TASK DEFINITION: In this task, you must classify if a given review is positive/negative, indicating your answer as P or N.
PROBLEM: on re - watching italian writer / director dario argento 's much lauded murder mystery tenebrae , i was struck more than anything else by how many sins he commits as a storyteller and manages to get away with .
in emphasising style over matters of plot argento is somewhat notorious in cult film circles , but some aficionados still praise tenebrae as the greatest of his " giallo " murder mysteries .
while it 's certainly not perfect , repeated viewings reveal it to be nonetheless a densely plotted and terrifically stylish thriller .
the story follows a promotional visit to rome by famous american mystery novelist peter neal ( anthony franciosa ) where he discovers that a serial killer is on the loose inspired by his latest book " tenebrae " .
with the police on his back for leads , he decides to take a personal interest in the case and he soon becomes drawn into a mystery where all is not as it seems .
the film benefits enormously from a fine central performance by franciosa .
he brings grace , charm and a deceptive benigness to his character which provides an interesting foil to both the violence of the books he writes and the unfolding real - life horror around him .
the film is awash with a fascinating psychosexual tension .
argento peels back the facade of showbiz and jetset lifestyles to reveal an amoral , ambivalent , shadowy world where desire in all its forms has become a dangerous business .
tenebrae is perhaps the most multi - layered of argento 's scripts to date and there is much bubbling underneath the surface here .
it may take at least two or three viewings to appreciate all the psychological themes at play .
in that respect it strongly recalls his previous giallo deep red / profondo rosso ( the full - length italian language version ) and fans will enjoy spotting the recurring themes .
needless to say for argento fans , there is no denying the director 's brilliance as a stylist .
many of the action and murder sequences are directed with his characteristic finesse and feature plenty of intriguing camerawork .
they are all the more impressive for the fact that in this film argento creates mood by filling his scenes with light , rather than the dark shadows and deep rich colours of earlier works like deep red and suspiria .
instead , tenebrae 's set design and lighting paints a sleek , clinical , chilly vision of a vaguely futuristic urban world .
and the soundtrack 's mix of electronic atmospheres and gothic rock by frequent argento collaborators goblin is the perfect accompaniment .
so tenebrae has much to recommend it , no question .
still , constantly nagging at the back of this viewers mind is several lumps in the narrative .
some critics argue that logic does n't matter in argento films , but damnit , it matters in all films to the point where viewers do n't deserve to feel cheated .
by the way , if you do n't want to know the solution to the mystery then skip the next three paragraphs .
about an hour into tenebrae the story takes an unexpected twist which , properly handled , could have proved ingenious .
we witness the murder of the serial killer himself by a man who , we later discover , is none other than the author peter neal .
he is insane , apparently .
the murders then continue for the remainder of the film as neal decides it 's time to settle some personal business involving his neurotic wife .
he is finally revealed to us as this " second killer " in the film 's bloody climax .
but argento muffs the twist , both technically and narratively .
you see , we are supposed to be tricked into thinking that during this scene peter neal is actually an innocent witness who was crouching in the bushes nearby the whole time and spying on the killer 's house .
but thanks to poor editing , its had to believe neal could have murdered the killer anyway .
bad cutting puts the timing way out .
in other words , he 's almost in two places at once .
during this crucial scene we are also thrown a ridiculous red herring .
by the film 's end you realise that for the sake of an alibi neal must have self - inflicted a nasty injury in this earlier scene to make it look like he was attacked by a fleeing assailant .
the injury ?
he banged himself on the head with a bloody great rock !
thus , the revelation of the " hero " as a killer ( and anti - hero ) in the final scenes may still prove shocking , but its all somewhat implausible by the time the end credits have rolled .
helpfully , in the end we do learn that the bizarre flashbacks of personal humiliation and murder that have permeated the film belonged to neal all along .
but there too is a problem , as the explanations offered for his motivations are psychologically fuzzy to say the least .
the story owes us a better understanding of franciosa 's mind , his concealed madness and his sudden murderous rampage .
tenebrae is also marred by annoying little inconsistencies .
for instance , a teenage boy and girl leave a hotel room and minutes
later we see the girl riding off on the back of a motorbike .
we would assume the rider is the same boy , but it turns out to be some male character we are n't even introduced too !
that 's careless filmmaking , pure and simple .
why , you may ask , do i go on about the story 's flaws ?
because when it comes to visuals and set pieces , argento is one of the most exciting filmmakers in the world .
take one of the extended scenes in tenebrae .
an upset girl wandering the streets at night needlessly taunts a guard dog to the point where - almost unbelievably - it jumps a high fence and chases her across town .
finally , as she desperately seeks escape from this crazed canine , she accidentally stumbles on the serial killer 's lair .
it 's an absolutely masterful sequence , tense and exciting , and communicating a wealth of information through visuals alone .
and that 's exactly the kind of thing that makes the flaws so frustrating .
too often , it seems , argento 's films as a whole are less than the sum of their impressive parts .
mind you , if you love murder mysteries then tenebrae is still worth a look .
and if you 're a fan of argento 's unique style of giallo thriller then it 's essential .
see the uncut widescreen version if you can and drink in some of the wonderful cinematography by luciano tovoli .
it 's a stylish , great - looking and quirky film despite the problem narrative .
a shame , because it does n't have to be that way .
take argento 's more recent stendhal syndrome ( 1992 ) , where with the aid of co - writer franco ferrini he fashioned a solid storyline without sacrificing any of his surreal weirdness or visual panache .
proof that he can do it , if he tries . . .

SOLUTION: P

PROBLEM: " living out loud , " is the type of motion picture we do n't often see : it is a film about mature , intelligent adults , instead of the usual american film , in which children basically dress up in grown - up clothing and parade around acting like immature seven - year - olds .
judith ( holly hunter ) , a fortysomething living in new york city , has been having a difficult time with life lately .
she is extremely depressed about her recent divorce to her husband ( martin donovan ) , who had been cheating on her .
she can not sleep , haunted by terrible memories , often imagines off - the - wall things to try and make the world seem like a better place , and
the only place she can really go to feel happy is to hear one of her favorite singers , liz bailey ( queen latifah ) , perform at a local club .
judith 's life does start to brighten a little when , one night when she gets home to her apartment late , strikes up a conversation with the elevator operator , pat ( danny devito ) , a lonely man in his fifties whom has lost his daughter recently .
both of them create a sort of emotional connection with each other , seeking comfort with the other person , but while pat starts to form a deep love for her , judith only wants to remain friends . " living out loud , " which was written by richard lagravenese ( " the bridges of madison county " ) , who is also making his directing debut here , is a wonderful film from beginning to end , one that is honest , genuinely funny , and poignant .
the three central characters , that of judith , pat , and liz , are all written to be free - thinking , complex human beings , and are all likable , but flawed , people who are constantly interesting , as is the film itself .
one highly original element of the film is that judith occasionally imagines things occuring in her mind in the way she wishes they would happen .
sometimes it results in comedy , and sometimes it turns out to be subtle and truly touching .
one sequence that stands out is when judith is at a restaurant by herself , reading a novel .
an older woman comes over to her , mentions that that is a great book she is reading , and then goes over to join her own friends .
as the woman sits down , she looks over to see judith by herself , and motions for her to come join them .
instantly , we realize this was simply in judith 's mind , as we see the same woman just sit down at the table and begin talking to her friends .
holly hunter and danny devito
both give the performances of their careers here .
hunter , of course , was brilliant in 1993 's " the piano , " for which she won an academy award , but in this film she is even better
, i think .
she finds the right note for each scene and holds it . and devito has never had such a humanistic role before , which i was surprised about
.
usually he is used as the butt of a joke , or as a caricature , but in this film , has a living - and - breathing , sympathetic person to play .
topping it all off is latifah , also a singer , who is quickly turning into a respectable actress herself , and has a juicy , natural supporting role
as , in some ways , judith 's role model .
another joy of the film is that it does not somehow form a contrived , " happy " ending , but , in staying with its realistic tone , manages to be upbeat , but truthful .
the last shot is an especially powerful image .
nothing is said , but just the image of someone walking down a sidewalk says it all .
the relationship that results between judith and pat is true - to - life and sincere .
as we watch these two people talk , and get to know each other , all that we wish for them both is to be happy , even if that does not include for them to become romantically involved .
and as , " living out loud , " which is one of the best films of the year , proves ,
sometimes a friendship is the strongest bond anyone could possibly ask for .

SOLUTION: P

PROBLEM: ' bicentennial man ' is a family film without any external motive with the exception of providing the minimum dose of entertainment .
chris columbus , the director who gave you " mrs . doubtfire " , plays on sentimental strings and mushy dialogue to make his point .
based on the short story by isaac asimov , it is supposed to be a science fiction story about a robot who wants to be human , which as you can imagine is very difficult .
starting in a not too distant future the film concentrates on a wealthy family that buys an android to help them with the house and children .
soon this robot , called andrew ( robin williams ) shows abilities that makes his owner mr .
martin ( sam neill ) very curious .
andrew is interested in art and music , he " enjoys " making clocks , which clearly shows that he has genuine emotions .
it shows out that because of a small failure in the " electrical circuits " and " positronic brain " andrew has accidentally gained a soul .
this makes him unique and his evil creators worried .
then mr .
martin decides to teach andrew all the things he was n't programmed to do .
soon andrew wants to leave the house in pursuit of freedom , destiny and love .
this film can be described as a disney version of blade runner , a film that still shines as the biggest gem in the crown of science fiction .
ever since that film , the subject of humanity still stands as one big controversy .
what makes us human ?
the thoughts ?
the emotions ? is it possible to become human ?
at what point can we say to a robot " now you are one of us " ?
these are very tough questions that require a serious and thurral approach .
it is obvious that columbus did n't take them very seriously .
when you think about it , this film is not really meditating on the question
" when is a robot no longer a machine , but a human being ? " , but tells a story about racial discrimination and lack of understanding .
andrew is so complex and emotional from the very beginning that the audience immediately accepts him as a human being , and only the society has troubles with it .
in other words , it is as far from reality as from the academy awards .
further more , there are other annoying problems .
to this day no serious filmmaker has dared to speculate about the future in more than 50 years from now .
this has not been done for obvious reasons , because the filmmakers are well aware of the fact that they lack the knowledge and imagination to perform such a difficult task .
columbus is the first to have crossed that line .
the result is , as you might imagine , primitive , unrealistic and incredibly disappointing effort .
the world is simply frozen in time .
neither the society , fashion , culture or values have changed over 200 years .
mom is still working at the kitchen , doing the dishes .
when you think back to the late 17th century and then compare it to the world we live in today , you 'll see a slightly bigger difference .
i am not saying that everything should change .
it is unlikely that the human rights will change , but it 's even more unlikely that there will not be any progress in science , technology and fashion .
i suppose it 's possible to watch this as a some sort of bizarre fairytale , but it 's really hard .
robin williams is hidden behind c and speaking in a robotic way .
as always he does a decent job , as does sam neill .
but it does n't really matter .
it is the sentimentality and length that turns
this picture into a tiresome experience .
pretty much like last year 's " meet joe black " , this is a primitive and unresolved story which is presented with a splendor and professionalism that it does n't deserve .
great actors and a talented crew have worked hard to achieve something that will be instantly forgotten .
when isaac asimov wrote this story , the future seemed far away and magical .
everything seemed possible .
now is the future of asimov 's time , and we know that it is not as magical and perfect as it seemed a long time ago .
for the same reasons that the young generation of today can not be amazed by julius verne 's " 20 000 leagues under the sea " , so ca n't we accept this story as a potential reality .
let us hope that next year 's " a. i. " will be more rewarding .

SOLUTION:
N