on an ambivalent note .
it 's typical of unimaginative cinema to wrap things up with a bullet , sparing the writers from actually having to come up with a complex , philosophical note .
in this regard
, l . i .
e .
( and countless other indie films ) share something in common with blockbuster action films : problems are solved when the obstacle is removed .
how often does real life work this way ? to extend the question : if a movie is striving for realism , do dramatic contrivances destroy the illusion ?
answer:
N


question:
you would think that this film 's dismal failure would be due to american filmmakers getting hold of a brilliant british comedy and " americanizing " it .
you 'd be wrong , since full blame can be placed on the very folks who wrote and created the series : rowan atkinson , robin driscoll , and richard curtis .
should you ever happen to meet those chaps , do me a favor . grab them by the hair and yell really loudly in their ear , " what were you thinking ? !
have you ever heard the phrase ' if it ai n't broke do n't fix it ' ? !
" then walk away .
the film concerns mr .
bean ( atkinson ) and his visit to america while escorting the painting of " whistler 's mother " to an american buyer ( played by burt reynolds , in the type of bit part that his success in " boogie nights " should hopefully do away with ) .
now how or why mr .
bean is sent on this trip makes no sense , and i ca n't even describe how the film explains it .
the point is that mr .
bean comes to america and causes wacky trouble .
problems problems problems , where to begin ?
first , the score music from the tv show has been completely replaced by score that is
either at times one note away from the score from " beetlejuice " or one
note away from the score from " rob roy " .
then , the song choices are totally uninspired .
" good vibrations " ?
"
i love l . a . " ?
wow , do n't put any thought into that guys .
also , bean makes way too much noise in the film .
the character does n't speak much , but in the series you really only heard the laughter of the audience , and maybe the occasional murmur from mr .
bean .
each episode was like a chaplin silent movie .
in the film , bean is constantly moaning , grunting , whining , etc .
it 's annoying , and just plain wrong for the character .
the main problem though is that it 's just not funny
.
with each episode of the series there would be dozens of really great laughs crammed into less than 30 minutes .
multiply that running time by three however , and the laughs steadily decrease .
they even have the gaul to repeat jokes from the series .
sad , and creatively lazy
. as a series , " mr . bean " only ran for about 13 episodes or so .
why on earth did atkinson and the gang decide it was time to completely rework everything ?
13 half - hour episodes certainly had n't exhausted all possible situations .
all i can say positively for the film at this point is that it 's almost appropriate for all ages , if it was n't for a couple of scenes where it appears as though
mr .
bean is having sex with things .
and even that is n't a very positive statement .
please guys , go back to england and go back to television so you 'll make me laugh again .
[ pg-13 ]
answer:

N