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

Q: plot : a separated , glamorous , hollywood couple must pretend to reunite for a press junket of the last movie that they ever shot together .
kewl . . .
now
i only wish that i could pretend never to have seen this movie . . .
critique : trite , unfunny , boring and a waste of everyone 's talent .
how a premise with such zest and bite can turn into a movie that does n't feature any chemistry , any real laughs , any surprises or any spice is beyond me .
how julia roberts is used solely as a " puppy dog " character , puttering around in the background while we endure the complete bitchiness of zeta - jones ' character , who is not one bit funny or romantic
( two ideal ingredients in a " romantic comedy " ) , is also beyond me .
and why they chose john cusack , a great , quirky actor in his own right , to play
the most bland , uninteresting and unfetching character ( with zero chemistry with either of his leads ) is further more , beyond me .
and to anybody who decided that this project was " funny " enough to greenlight featuring the talents mentioned above , along with billy crystal , christopher walker , seth green and stanley tucci .
. .
well , what can i say .
. .
i just do n't have the words .
so is this the worst movie that i 've seen all year ?
no .
but it definitely sucks
and it 's basically because . . .
well , it 's just not funny .
and for the record , allow me to state a few more problems with it .
it starts off slow , it 's got no energy , it does n't engage you with any of its characters
( julia barely gets somewhat interesting in the film , everyone else . . .
lame ! ) , it utilizes way too many flashbacks to move the story forward , it 's utterly predictable , standard , routine , see - through and uninteresting as a plot and it just sits there on the screen , big and ugly , waiting . . .
waiting for you to laugh or find something in it that is amusing .
and then hank azaria shows up . . .
aaaaaah , the film 's savior ( mind you , some might be offended by his exaggeration of a stereotype , but that 's another story altogether ) .
but when an experienced " voice " actor upstages all of the main stars in a summer " blockbuster " romantic comedy with an over - the - top antonio banderas accent , damn dude . . .
your film 's in trouble ! ! rent this movie on video just to see what went wrong yourself .
the references to ricky ricardo and senor wences
( huh ! ? ) , the idio - plot points like when one of the characters goes on the roof to stretch his arms out and relax , but everyone believes that he 's going to kill himself ( hardy - har - har ) and the cheap way of getting the audience to leave the theater laughing by bringing back a ball - sniffing dog that has no place being in the location at the end of the movie , well .
. .
i could go on .
but i wo n't because i do still respect all of the actors in this film and actually did laugh at azaria , green and tucci 's antics from time to time ( ironic , eh .
. .
what about the leads , dammit ! )
and liked the premise behind the film ( before i saw the finished product , of course ) .
a dud all the way around .
btw , all the talk about this film was that julia roberts was to be in a fat suit for one scene
( her character is supposed to have lost 60 pounds ) , so when the scene finally came , i did get a little excited about what it might look like and then . . .
well , it basically just looked like julia roberts in a fat suit ! ugh .
i think i 'm gon na start drinking again after this lame - ass movie .
c'mon hollywood , enough with the crud !
where 's joblo coming from ?
beautiful ( 1/10 ) - my best friend 's wedding ( 7/10 ) - notting hill ( 5/10 ) - pretty woman ( 7/10 ) -runaway bride ( 5/10 ) - someone like you ( 4/10 ) - wedding planner ( 3/10 ) - when harry met sally ( 10/10 )
- you 've got mail ( 4/10 )

A: N
****
Q: absolute power , the new film produced and directed by clint eastwood , attempts to be a thriller set in the world of hypocritical presidents and their murderous political staff .
it is about as thrilling as a lecture on the mating habits of the south american grasshopper .
one can only wonder how an utterly absurd script like the one written by william goldman could have ever interested eastwood .
not only is the plot unbelievable and contrived , but even the writing itself lacks any consistency or intelligence .
continually underestimating the audience , the film gives us information we already know or do nt even need .
details essential to the story are so improbably convenient they are annoying
( like why would two unprepared secret service men carry two night - vision goggles in their car ? ) .
oddly enough , the initial setup for absolute power offers interesting possibilities .
a masterful jewel - thief ( played by clint eastwood ) witnesses the murder of the wife of a powerful millionaire ( played by e. g. marshall ) .
while robbing one of marshalls mansions , he is forced to hide in the bedrooms vault .
there , through a two - way mirror , he sees the wife and another man engage in passionate foreplay .
their game of love quickly turns into a violent struggle as the man starts beating the woman . in self defense , the woman grabs a letter - opener and stabs the man in the elbow .
she raises her arm to stab again when she is fatally shot by two secret service men .
the man ?
he is the president of the united states of america .
where does the film go wrong ?
it can not be the acting .
clint eastwood , ed harris and gene hackman as the president give type - cast , but decent performances .
the cinematography is sufficient ; wild and erratic during action sequences , dark and mysterious during psychologically suspenseful scenes , and calm and warm during dramatic dialogue .
even the music is not as bombastic as it usually tends to be in the thriller / suspense genre .
the fault clearly lies in the screenplay , and the screenplay alone .
while setting up a story about misuse of power , about the true possessors of that power , and about intrigue and double - crossing , it does not resolve it .
not one buildup of suspense is resolved by an exciting climax . rather , the tense situations are left dangling at the end , giving the viewer an uneasy sense of incompleteness .
an example of this is a very promising and tense buildup of a scene : in an attempt to arrest clint eastwood , the police have set up a trap at a small restaurant .
police officers are everywhere , incognito of course .
at the same time , not one but two hit men are preparing to kill clint eastwood when he arrives .
all three parties are unaware of each others presence .
this scene is tremendously exciting and the audience is wondering how clint eastwood , who might suspect this is a trap , will get himself out of this difficult position .
he will probably have a brilliant plan , involving ingenious preparations .
however , when he arrives at the trap , both hit men miss ( how convenient )
and in the confusion eastwood simply walks away .
the buildup of this scene took about ten minutes .
ten minutes of close ups of the hit men loading their weapons intercut with the police preparing for the trap .
the scene was resolved in less than 20 seconds .
.. parallel to the story line of catching the real killer is a cliche emotional tale about the estranged relationship between father eastwood and his daughter .
the daughter blames her father for never being there for her , because he was either in jail or robbing a house somewhere .
of course their relationship takes a turn for the better during the adventure and they end up a happy family .
again , it is commendable that absolute power tries to deviate from the mainstream suspense film by giving room for a dramatic subplot . however , trying is simply not enough !
the second story line should be subtle , original and preferably unpredictable .
.. everything this film is not .
how could a screenplay like absolute power ever get the funding to be produced ?
how could eastwood , who has successfully produced and directed many outstanding films such as the brilliant unforgiven , ever believe in a project like this one ?
i am sad to say that my respect for the actor / director / producer has diminished substantially due to this film .
director quentin tarantino once said : " i can make a good movie out of any bad script .
" director clint eastwood obviously can not .

A: N
****
Q: the laserman : somehow the title of writer - director - producer peter wang 's film conjures up images of superheroes , like ultraman and spiderman .
you kind of expect an adventure flick about a crime fighter who can shoot laser beams from his fingertips .
as it turns out , the laserman _ is _ about crime and about laser beams , but there are n't any superheroes .
instead , wang 's film is populated by a group of refreshingly off - beat characters living in the ultimate cultural melting pot : new york city .
the laserman is a comic brew which celebrates ethnicity , eccentricity , and electricity .
the film tells the bizarre story of arthur weiss ( marc hayashi ) , a chinese - american laser scientist whose life becomes incredibly hectic after he accidentally kills his lab assistant in an experiment .
he loses his job but finds work with a mysterious company which secretly plans to use laser technology to commit dastardly deeds .
arthur 's professional life is cluttered with moral dilemmas .
his personal life , on the other hand , is cluttered with colorful friends and quirky relatives .
in fact , arthur is by far the blandest character in the film , despite a charismatic performance by hayashi ( the san francisco - based actor whose films include chan is missing and the karate kid ii ) .
it 's the auxiliary characters who give the laserman its unique spark .
arthur 's not - so - typical jewish mother , ruth
, for example , is convinced that a chinese soul is trapped in her jewish body .
she has dyed her red hair black , she takes herbal medicine daily , and she is perpetually cooking up strange delicacies , such as matzo balls in soy sauce -- the ultimate fusion of jewish and chinese cuisine .
veteran stage actress joan copeland takes the part and runs with it , almost stealing the movie in the process .
she plays ruth as a driven woman , determined to overcome her genetic heritage by immersing herself in chinese culture .
arthur 's girlfriend janet ( maryann urbano ) is a kooky free - spirit who would rather meditate than copulate ; her ultimate goal is orgasm through zen meditation .
arthur 's best friend , joey ( tony leung ) , is a small time thief who hustles everything from microwave ovens to machine guns .
joey is married to arthur 's jewish sister , but he is also having an affair with a chinese immigrant who works in a whore house .
arthur 's 11-year - old son , jimmy , played by the amazingly adorable david chan , is -- horror of horrors -- bad at math !
he finds it impossible to meet his father 's lofty expectations .
the various people in arthur 's life come together to form a rich tapestry of humanity .
like wang 's earlier film , a great wall ( about a san francisco family visiting relatives in china ) , the laserman revolves around cultural differences .
every character in the film is , in some way or another , trying to find his identity -- struggling to negotiate a balance between his native culture and the american way .
the movie also offers a provocative look at technology .
wang appears in the movie as lieutenant lu , a detective who is fed up with machines , even though he relies on them to do his job .
the film views technology with a wary eye , acknowledging its necessity while at the same time realizing its potential dangers .
wang raises the time - honored question of whether scientists should be held responsible for their inventions .
was einstein responsible for the a - bomb ?
is arthur weiss responsible for his lasers ?
the movie pits spirituality against technology , man against machine , and
the result is a draw .
according to the film , technology has its place , but we must employ it with great forethought and caution .
ironically , by its very nature , the laserman is a triumph of technology -- the technology of filmmaking .
wang 's direction is exquisite , especially during the tense finale in which the director frantically cross - cuts between the various subplots , perhaps in homage to
d .
w .
griffith .
cinematographer ernest dickerson , who has worked on all of spike lee 's films , gives the laserman a distinctive , artistic look .
mason daring 's score , which includes a send - up of bach , is right on target .
the laserman is an ambitious endeavor , which is to be applauded , but it 's sometimes ambitious to a fault .
wang serves up so many slices of life in the film that it 's hard to digest them all .
for instance , one character ( arthur 's sister ) has negligible screen time , and consequently we just do n't care about her marital problems .
in weaving his web , wang has included a few too many strands .
overall , however , the laserman is a charmingly eclectic concoction .
on the surface , the film is a light and bouncy comedy - thriller , overflowing with whimsical humor and visual style .
the heavier issues emerge only when you take a deeper look at the film .
you can ponder the moral questions or you can just sit back and enjoy the absurdity of life in china town .

A:
P
****