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

Q: hollywood has really done the whole dracula thing to death ( no pun intended - honest ) .
it 's a shame , too , because the good count was probably the most frightening out the old b - movie monsters .
i mean , come on .
are people really going to get that scared over a big green guy named frankenstein that moves at a speed of five miles per hour ?
hell no .
and not only was the idea of a vampire frightening as hell , but it also carried with it a kind of sensual feeling as well , not commonly associated with horror films .
and not only has the idea been done too many times , but with the possible exception of from dusk ' till dawn , has not been done very well lately , either .
this is precisely why
it was so much fun for me watching the original nosferatu .
i got to go back to the times when making movies ( even horror movies ) was considered an art form , and not just done to make cash like nowadays .
and that is exactly what this film is ; art .
i 've been a horror fan since i was eight years old , and to this day
i have not seen any horror film cover the intellectual ground that this film covers
.
let me backtrack a minute .
when i say " intellectual ground " , i do n't mean that nosferatu tackles philosophical questions or anything like that , i just mean that in order for the film to work the way it was intended to , a little bit of thinking is involved .
with most modern slasher movies like friday the 13th and what - not , you can just simply sit back in your chair and be frightened by the gore that is shown .
those movies could have been made by a fifth grader with a good makeup kit ; movies like this require the viewer to actually pay attention and ponder what is happening on the screen .
you see , this movie has barely any violence in it and even less blood or gore .
this is a thinking man 's slasher flick .
the " nosferatu " of the title is orlock ( max shreck ) , a strange , hermit - like count that , as the film opens , is looking for a new home to buy .
he employs the help of hutter ( gustav von wangenhein ) , a real estate salesman ( or something to that effect ) who has a nice home and even a fiancee named ellen ( greta schroeder ) . upon orders from his boss , hutter treks to the transylvanian mountains to visit orlock 's castle and speak to him about his new home ( which just happens to be right next door to hutter 's ) .
the next morning , he wakes up to find teeth marks on his neck . . .
not really a good sign .
he then discovers through some reading that the count is a " nosferatu " , or vampire , one of the undead that feeds off the blood of living humans .
but by the time he pieces this together , he is too late ; orlock has already embarked to hutter 's hometown via boat .
will hutter reach his destination in time to save his fiancee from the deadly clutches of count orlock ?
the character of orlock is , of course , dracula .
the only only reason his name was changed was because this was an unauthorized account of bram strocker 's novel .
just thought that was an interesting little side note .
. .
probably the only way you will get to see
this fine film is by purchasing a copy of arrow entertainment 's digitally restored cut , now available in stores .
however , this version is quite different than maunau 's original masterpiece .
the movie is now sporting a new soundtrack by band type o - negative and color tinting , much like the 1984 version of lang 's metropolis .
now , i really appreciate what arrow entertainment is trying to do here , bringing a classic like this to the attention of a wider audience that might have otherwise just skipped this one .
but alas
, i like watching movies the way they were originally intended to be seen .
but that 's just my bag
; you may like the newer , more " modern " version better .
either way , i suggest investing your money in a copy .
if you like what they have done with it , pop it in the vcr and enjoy .
if you 're like me , just do what i 'll do during future viewings ; turn the color all the way down on your television , hit mute , turn on some bach or mozart or whatever , dim the lights and prepare to view what is truly one of the greatest films ever made .

A: P
****
Q: synopsis : lifelong friends rafe ( affleck ) and danny ( hartnett )
join the us air force and are stationed at pearl harbor , hawaii .
rafe goes to england to fight alongside british pilots and is seemingly killed in action .
danny falls in love with rafe 's girlfriend , evelyn ( beckinsale ) , but rafe survives and returns to confront his former friend .
meanwhile , the japanese sneak attack is imminent . . .
review : " pearl harbor " is a perfect example of movies as product rather than as art .
it is little more than a crassly - calculated attempt to woo the masses , enticing them with big stars , big effects , and a big setting -- but no heart .
it is difficult to criticise the actors , because they do everything the movie demands of them . sadly ,
this amounts to barely more than reciting dialogue of such sheer banality that it makes one eager to see the script randall wallace wrote with his right hand at the same time as he was writing " pearl harbor " with his left .
the plot here is pure cliche , and the wartime setting simply a convenient backdrop .
there is no genuine exploration of what pearl harbor meant to the united states , and no insight into its vital role in inciting that country to join world war ii . instead , there is just an assembly - line love triangle , some empty patriotic rhetoric , and a laughable attempt to placate japanese viewers via the inclusion of some reticent imperial commanders ( when one intones , " i fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant " , i nearly fell out of my seat ) .
to the movie 's credit , it does include a fantastic portrayal of the attack itself , an exciting and dizzying hour which plunges viewers into the war .
if only the remaining two hours had been crafted with such skill , perhaps this memorial day non - event would have been worth watching .

A: N
****
Q: capsule :
dumb dud of an entry in the body heat sweepstakes , and now something of a landmark for having spawned a jillion clones .
basic instinct 's worst crime is that it 's not just a bad movie , but in many ways , an incompetent one as well .
it 's stupid in itself , and stupid to think its audience is as stupid as it is
.
it 's supposed to be a thriller , but the plot is dead on its feet , and ultimately arbitrary
; it 's only put into the movie to jerk us around .
it 's also supposed to be sexy , but it 's instead got the unpleasant rawness of a teenager showing younger kids his collections of dirty pictures .
it 's a ripoff .
the story opens with a rock star being murdered while in the throes of orgasm .
the biggest suspect is an authoress , catherine tramell ( sharon stone ) , who wrote a novel in which the murder was eerily presaged .
or maybe it 's the work of a copycat ?
these and other plot threads get fed to the detective who 's on the case ( michael douglas ) , who has a few problems himself .
like we wonder if his elevator goes to the top floor .
we can measure with a stopwatch the time from them setting eyes on each other to the moment they are doing the mattress dance .
joe eszterhas has written the screenplay , and he uses a device that he used before in the much better jagged edge : the killer 's identity is kept a secret until the movie 's final shot .
this is n't in itself a problem -- the problem is that up until that point , we 've been given nothing to work with .
every clue in the movie -- every clue -- is ambiguous .
the whole thriller aspect of the movie is a shill . red herrings , dead plot threads , violence , and kinky sexuality litter the movie like potholes in manhattan streets .
they add up to zip , because they 're not happening to people we care about .
douglas 's character is foulmouthed and bitter and that 's it
; stone 's character has an iron - on smile that never changes ; the rest are forgettable .
when we do n't even have the luxury of giving a damn about anyone in the movie , who cares what happens in it ?
especially with an ending that is not only unsatisfying , but in many ways inexplicable ?
( a friend of mine once came up with a rule of thumb about movie characters : " if no one in the movie behaves like anyone you know , or would * care *
to know , just leave !
" ) one of the nastier things about the movie is the way it treats lesbianism not as an integral part of someone 's life , but as a kind of kink -- something to thrill men with .
i despair whenever i encounter this kind of stupidity in mainstream entertainment ; are we still so culturally neanderthal that the only way to include something like that in a big - budget hollywood film is as a hefnerism ?

A:
N
****