In this task, you are given product reviews about dvds. The goal is to classify the review as "POS" if the overall sentiment of the review is positive(the reviewer is satisfied) or as "NEG" if the overall sentiment of the review is negative(the reviewer is not satisfied).

Another King Masterpiece Butchered . I find it disheartening that so many of King's masterpieces were treated so badly in their film adaptations...and perhaps it's mostly because his books are too complex to adapt well to film...I'm not sure. Delores Claiborne, Stand By Me, Misery, Carrie, Shawshank Redemption, The Shining, and the Green Mile all did well. Then we are treated to stinkers like IT, Maximum Over-drive, Dreamcatchers, Thinner, The Running Man, Firestarter...and of course, this one.     Did I forget to mention Stephen King's own remake of The Shining? He should have settled for the original.     This film has all the feel of a made-for-tv movie or direct-to-video film...and, in fact, that's what it should have been. The film was terribly fast-paced and left out some of the more necessary plot elements of the book. They jumped into the darker elements way too quickly. There is barely a set up for the horror to come.     That they left out Norma Crandall was very disappointing as she added to Judd's character so much. He's barely even interesting in the film. Fred Gwynn turned him into a goofy, drawling, old man. Over-acted. Not subtle at all, as his character was in the book.     Ellie, the daughter, was a terrible actress. I am sure they could have found a better actress than her. She was whiny and abrasive and her lines were very forced and unnatural.     Even the cinematography was badly done. Everything is way too bright for the plot line. Too many primary colors. It felt like they were on the set of a soap opera. At least it matches the acting of the principal characters.     They tried to sew it all up with gory makeup effects, but set in the backdrop of a badly made film, it just makes the blood and gore goofy and laughable. The only way this film could be considered "scary" is with the cheap haunted-house "BOO!" scare tactics...like when a hand shoots out of the dark and grabs a shoulder.     Why would they choose Mary Lambert to direct this film? She barely had any experience as a director before this gig and most of the experience she did have was with music videos. And, as expected, beyond this flop, she has barely done anything worth mentioning. Well, except for more music videos and the follow-up stinker sequel to this film.    Let's hope the 2008 re-make is better.
NEG

2025 . I don't think I'm going to be around in 2025 to give an accurate evaluation .I'f I'm still here I hope I still remember who neil young is, and I'm still rocking in the free world
NEG

Interesting Archival Footage Grafted onto Bad History . This production is misleadingly named.  Far from being a biography of Grand Duchess Anastasia, it is really the story of how the deaths of her family at the hands of Russian revolutionaries in 1918 spawned one of the 20th century's enduring mysteries -- a mystery which was given a unique lease on life when, among the myriad male and female claimants to be survivors of the imperial family, one woman began to pick up supporters in the 1920's among at least some people who had had contact with the original family.    I do not fault this production for failing to be a real biography.  After all, how much of a biography can one write on a 17-year-old girl whose life was largely one of sheltered privilege?  However, I do fault this production for being a badly-flawed recounting of history.  And I am not talking about the interminable debate that still rages in the arcane world of Romanov history buffs about whether Anna Anderson was really Anastasia.    This work's take on the life of Anastasia paints a very tilted picture both of the world of the Romanovs, their support among their subjects, and their reputation among today's Russians.    First, life in the inner sanctum of Nicholas's family was not the halcyon existence this production claims.  Certainly the family had great wealth and huge staff at its disposal.  But neither Nicholas nor Alexandra were well-suited to their roles, and they lived under the strain of it.  They were increasingly isolated from the extended Romanov clan, who shared the dawning awareness of the Russian people that the monarchy was in serious trouble.  While these forces might not have touched Anastasia directly, she was certainly touched by her brother's hemophilia and her mother's response of sinking into frail health, chronic emotional distress, and a religious mysticism that almost bordered on hysteria at times.    Secondly, this film's portrayal of the counter-revolutionary White Army as determined to save their beloved tsar from captivity is just plain wrong.  While the Whites wanted to unseat the Bolshevik revolution, there was virtually no support for a Romanov restoration among the leadership of the White Army.  Nor are there any known attempts by the counter-revolutionary forces to rescue their former imperial family.  In fact, one senior White military leader once remarked, "having seen the monarchy at close quarters, I have no desire to see its return."    And thirdly, while there is a gradual rehabilitation of the last Romanov's reputation underway in Russia today, the notion that the murdered Romanovs are saints is not nearly the widespread sentiment that this production claims.  In fact, the great masses of modern Russians are far more interested in making their new democracy work than in figuring out how to get the sainted Romanovs back on a throne.    I do not know whether these flaws arise from some agenda to rehabilitate the Romanovs, whether they arise from sloppy research that relied too much on the fawning pseudo-history that plagues serious study of the Russian monarchy's fading years, or whether this production did not have access to newly-opened archives.  But -- whatever the reason(s) -- it does a disservice to the study of history by claiming to be history when it is, in fact, closer to a grocery-store romance novel

NEG