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

at first glance , three kings looks to be just another war movie , the 90s version of all those favourite war movies with names i can not remember .
the 90s version , it definitely is , just another war movie ? not in your dreams !
imagine pulp fiction approach to saving private ryan , tha 's three kings for you .
believe it or not , it bears the cool of the former and the stark humane meaning of the latter .
the story brings us to the twilight of the gulf war , with the allied troops victorious .
majpr archie gates ( clooney ) leads an enterprising bunch of grunts to a rather unorthodox post - war looting spree ; the millions in gold bars secretly stowed away by saddam in a desolate village in the desert .
as the rest of the troops are celebrating their victory and getting ready to be shipped home , this ' wild bunch ' goes awol on an armed hum - vee ( the vehicle of choice of the us army ) .
they soon find out that they have much resistance , as they get tangled with the local rebellion against saddam 's forces .
frequently switching their modes between looters and robin hood 's merry men , they become consciously attacked by their own morals .
as the film begins to roll , it seemed to have a rather ' light ' mood to it . ' special ' effects such as when gates describes to his men how a bullet can kill simply paves the way for a light - hearted funny action movie .
three kings is much smarter than that .
as the conflict becomes more and more complex , the audience will be trapped in a limbo , trying to stay focussed on that light - mood / serious - mood that the film seem to portray .
i personally found this analogous to the same feelings of the main characters involved in the film ; trapped between their initial plan paved by greed and their own sense of humanity .
this simply made the entire experience of watching three kings
truly brilliant .
action sequences are not shot as your old - fashioned war films nor anything like steven spielberg 's in - your - face war violence .
they are carefully built to generate tension with just the right tight close - ups and pauses , right before the action starts .
not john woo for sure but more of sergio leone 's spaghetti western style ( tons of them starring clint eastwood ) . great performances by clooney and wahlberg but
the brilliance have to lie in the conception of this film ;
the screenwriter and the director .
three kings ranks among the best films of the year ,
well , for me at least . highly recommended .
P

five girls spend a day in a closed building doing inventory when a strange box gets delivered there ( is this starting to sound familiar ? ) by mistake .
the girls accidentlly open the box ( big surprise , huh ! ) and release an evil spirit of a killer that kills the girls off one by one ( betcha did n't see that one coming ! ) .
hard to die , i found out while watching the film , is a sequel to sorority house massacre 2 : nightie nightmare ( r .
a .
m .
r .
# 1521 ) .
two of the actresses from sorority house massacre 2 are in this film , robyn harris and melissa moore , but they play different characters here .
orville ketchum is also back as ( get ready for this ) orville ketchum ( yes , the same character from number two ) .
yes , he is also built like a tank in this film too .
i 'm telling you , a nuclear bomb detonated next to this man would n't harm him at all !
the before mentioned three were the only actors from part two that i thought could act , well
they seemed to have lost that ability .
thankfully , for my sanity , i also saw the film warlock , which undid all the ill effects that i got from this film .
the story for this film is completely ridiculous and has many elements from many cheapo low budget horror flicks .
any good moments that this film fails to make are even more destroyed by the story line .
the film is so pathetically predictable that every moment has already been figured out , analyzed , and discarded before it happens .
there is no point in this film that any suspense is ever afoot .
while we are on the subject of the story , the story also provides every chance it can to disrobe an actress .
the film goes to the extent of putting a shower in the manager 's office .
i 'm sorry folks but this is completely unnecessary , ridiculous , and hurts the story
more ( if that is still possible ) .
the script for this film is completely pathetic .
the lines the actresses come out with are completely horrible .
the only thing that i think could have happened is that the actors made up the script as they went along .
here is an example of the wonderful dialog .
the scene is two girls have just entered a gun store and have picked out a * really * big gun .
the line is " my dad used to be a marine , i bet i can work it .
"
this line has got to be a contender for the bad line hall of infamy .
now , we fast forward for a few minutes until just after a big plan ( ? ! ! ? ) has been presented .
one comment from an actress is " not a lot of strategy involved , but i like it .
"
i 'm afraid folks that this is about as good as they get .
now lets talk about the great special effects for this film .
this obviously was n't a big concern of the film makers .
the killing scenes are so obviously faked that they go to the point of threatening the viewer 's intelligence .
a girl gets hacked with a knife and enough blood comes out to do one friday the 13th movie .
are we trying to see how unrealistic we can get ?
the continuity department was obviously asleep ( along with the viewers ) when watching this film .
in one shot , actress has cloths on , camera angle changes , actress seems to have lost clothing .
very impressive trick !
the one ( half ? ) plus that this film has going for it , is that in many places it is unintentionally hilarious .
the incompetence behind the film makes it incredibly funny , and so the viewer can get some enjoyment ( ? ! ! ? ) from the film .
however , this does n't make it worth the rental fee of over a penny
.
in the acting department , the only thing i can say is two thumbs squared and one head down .
i would normally do a detailed paragraph on this topic , but there is no point here because there is nobody that i was impressed with in the least .
oh well , win some , lose some .
N

brian de palma 's snake eyes stars nicolas cage 's evil twin , who confusingly uses the same stage name as his talented brother .
like a foreign tourist who screams his lines in english to ensure that he will be understood , cage yells with the ferocity of a man with a bad case of caffeine overload . de palma , whose last great film , the untouchables , was crafted over a decade ago seems to have lost his magic .
in snake eyes , he manages to elicit some of the worst performances possible out of a skilled cast .
only gary sinise rises slightly above the hackneyed material .
the rest of the actors become caricatures in this by - the - numbers thriller .
ryuichi sakamoto 's atmospheric and melodramatic music dominates almost every scene .
heavy on the long violin notes , its rhythm is punctuated by thunder .
( the script by de palma and lost world 's david koepp sets the action during a hurricane in an attempt to pump up the adrenaline level and the noise .
only the latter is achieved . )
cage plays rick santoro ,
a corrupt atlantic city cop who shakes down criminals to get betting money .
the movie takes place over a single evening when a world championship fight is being held .
with a flashy , bad wardrobe and a gold cell phone , rick is an obnoxious cop who does n't know when to shut up . spouting cliched and ridiculous dialog
, he screams such lines as , " i was made for the sewer , baby ! "
actually the line is more apropos for the movie as a whole .
sinise plays kevin dunne , a naval officer who is in charge of the security for the secretary of the navy , who has come to watch the fight .
but most people in the film are not who they seem to be , and the thin script makes all of them easy to guess .
the plot , which is told in endless flashbacks , concerns the assassination of the secretary through a scheme set up by some malevolent businessmen ?
that adjective is , of course , redundant in hollywood thrillers .
the flashbacks become repetitious with the same scene shown again and again , sometimes from a different perspective and sometimes not .
although a brian de palma film requires a certain amount of gratuitous violence , this one is remarkably tame for the man who became famous when he made carrie .
the movie 's outline has some promise , but the movie itself is leaden .
the film takes itself all too seriously .
at best , it is a 1940s - style b movie .
a little humor would have helped the script some , but a complete rewrite would have been better .
and , although i hate to say it , a different director would have been the biggest improvement .
snake eyes runs 1 : 39 .
it is rated r for violence and would be acceptable for teenagers .

N