instruction:
In this task, you must classify if a given review is positive/negative, indicating your answer as P or N.
question:
i was anxious to see this for a long time .
a friend of mine recommended this to me because he has a crush on neve campbell , and he wanted to prove that she 's as hot as he thinks he is .
he proved it for me all right , but
the reasons i enjoy this film go way beyond that .
scream treads on familar ground , horror movie with , as star neve campbell puts it , " some stupid killer stalking some big breasted girl who ca n't act who 's always running up the stairs when she should be running out the front door .
"
it 's very familar , your typical horror film .
so why , you may ask after watching it , does it seem so new and original ? because it treats itself as if it has n't been done before , and thus the viewer is disilusioned into believing that it is not old , familar tired stuff .
this raises another question : how does it do this ?
simple : the characters .
they 're not your typical stupid horror film victims who do n't know what the hell to do when being chased by a guy in a ski mask and a machette .
they are horror fans , they know how stuff happens in a horror movie , they know what to do and what not to do , and that makes it scary , and even funny at certain times .
you can tell this just by watching the opening scene where casey becker ( drew barrymore ) is making popcorn , getting ready to watch a video , and some guy who sounds like a killer calls her up to play a game with her that involves horror movie triva that , if she gets it wrong , will get her and her boyfriend killed .
she knows what to answer when he asks her horror film questions , she just ca n't answer his final question , " what door am i at ? " and that gets her killed .
that scene works because in a normal horror film , half the things that happen in that scene would never happen .
the plot is typical horror stuff : sidney prescott ( an impressive neve campbell ) , an attractive young high school student who 's mother was killed a year ago tommorrow , is being stalked by a killer who 's previously murdered one of her classmates ( casey , naturally ) , and everybody in this small , california town is a suspect , including sidney 's boyfriend , billy loomis .
but as i said before , these people know how horror movies work , and that 's what makes it so appealing .
that and the references to horror movies , like when casey says , " the first ( nightmare on elm street ) was scary , but the rest sucked .
" which is obviously director wes craven ( who does a good job of poking fun of the genre that made him a legend ) patting himself on the back as he directed the first nightmare movie and none of the others , and when tatum , sidney 's friend , mentions the director , wes carpenter , which is obviously an homage by writer kevin williamson to not only craven , but also director john carpenter .
the cast is well chosen , neve campbell pulls off a good heroine
( and unlike most horror film heroines , she * can * act ) , drew barrymore does a good janet leigh impression for what little time she has in the film , and david arquette is impressive .
also good
( and funny ) in his role is henry winkler ( " the fonz " )
as the school principal .
i took half a point off for the unnecessary ( albeit limited ) appearance by friends ' courteney cox as reporter , gail edwards , sidney 's rival because she covered her mother 's disappearance .
i hate that show
, i hate those actors .
they 're untalented , overexposed , and overpaid , imho , and i would think wes craven is smart enough to know those actors are overexposed enough , but i suppose he is n't .
answer:
P


question:
i am starting to write this review before going to see strawberry and chocolate , cuba 's oscar nominee for best foreign film , directed by tomas gutierrez alea ( who also directed the sometimes and in some circles critically acclaimed memorias del subdesarrollo-- " memories of underdevelopment " .
i saw memorias as part of a cuban cinema class back in the late ' 70s ; it merged the politics of the cuban revolution with mundane elements of the human condition .
i knew then that memorias was probably a state - sanctioned political missive , and now expect strawberry will follow suit .
fellow internetters , primarily in the newsgroup dedicated to cuba ( soc . culture .
cuba ) , have mentioned that strawberry is a harsh criticism of the revolution and its current state of affairs .
i have jumped to the conclusion that strawberry is nothing more than a veiled attempt at espousing the party line -- it probably looks like political criticism , but it ai n't so .
having some first hand and extensive anecdotal knowledge of castro 's repressiveness , i ca n't conceive of his tolerating honest and adversarial criticism of the revolution , and i ca n't imagine his letting anyone even suggest his failure as a leader of a failed movement .
as kids say these days , duh ! , the revolution 's current state needs no criticism ; its physical and spiritual crumbling is self evident .
the proper questions to put relate to castro 's legitimacy .
i bet the film takes castro 's power for granted , and that this or any other movie , produced under cuba 's state control , can not question his right to run cuba 's political show ( ongoing now for more than 36 years ) .
that 's why i just ca n't believe strawberry is an honest criticism of the regime .
let 's see what happens after the room goes dark and the screen lights up .
i saw the film -- twice .
i was right ; castro remained intact .
strawberry negotiates the relationship between a young " dialectic materialist , " as he describes himself , and a homosexual photographer ( diego ) in 1979 cuba .
the young man ( david ) is the son of peasants ; a symbol of the revolution 's reason for being .
grateful to the revolution for the opportunity to receive a university education , he studies political science instead of literature , his avocation , because he perceives it is his duty .
therein lies a likely unintended irony , since cuba has no need for political theoreticians .
cuba 's government is castro .
diego 's lifestyle is the antithesis of revolutionary life .
he enjoys the finer things -- tea , opera , art .
he does not do " voluntary work " for the revolution .
his small apartment is a sensual oasis .
the moniker " bourgeois " figuratively hangs over his head during the early parts of the movie .
however , he is a " revolucionario " in his own way .
the supporting roles are filled by : an aging busybody with a heart of gold and a troubled psyche ; david 's roommate , who rally takes the communist party line to its expected extreme ;
david 's ex - girlfriend , who dumped him for another guy , yet wants to bed him before she leaves for italy with her husband ; german , a gay sculptor whose work diego is attempting to exhibit , and who strikes a faustian pact with the government .
gutierrez alea and co - director
juan carlos tabio
do a fine job at almost showing that homosexuals can be revolutionaries too .
heck , towards the end of the film you begin to think the guy deserves a medal for his patriotic fervor .
he really loves the revolution ( as supposedly does everybody else in cuba ) and wants to make it better by exposing and correcting some of its flaws .
real criticism is missing though .
this movie is political window dressing .
luis aguilar leon 's op .
ed .
piece on fresa in the miami herald ( 10 march 1995 , at 21a ) did not color my judgment ; it presaged my intuition .
aguilar leon expressed my sentiment about this film 's political angle best : like many artistic manifestations in cuba , strawberry and chocolate sprang from a totally manipulated environment .
as art critic ivan de la nuez well states in the latest issue of the magazine postmodern notes , the silenced artists are those who refuse to accept " the charade in which artists can provoke up to a point , while the institutions legitimize themselves by forbidding them to go beyond that point .
" although terrible propaganda , this is otherwise a fine film .
answer:
P


question:
girl 6 is , in a word , a mess .
i was never able to determine what spike lee was trying to accomplish with this film .
there was no sense of where the film was going , or any kind of coherent narrative .
if there was a point to the film , i missed it .
girl 6 , by the way , is the way theresa randle 's character is addressed in the phone sex workplace ; all the girls are known by their numbers .
the plot , such as it is : theresa randle is a struggling n .
y . actress , and eventually takes a job as a phone - sex operator .
she begins to lose contact with reality , as her job consumes her .
also , she must deal with the advances of her ex - husband ( isiah washington ) .
he is an ex- con thief , and she tries to keep him away , while at the same time , it 's clear that she still harbors feelings for him .
her neighbor , jimmy ( spike lee ) functions as the observer ; mediating between the ex- husband and girl 6 .
he also functions as a point of stability , as he watches her become seduced by the lurid world of phone sex .
the soundtrack , consisting of songs by prince , was jarring .
it kept taking my attention from the film - not altogether a bad thing , i 'll grant you , as what was transpiring onscreen was n't that riveting .
for parts of the middle of the film , the music stayed blissfully in the background .
in the opening sequence and one scene later in the film , however , the music was particularly loud and distracting
.
of course , i 've never really cared for prince 's ( or tafkap if you like ) music .
prince fans might love the soundtrack , but it will probably be distracting , even to die - hard fans .
of the performances , the only one that stood out was spike lee 's buddy character , jimmy .
he was excellent as the always - broke neighbor of girl
6 .
he should have stuck to acting in this film .
there are several sequences that gave me the impression that he 'd like to be oliver stone when he grows up .
there are scenes shot with different types of film , which are purposely grainy , and reminiscent of some of the scenes in oliver stone 's natural born killers .
in that film , they worked to propel the narrative .
in this film , they just made me more confused .
there are some amusing moments , and a few insights into the lives of the women who use their voices to make the phone - sex industry the multi - billion dollar industry that it has become .
other than that , though , nothing much happens .
there are a few intense moments , as when one caller becomes frightening , but even that is rather lackluster .
i 'm not the biggest fan of spike lee , though i 'd agree that he has done some very good work in the past .
in girl 6 , though , he seems to be floundering .
he had an interesting idea , a fairly good setup , and seemed to wander aimlessly from there .
girl 6 earns a grade of d .
answer:

N