instruction:
In this task, you must classify if a given review is positive/negative, indicating your answer as P or N.
question:
the film starts out with a creepy opening sequence to which has the now classic and creepy score by writer / director / producer john carpenter who in my mind is a brilliant director , he really is .
he wrote this film , he directed this film , he produced this film and he made the excessively creepy score to this film .
i think he is and always will be famous for this classic which after 21 years has not lost it 's popularity
or it 's ability to scare the wits out of people .
i think i have seen ' halloween ' over 100 times and each time i find something new and brilliant , and each time i am scared even though i know what is going to happen
.
i own three different versions of the film : a vhs regular version that came with a limited edition 20th anniversary t - shirt , a boxed edition vhs in a hardcover case digitally re - mastered with the original theatrical widescreen presentation , in a nifty plastic picture decorated box with a numbered snow - globe .
in other words
i am completely and utterly obsessed with the film .
it has changed horror movies forever and spawned six sequels with only 2 , 4 , and 7 being truly good .
it also spawned several cheap imitations of the film that were offensive in some ways to a true halloween fan .
since i heard about halloween being released on dvd in a limited edition of 30 , 000 copies , i knew i had to buy one no matter what !
i did and man
to me
it 's the best dvd ever manufactured with the brilliance of the film
.
no words can describe the dvd .
in ' halloween ' michael myers is a evil person whom killed his sister in cold blood 16 years ago in 1963 .
now in 1978 grown up and in a mental hospital michael myers escapes to go back to his hometown of haddonfield , illinois , followed by his past doctor sam loomis .
the person michael is targeting is laurie strode who is played by jamie lee curtis in her film debut .
why is he stalking her ? check out halloween
ii
it explains it all .
on this unholy night on october 31 , 1978 laurie strode and her two friends are going to have the time of their lives , which is trying to stay alive .
the whole film is filled with terrifying moments most coming from just seeing michael myers walk .
nick castle who played the shape in the first movie did an incredible job , and no other person in any other halloween flick can do what he did .
what john carpenter did in 1978 is made a ground - breaking new film , with scares , wit , and style .
the movie is flawless if not perfect .
no other movie or sequel has lived up to this one , and in my opinion never will .
'
halloween ' will be like ' psycho ' and
still be extremely popular even almost 40 years later
.
i just hope someday ' halloween ' will be released in a new dolby soundtrack with the 4 extra scenes on the dvd edition .
' halloween ' is n't just another slice - and - dice horror flick ,
it 's an intelligent , horrifying and best film experience ever made .
see ' halloween ' and be scared . . . .
then watch it again ! reviewed by brandon herring october 7 , 1999 .
answer:
P


question:
first impressions : critically , a close - to - awful film , but money - wise , it has been doing ( and will continue to do ) great .
a sometimes - funny film that sags and lags and oftentimes gets boring .
an orginal plot that grows old real fast .
one of the only 90 minute films that i 've gotten bored through .
men in black has defied the odds .
when i first saw that the flick was 89 minutes long , i thought maybe that this was a poor attempt at an independence day type film that just ran out of gas .
however , i now realize that not only did men in black run out of gas , but the film in 90 minutes manages to show off a very original idea ( which summer audiences have embraced ) that becomes old about 25 minutes into the movie .
tommy lee jones and will smith play two " government " agents who are responsible for keeping order in alien society .
the ridiculous plot begins when an alien " bug " , played weirdly by vincent d'onofrio , who was so great in full metal jacket , lands on earth to retrieve a galaxy that 's somewhere on " orion 's belt .
"
anyway , the basic plot revolves around jones and smith to stop this bug from getting the galaxy , or a higher power will blow up the earth .
the premise is ridulous , but that is not why i did n't like this film .
i love original plots .
this one had an original one .
but director barry sonnenfeld did something to this film that ruined its plot : he made the film drag and also put in unncessary elements in it that are found in romance films .
whenever i saw d'onofrio 's bug stomp and eat people in the film ,
it got terribly boring after a while .
while smith 's wise - cracks did fill in the gaps , it was n't enough .
and also , i can not believe the screenwriters elected to have a sub - plot where tommy lee jones missed his former lover because as an alien agent , they ca n't have contact with any humans really .
and here i see jones , at a satellite computer , watching his lover plant the garden ?
a sentimental moment in an alien movie ?
nice try , but i do n't think so .
it does n't work here .
it just makes the movie even more ridiculous and even more boring
: we do n't only have aliens to worry about , but now we have jones 's conscience .
i came into the movie not wanting to see jones 's conscience , but wanting to see a real action movie that had lots of aliens in it .
maybe it 's unfair that i partly judged this movie on what my expectations were .
nevertheless , even though some parts are indeed funny , the plot in this movie grew old and boring -- quick .
answer:
N


question:
scream 2 has a titillating little scene that lays down the unwritten law of horror movie sequels quite well .
during a film - class discussion , windsor college students articulate what these inevitable laws are , and why sequels never live up to the originals .
a few rare exceptions are noted , but they left out one . . .
scream 2 !
1996 's surprise horror blockbuster scream became an instant hit and developed an obsessive coterie of fans which included almost every teenager in america !
a sequel was unavoidable , but luckily the re - teaming of writer kevin williamson and director
wes craven gives us nothing to fear in the way of lost entertainment .
in fact , at the risk of sounding sacrilegious to all the adorning fans of scream , i would say that scream 2 might even be the better film !
sidney prescott ( neve campbell ) , the sinuous heroine who survived a series of murders in woodsboro , ca in the original scream , is now two years older and off to college , majoring in theater .
meanwhile , tv journalist gale weathers ( courtney cox ) , who covered the murders in the first film , has since written a book about the dreadful events ; a book titled " stab " , which has been developed into a major motion picture .
as scream 2 opens , a crowd of overzealous teenagers are piling into a crowded movie theater for the premiere of " stab " , and before long , a young couple are butchered to death , unnoticed in the midst of hysteria .
this marks
the beginning of a new murder spree as an unknown " copycat " sets out to repeat what 's been done . . . and finish what has n't !
of course the killer is just as obsessed with movies as the killer in the first film , and yes , movies play a huge role in the bizarre psychological outlook the murderer holds as he /
she goes about slaying an assortment of gorgeous twenty year olds , but this * is * a sequel , and without deviating from the original groundwork we are still given a fresh outlook on horror movies .
this is in large part due to williamson 's deliciously written script , which will easily leave you satisfied . as much as the film condemns the use of cliches , it is riddled with them , but it is done so effectively , and with skillful direction by craven , that you 're not bound to complain .
i will note , however , that the " whodunit ?
" did wind up being the first person i suspected , but believe me , i kept changing my mind as i tried to stay one ahead of the movie .
all the actors outdo themselves here .
we 're not talking oscar performances , but cambell , cox , david arquette as dewey riley , and jamie kennedy as randy
all give surprisingly satisfying performances
that go beyond their last outing .
the characters remain true to their roots , and yet show a clear sign of development over the last two years .
we can see how the events in the first film has affected them , but we do n't lose any of the luster that made them such a delight to watch in the first place .
the nice thing about scream 2 is that it does n't seem off - kilter from it 's predecessor .
it 's a natural , smooth , and believable ( as far as horror films go ) transition from film to film .
we skip two years , but there does n't seem to be any holes or shortcuts taken in connecting the two flicks .
it flows so well that you feel more like you 're reading chapter two of a book ( long chapters , eh ? ) than just revitalizing a cast of familiar faces .
while main characters are usually the only connection in sequels , scream 2 's entire plot structure correlates * completely * with the first , making for immediate fondness and absorption .
as i said before , scream 2
easily lives up to , if not surpassing , it 's precursor .
the only reason scream will likely be hailed above scream 2
is because it was the first .
this does n't mean that it overcasts the unique , whimsical humor or overall caliber of it 's sequel , it just means that scream will forever be known as the movie that mocked it 's own while maintaining it 's sought - after qualities .
if ever a film followed it 's original
so well , it would be scream 2 , and it makes this a definite must - see for all those unbridled scream fans out there .
scream 2 fits snugly alongside scream , and will hopefully receive as many high remarks .
it would top off the series quite well , if it were n't for the fact that two movies do n't really make a series .
it 's unlikely to assume that a scream 3 wo n't appear in the next few years , but if they do decide to turn this into an undeniably acclaimed horror - trilogy , let 's hope they can keep up the fantastic work
.
like they say , do n't mess with perfection .
.
.
but when a money - making smash - hit is almost guaranteed , who 's gon na listen ?
answer:

P