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

[Q]: i am starting to write this review before going to see strawberry and chocolate , cuba 's oscar nominee for best foreign film , directed by tomas gutierrez alea ( who also directed the sometimes and in some circles critically acclaimed memorias del subdesarrollo-- " memories of underdevelopment " .
i saw memorias as part of a cuban cinema class back in the late ' 70s ; it merged the politics of the cuban revolution with mundane elements of the human condition .
i knew then that memorias was probably a state - sanctioned political missive , and now expect strawberry will follow suit .
fellow internetters , primarily in the newsgroup dedicated to cuba ( soc . culture .
cuba ) , have mentioned that strawberry is a harsh criticism of the revolution and its current state of affairs .
i have jumped to the conclusion that strawberry is nothing more than a veiled attempt at espousing the party line -- it probably looks like political criticism , but it ai n't so .
having some first hand and extensive anecdotal knowledge of castro 's repressiveness , i ca n't conceive of his tolerating honest and adversarial criticism of the revolution , and i ca n't imagine his letting anyone even suggest his failure as a leader of a failed movement .
as kids say these days , duh ! , the revolution 's current state needs no criticism ; its physical and spiritual crumbling is self evident .
the proper questions to put relate to castro 's legitimacy .
i bet the film takes castro 's power for granted , and that this or any other movie , produced under cuba 's state control , can not question his right to run cuba 's political show ( ongoing now for more than 36 years ) .
that 's why i just ca n't believe strawberry is an honest criticism of the regime .
let 's see what happens after the room goes dark and the screen lights up .
i saw the film -- twice .
i was right ; castro remained intact .
strawberry negotiates the relationship between a young " dialectic materialist , " as he describes himself , and a homosexual photographer ( diego ) in 1979 cuba .
the young man ( david ) is the son of peasants ; a symbol of the revolution 's reason for being .
grateful to the revolution for the opportunity to receive a university education , he studies political science instead of literature , his avocation , because he perceives it is his duty .
therein lies a likely unintended irony , since cuba has no need for political theoreticians .
cuba 's government is castro .
diego 's lifestyle is the antithesis of revolutionary life .
he enjoys the finer things -- tea , opera , art .
he does not do " voluntary work " for the revolution .
his small apartment is a sensual oasis .
the moniker " bourgeois " figuratively hangs over his head during the early parts of the movie .
however , he is a " revolucionario " in his own way .
the supporting roles are filled by : an aging busybody with a heart of gold and a troubled psyche ; david 's roommate , who rally takes the communist party line to its expected extreme ;
david 's ex - girlfriend , who dumped him for another guy , yet wants to bed him before she leaves for italy with her husband ; german , a gay sculptor whose work diego is attempting to exhibit , and who strikes a faustian pact with the government .
gutierrez alea and co - director
juan carlos tabio
do a fine job at almost showing that homosexuals can be revolutionaries too .
heck , towards the end of the film you begin to think the guy deserves a medal for his patriotic fervor .
he really loves the revolution ( as supposedly does everybody else in cuba ) and wants to make it better by exposing and correcting some of its flaws .
real criticism is missing though .
this movie is political window dressing .
luis aguilar leon 's op .
ed .
piece on fresa in the miami herald ( 10 march 1995 , at 21a ) did not color my judgment ; it presaged my intuition .
aguilar leon expressed my sentiment about this film 's political angle best : like many artistic manifestations in cuba , strawberry and chocolate sprang from a totally manipulated environment .
as art critic ivan de la nuez well states in the latest issue of the magazine postmodern notes , the silenced artists are those who refuse to accept " the charade in which artists can provoke up to a point , while the institutions legitimize themselves by forbidding them to go beyond that point .
" although terrible propaganda , this is otherwise a fine film .
[A]: P


[Q]: john sayles ' " men with guns " is about what happens to a society when brute force and constant threat of violence are the only means of gaining and maintaining power .
the film takes place in an unnamed central american country , where the men with guns are the rulers .
most of the country is divided into tiny segments - some are controlled by guerrillas with guns , some are controlled by army soldiers with guns , and all the spaces in - between are controlled by thieves , bandits , and terrorists .
all people not fitting one of those descriptions are defined only by their powerlessness .
however , like so many central american countries , this one also features modernity .
there is an unnamed capital city that bears all the hallmarks of contemporary civilization : skyscrapers , hospitals , televisions , highways , etc .
but , it might as well be in another country because those who live in the comforts of the city have either decided to ignore the violence ravaging the rest of the land , or else they are simply ignorant of it .
the film 's main character , dr .
fuentes ( federico luppi ) falls into the latter category .
one of his patients , an army general , describes him as the most educated man he has ever met , and also the most naive .
fuentes is a true liberal , a caring man who thinks he can cure the ills of his country by fighting bacteria and ignorance among the indigenous indians .
with government assistance , he has trained a large group of eager young medical students and sent them into the rainforest to cure and educate .
this program was to be his legacy , and he repeats over and over that it was a good idea .
however , when he ventures into that same rainforest to visit his prot ?
g
? s , he finds that things have not turned out as he has envisioned .
as he travels deeper into the forest , going from village to village , the story is always the same : the doctors were all killed by either the guerrillas or the army soldiers , usually for helping the other .
when dr .
fuentes asks a village woman why the army killed one of the doctors , she replies simply , " because they had guns , and we did n't . " rational science and all its attempts to cure have been wiped out by the men with guns , because others ' sickness and ignorance helps them maintain power .
dr .
fuentes picks up several companions during his journey , all of whom are characterized by their loss .
first , there is a young boy named conejo ( dan rivera gonz ?
lez ) , who has neither a mother nor a father .
next , fuentes crosses paths with a thief named domingo ( dami ? n delgado ) , who deserted the army because he was tired of being jeered into committing murderous atrocities .
through his ordeal in the army , domingo has lost most of his self - respect , and defines himself only by his pistol .
along the way , the group also picks up padre portillo ( dami ?
n
alc ?
zar ) , a priest who has lost his faith .
as domingo is running from the army , so is portillo - he has been labeled a guerrilla sympathizer , and ran away from the village in which he was preaching .
last , the group takes on a mute girl named graciela ( tania cruz ) , who has n't spoken since she was raped two years earlier , her innocence and even her will to live forcefully taken from her .
sayles two major strengths as a director - characters and setting - are abundantly evident in " men with guns .
"
( like many of his films , sayles might have tightened this one somewhat in the editing room , but a longer - than - necessary running time is a sin almost always committed when the director is also the editor . )
he creates fascinating , complex characters , especially dr .
fuentes and domingo .
their uneasy relationship is also somewhat humorous in context of the film 's overarching theme of violence as power - domingo 's attempts to control fuentes with his revolver are constantly undermined by fuentes ' belief that the revolver is unloaded ( at first it is , but later is is n't ) .
the setting is also as thick with detail as the rainforest itself .
sayles knows how to bring a location to life , whether it be an early twentieth - century coal mining town in " matewan " ( 1987 ) or a contemporary texas / mexico bordertown in " lone star " ( 1996 ) .
sayles is not a particularly inventive director - he likes to let his actors do most of the work - but he and cinematographer slavomir idziak ( " gattaca " ) successfully evoke both the beauty and the danger of the central american terrain .
sayles also maintains a strong sense of authenticity by filming everything on location in mexico , using all latin american actors , and having all the dialogue spoken in either spanish or native indian dialects .
the one exception is a couple of bumbling american tourists who work not only as comic relief , but as evidence of just how clueless the united states is about what is going on a few hundred miles south of the texas border .
it would not be a stretch to say that " men with guns " is a depressing film .
in fact , the two feelings it evokes most are hopelessness and failure .
in addition to loss , the main characters are also failures at something , whether that be dr .
fuentes failure to change anything through medicine , or padre portillo 's inability to stand up and be the martyr he always dreamed of being .
nevertheless , it is bleak material sayles has chosen , and he deals with it accordingly .
the last shot of the film does offer a hint of hope , even in a world where , as one character puts it , " nobody refuses the men with guns .
"
[A]: P


[Q]: "
you leave little notes on my pillow .
i told you a million times i ca n't stand little notes on my pillow . '
we are all out of corn flakes - f . u . '
it took me three hours to figure out that ' f . u . ' was felix unger .
" --- a frustrated oscar madison ( walter matthau ) running down a list of his complaints against his roommate felix unger ( jack lemmon ) , in the odd couple .
the classic neil simon comedy ( based on his own stage play ) about suicidal felix ( lemmon ) , who is persuaded by his poker friend oscar ( matthau ) to stay with him in his apartment after felix 's wife throws him out and files for divorce .
the hook : oscar is messy and likes his apartment that way , while felix is an obsessive / compulsive neat freak .
the two men , despite their friendship , instantly clash .
movies just are n't as delightfully funny as this one is .
every line of neil simon 's dialogue flows like comedic poetry , and all the actors are just perfect in their performances .
lemmon
is at his best as the anxiety ridden felix , but it 's matthau who shines brightest as oscar , whose world is being invaded and rearranged , mostly against his wishes ( the type of character i always enjoy identifying with ) .
and who can forget that catchy score by neal hefti ?
the best thing about the film
( and this is a testament to the quality of the writing ) is that it 's a comedy with substance .
these two men , even while at each other 's throats , genuinely care for one another as friends .
when they clash , it is n't cartoonish hatred being displayed , but genuine frustration with the fact that they are such good friends but just can not manage to co - exist .
movies nowadays , take grumpy old men for example , just do n't have that extra spark there .
these days it 's just animosity for the sake of comedy .
a television series followed ( starring jack klugman and tony randall ) , which i 'll admit i 've never seen an episode of in its entirety , and neil simon even scripted the sequel , the odd couple ii , which was released in 1998 .
neither of them compare to this comic masterpiece
though .
it 's one of the best comedies of all time and easily earns its spot in my top ten favorite films .
[A]:
P