In this task, you must classify if a given review is positive/negative, indicating your answer as P or N.

[EX Q]: the job of the film critic is to see a movie and write a review of it that tells you what it 's about and why it 's good or bad .
i feel kind of embarrassed to admit this , but i after having seen " get carter
" i really ca n't tell you what it 's about although i could go on and on about how and why it 's a bad movie .
" get carter " falls into that category of ?
movies that continue to be made for reasons unknown to anyone outside of a hollywood executive board room .
you might call them the " steven seagal / mickey rourke / jean - claude van damme / wesley snipes school of mediocre action / crime thrillers .
"
you know - the potboilers that are heavy on fistfights , shoot - outs and car chases but really light on plot and character development .
they have stories where the so - called hero just keeps running into characters who have some connection to one of the other characters who are all antagonists without a reason for being in the movie other than to give the protagonist someone to fight , chase or shoot at .
sylvester stallone stars as jack carter , a las vegas - based mob enforcer who returns home
* for his brother 's funeral .
he believes his brother ?
richie was " taken out " and did n't die from a dwi accident .
carter 's one of the most cliche bad - asses ever captured on celluloid .
his face alone is pretty intimidating and there 's quite a few scenes in which he leans on both regular citizens and criminal lowlives simply by staring them down and speaking with confidence in his " rambo - on - testosterone - therapy " voice .
stallone 's performance in this movie is so forced and unnatural
he does n't realize he 's mocking himself .
the actual story involves carter 's investigation into his brother richie 's death .
he 's in a town that 's not his
but somehow the local top dogs know him very well .
mickey rourke co - stars as one of these characters , a sort of crime boss who has something to do with running a porno web site and blackmailing a young internet tycoon
( played by alan cummings looking and acting a lot like pee wee herman ) .
there 's also another plot involving richie 's mistress , a secret cd - rom with some convicting and disturbing evidence on it and something terrible involving one of carter 's still - living relatives .
i 'm rolling my eyes
just thinking about trying to critique all this in a way that could be remotely comprehendible .
i could just rip the screenplay to shreds , plus the direction or the editing or the production values but that would require discussion of nearly every scene in order to explain it all .
i do n't like to put spoliers in my reviews either intentionally or accidentally .
yes , " get carter " is just that complicated and complex .
and what 's worse is that it 's not this intricate to make it seem smart like " the usual suspects " for example - just the opposite .
you get the feeling whoever wrote this script
did it in short intervals spaced far apart
and they probably did n't remember what had already happened and did n't figure out how each scene would lead in to the next one or how the major plot points would work towards the climax .
all you really need to know is that most of the film is just scenes of carter tracking down one scumbag or supposed witness after another , asking them what they know , getting information and then realizing that if he was n't a complete idiot he could have figured it out in the first five minutes .
although the supporting characters are equally stupid themselves since they tell him everything which comes back to haunt them in one violent way or another .
making a movie entirely about criminals does n't necessarily mean they have to be unlikable and cliche cutout characters .
mel gibson starred in " payback " a few years ago
that had a story not unlike this one but had such a good screenplay you could n't help
but like him even though he was just as bad a guy as jack carter .
so ultimately " get
carter " fails for pretty much every selling point it has
. carter is not a likable character and you really do n't care if he gets revenge or not .
the action sequences are not at all exciting or original .
the enemies and their massive conspiracy are not threatening at all ( c'mon , you know who 's going to win every brawl and shoot - out and car chase ) .
in the end you do n't feel nearly satisfied with the results .
the filmmakers did a good job in doing everything as unoriginal as possible .
*
the city is never mentioned by name
but i assume it 's seattle since all the cars have washington license plates
and it 's always raining .
[EX A]: N

[EX Q]: studio expectations must not have been high for " great expectations " -- the film 's release date was pushed from late december to late january at what appeared to be the last minute , therefore putting any academy awards chances it has off until this time in 1999 .
it 's actually a smart move , because while this updated take on the charles dickens tale is n't quite oscar fodder , it * is * strong enough to be distinguished from the cinematic dumping ground that usually makes up the first five or six weeks of any given year .
" great expectations " also demonstrates how to modernize a classic story right , especially after the excruciatingly wretched excesses of baz luhrmann 's " william shakespeare 's romeo + juliet .
" " great expectations " opens somewhere in 1970s florida ( the original story is set in 19th - century england ) , as eight - year - old finn ( jeremy james kissner ) meets a trio of people who will have a profound effect on his life in the future .
there 's icy , 11-year - old estella ( raquel beaudene ) , a pseudo - playmate of finn 's ; ms .
dinsmoor ( anne bancroft ) , estella 's auntie who 's quite off - kilter over a past romance that never took off ; and a mysterious prisoner ( robert de niro ) whom finn saves the life of .
finn , who lives with his sister 's affable boyfriend ( lone star 's chris cooper ) , fancies himself an aspiring artist , and proves his prowess by whipping up an unusual portrait of estella using only ms .
dinsmoor 's lipstick , eyebrow pencil and the wallpaper from her dilapidating mansion .
flash forward into
the ' 90s ( after a brief stop in the ' 80s ) , and finn ( now played by ethan hawke ) , despondent over a strange hot - and - cold relationship with the elusive estella ( gwyneth paltrow ) , receives quite a bit of money from an unknown benefactor ; it 's enough cash to send him to new york to focus on a career in art .
there , finn seems to gain everything he could ever want -- wealth , prestige and a high place in the glamorous art world .
when estella resurfaces -- albeit with an aloof fianc ?
( hank azaria ) --
finn also sees the chance to renew their mutual attraction .
but she 's not the only ghost from finn 's past that 's going to be paying him a visit .
comparisons with the afore - mentioned " romeo + juliet " seem inevitable since these films are the only ones in recent memory to plop classic drama into a current setting .
" great expectations " is a much better venture , though , because it treats its source with even - handed respect , where " romeo " was never quite sure whether to be a spoof , a homage or both .
the movie is a visual banquet thanks to emmanuel lubezki 's sexy cinematography ; notably , he captures a revisited fountain kiss between the two leads with a luscious , erotic charge that 's steamier than the film 's ( surprisingly muted ) love scenes .
the eclectic rock soundtrack compliments the on - screen action beautifully , especially new songs by tori amos , mono and duncan sheik .
acting credits are first - rate , often hiding the screenplay 's occasional slip - ups .
hawke is sincere and solid as a leading man ( something we also learned from " gattaca " ) , and his finn is quite a likeable guy .
paltrow 's estella , on the other hand , is rather underdeveloped .
while the actress is at her icily seductive best , we 're not told very much about her character , and as a result , it 's often hard to understand why finn would appreciate her beyond a physical level ( but , oh , * what * a physical level ) ; sometimes , we root for finn although we do n't quite understand why she 's fueling his fire .
robert de niro is nice and sophisticated in the benevolent kind of role he rarely gets to play ; on the other end of the acting spectrum is bancroft , a macabre , throaty delight who mambos and sucks down cigarettes with an eerie enthusiasm that would make norma desmond jealous .
alfonso cuaron 's visually elegant direction helps to distract from the dry moments that pop up more frequently around the movie 's climax .
another problem is predictability ; you can guess your way through the plot even if you are n't familiar with the story .
despite its script flaws , though , " great expectations " is undeniably romantic without being corny or gloppy .
and frankly , it 's nice to see a film that embraces softened sensuality other than explicit sexuality .
perhaps that renovated release date , awfully close to valentine 's day , will end up helping " great expectations " ' seemingly average box office chances after all .
[EX A]: P

[EX Q]: around the end of 1998 , a japanese cartoon came to the usa television , and really was n't that big .
in fact not many people even knew what pokemon was , but in 1999 it hit big with kids and adults alike , and became one of the biggest franchises and merchandise seller of all time .
in fact it even spawned a big screen adventure pokemon : the first movie which for what it was , was n't all that bad .
it grossed $ 31 million in its opening weekend , and went on to make almost $ 90 million .
fans thought it was great and now is a second movie in the pokemon craze , " pokemon : the movie 2000 " which is far inferior to the original animated movie .
first up is the plot , which there really is n't much of , in fact the plot what there is : a bad guy trying to destroy the ancient
never before seen pokemon , lugia , is about it , except the fact that ash kethcum the worlds best pokemon trainer must try and stop him before he destroys this one pokemon forever .
well there you go , of course ash is followed by his friends misty , brock , gary and his pokemon friends , pikachu , squirtle , charizard , the usual .
even though the first movie was n't a great film , it was definately an enjoyable well - made movie with an actual thin storyline .
this new movie however is nothing but garbage ,
there is nothing good to it storywise , and its only good thing comes from some plush animation and colors .
compared to the first film , this movie is awfully bland , from its opening titles , to the end titles it tries its best to work , but fails miserably at every corner .
the characters are
1-dimensional , the story thin as chicken broth , and the writing very lame .
even the so called action scenes are extremely lame , and falls before it even gets a chance to go .
the voices even are n't that good and almost feels like the stars do n't want to be there , like they can tell that this is an extremel bad movie .
which it certainly is .
the film has one thing going for it
and that is the animation , although not up to disney standards , it is still very good with some interesting cgi 's and very colorful animation , the colors jump out at you very fast , and seem very nicely put on film .
why a film this bad got such a good treatment with its animation is still a question to be answered ,
hopefully pokemon 3 next year will be much better than this trash .
for now watch the first one .
its much much better .
[EX A]:
N