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

[EX Q]: some of my friends who went to live in usa complain about one thing - that country is very different from the one depicted in hollywood movies .
that is especially true for those who end up somewhere in that unexplored land between los angeles and new york where they find , to their big surprise , that the majority of people vote republican , go to church every sunday and usually do n't tolerate liberal attitudes that are taken for granted in an average american film .
such rude awakening , however , can happen in another direction - conservative people are sometimes forced to discover unpleasant truths about world they live in .
something like that happens to jake van dorn ( george c . scott ) , successful grand rapids businessman who shares strong calvinist convictions with the rest of his community .
one day his daughter kristen ( ilah davis )
disappears from calvinist youth convention in california .
van dorn is worried because he does n't believe that his daughter would run from home .
however , the truth delivered by private investigator andy mast ( peter boyle ) is
even harder - kristen is spotted in cheap pornographic film .
infuriated van dorn is unsatisfied with the way mast 's investigation is going , so he goes to los angeles to search for kristen himself .
unfortunately , he lacks experience and the quest , that brought him to the utter depths of sex underworld , is fruitless .
things change when he devises cunning plan and , while doing it , stumbles on sympathetic prostitute and part time porno actress nicky ( season hubley ) .
almost two decades after its release , hardcore is mostly forgotten by critics and film scholars .
it is a real shame , because very few movies in today 's hollywood would dare tackle controversial issues that writer and director paul schrader explored in his second directorial attempt .
in late 1970s , it was totally different situation - films were expected to have mature , serious themes for the mature audience .
for schrader this film was nice opportunity to expand the subplot of his previous work , taxi driver - one that deals with the great generational divide that tormented the american society in 1970s .
on one side we have an old america that sticks to the puritan ideals of hard work and strict morals that made that country great .
but that america is obviously unable to cope with the new challenges brought by the social turmoil in 1960s and , instead of facing them , prefers to live in rural , conservative cocoons .
the new america , on the other hand , fares no better - ideals of the so - called " sexual revolution " , same as all other " revolutions " of the swinging sixties , degraded into exploitation and depravity .
instead of being " liberated " , baby boomers are stuck with their own inability to cope with the newly discovered freedoms .
schrader very cleverly brings the idea that those two americas , actually , are n't so far away - nice example is a brilliant scene in which van dorn , already described as an authoritarian and paternalistic capitalist , meets sleazy porno producer ; the latter one also turns out to be authoritarian , paternalistic and very dedicated to this job .
the difference between the two is simply in the line of work .
many contemporary critics actually accused schrader of promoting conservative agenda .
on the surface , it may look that way - audience is forced to sympathise with van dorn and his quest .
in the first scenes , he is portrayed as nice family man who actually does n't deserve to experience parent 's worst nightmare .
the scene in the porno cinema that reveals kristen 's fate is extremely cruel ; pain and humiliation , brought by oscar - winning actor george c . scott , is of such intensity , that the audience feels sorry for him and simply must support his agenda .
van dorn is perhaps flawed , and the subtle hints lead to the unflattering truth at the end ; but the viewers simply know that his cause is just , and that prodigal daughter must be better off with her loving father than with the sleazy pornographers that only want to exploit her body .
on the other hand , schrader , who grew up in an environment very much like van dorn 's ( his own parents would n't allow him to watch movies until he was 18 ) , knows better and tries to bring another side of coin .
even the people connected with sex underworld can show redeeming qualities - like nicky , who actually tries to improve her life , and sleazy detective who develops something like a conscience at the end .
unfortunately , schrader fails to erase the impact of the shocking scene at the beginning , and his attempt to reconcile the opposing sides of america seems lost in somewhat clich ?
d finale .
the script is slightly flawed , and schrader as director does n't show too much originality - his style seems too influenced by techniques that scorsese used in taxi driver .
apart from the scenes in grand rapids , those two films even look alike .
but the content might be more than interesting for today 's viewer , especially those inspired by the current 70s revival . until boogie nights , no hollywood mainstream movie ever dared to explore the phenomenon of pornography in 1970s .
hardcore , on the other hand , might serve as precious document , because it depicts sex film industry in the period often regarded as the golden age by connoisseurs - before the advent of video , when many of the porno filmmakers could afford to think of themselves as artists .
the view of such age and the industry is very unflattering , though , but for the film whose main character takes time to explain calvinist doctrines to the audience , that should n't be too surprising .
anyway , despite some flaws , hardcore remains very interesting and powerful piece of cinema .
[EX A]: P

[EX Q]: for about twenty minutes into mission impossible 2 director john woo ( the killer , hard boiled , face off ) appears to have made an exciting , elegant , charming spy thriller , kind of a post millennium james bond adventure with a strapping american ( read : unsophisticated ) hero more willing to drop kick villains than out fox them .
sadly , as the picture progresses , the final product begins to bear a closer resemblance to a souped up , two - hour long episode of magyuver .
and not a particularly good one at that .
what went wrong ?
mi2 begins flashily enough , that initial flash leading us to believe that it 'll soon give way to something of a plot , but it only gives way to more flash , then digresses further into a presumably unintentional parody of itself with much slo mo posturing and countless action set pieces wherein bad guys seem to deliberately leap into the way of tom cruise 's firing gun just so they can die really cool .
early on , during a car chase between soon to be lovers ethan hunt ( tom cruise ) and nyah nordoff - hall ( thandie newton ) , woo works some of his trademark magic .
in one hypnotic , though completely inexplicable sequence , the director slows the action down to a languid semi - stall as cruise and his stunning opponent stare into one and other 's eyes with come hither sexuality ? ? ?
just as their respective cars smash and spin in accordance , coming ever so close to toppling over a neighboring cliff .
prior to this we see the famed trailer opener of cruise climbing a steep mountain , sans scaffolding , then leaping from one jagged rock formation to another .
why ?
i have n't the foggiest .
i doubt even john woo could provide you with a logical reply .
with mi2 woo has become a slave to the summer movie machine , the one that jettisons logic for gravity defying effects and story for more gravity defying effects .
it 's possible that these " spies " could be adrenaline junkies climbing mountains and crashing into each other as means to get off , though of course this is never explored .
the scenes i 've described are really only included to titillate , not to give any insight into character .
god forbid .
woo certainly knows how to make each set piece energetic , but they remain individual set pieces never connecting to form anything more than splices of beer commercial - like visuals .
still in terms of crackerjack eye candy , the opening has much to cherish .
cruise and newton first meet during a vigorous flamenco dance featuring several welcome woo devices ( the graceful slow mo artistry of synchronized movement juxtaposed against the stage 1 romance of two attractive individuals discovering how attractive the other is ) .
between the frantic dancing , woo trains his camera on cruise and newton as they make with some sensuous eye contact .
the scene is a little over the top in a bon jovi music video circa 1988 kind of way , yet it has style and something of soul , and woo casts a bit of a spell on us .
sure it 's all smoke and mirrors , but we can see that there happens to be a talented maestro behind this particular product .
thandie and cruise later meet in a bathtub in a scene that 's about half as playfully charming as the jennifer lopez \ george cloony trunk meeting in out of sight .
they flirt and exchange obvious double entendres .
newton bats her eyes flirtatiously .
cruise grins a little too slyly .
the cruise character , ethan hunt , has been drastically altered since the first film .
here cruise plays him more as a hip , sexual dynamo than the square jawed robot he impersonated in part 1 .
he 's cool and dashing , which is precisely the kind of role we want to see cruise in after watching him sleep walk through eyes wide shut ( which might just be the longest episode of red show diaries ever committed to film ) , and blustered his way through magnolia ( quite possibly the most overrated performance of the 90 's ) .
sadly as the film progresses we see less of cruise 's initial " i 'm the man !
" charm and more slo - mo close - ups of his preening mug .
mi2 falls apart on nearly every level during its repetitious third act , which is essentially one hour long action sequence that just wo n't stop .
the whole thing commences with an utterly generic gun battle ( the first gun fight in the film ) , which really should be unheard of in a john woo film , but alas this particular battle could 've been staged by anyone from renny harlin to joseph merhi ( of course excepting the " symbolic " pigeons who seem to find their way into every john woo picture ) .
we 've all seen guys slide across the floor in slo mo while firing a gun in each hand .
it is n't done any differently here .
the action is pure hard target \ broken arrow theatrics with nothing to propel it but the apparent need to see tom cruise drop kick face less villains while his hair whips stylishly in the wind .
he 's cool for sure but
he 's made to be as empty as the movie .
the actor is n't used so much for his boyish appeal as for his chiseled looks ; he smiles narcissistically into the camera at literally any moment , be it during a gunfight , before one or after one .
when he 's not beaming away , he 's staring into the lens with cold eyes trying to look mad as hell , but woo 's editing seriously undermines the effort .
he fetishizes cruise 's angular face with such glee that it turns into a naked gun style spoof .
i half expected cruise to peel off his facemask and reveal that he 's really austin powers .
in a classic woo action moment , ethan hunt struts past a fiery doorway glaring at the baddies within its frame like a pin - up boy angel of death .
the gunfight turns into a daring escape which turns into a reckless mission which turns into a motorcycle attack in which bad guys seem to angle directly for cruise to kill them like some kind of mass suicide ritual ( one dumb bastard even jumps his bike over the gun toting cruise , basically inviting our handsome hero to shoot him in mid air which he does ) .
the lead bad guy ( played by the appropriately british dougray scott ) and cruise face off in a mentally deficient game of chicken ? ? ? on motorcycles .
though instead of jumping off to the side at the last moment , the two grown men leap directly into the other giving each other a mid air bear hug , only to fly about a hundred feet ( still in bear hug position ) , land on a beach below and begin a mano - e - mano fist fight that ends with the bad guy pulling a " so you thought i was dead . . .
"
.
not to worry , cruise takes care of the problem without even breaking a sweat .
what a hero !
you may have noticed that i opted not to describe an iota of mi2 's plot .
my reasoning is simple : i 'm not sure of any good it would do .
the film itself has absolutely no concern with story , only with hurtling forth to the next " special " effect .
i was n't kidding when i told a friend of mine that mi2 has less plot than the average aerosmith video .
nobody will go to this for the plot , and if they do they 'll surely regret it .
as summer movies evolve ( or devolve ) character and plot have become increasingly whittled down to nearly nothing .
in mi , the plot seemed to be built around brian de palma 's ( that film 's director ) stylistic flourishes , while in mi2 the plot only serves to give us an intermittent breather from woo 's non - stop masturbatory pandemonium .
it 's irrelevant in every sense , as is character .
all that ultimately matters are those pesky smoke and mirrors .
[EX A]: N

[EX Q]: burnt money is the perfect festival film .
it will show once or twice , and then no one , thankfully , will ever have to hear from it again .
this film from the seattle international film festival 2001 's emerging masters series is easily one of the year 's worst
.
billed as a gay ` bonnie and clyde ' , this gritty film from director marcelo pi ?
eyro has its only highlight in a well - designed title sequence .
two gay lovers get involved in a bank robbery that makes a gang leader , whose plan they screwed up , angry .
this causes the gang leader to send his boys out to get the gay guys , one of whom may not actually be gay . hiding out in a prostitute 's apartment , the two men must fight off police and gang members in a very long showdown for the movie 's conclusion .
if caught , they risk losing all the money , and their love .
as an added emotional bonus , one of the gay men is dying .
or something like that .
everything that happens is so quick and confusing
i was completely lost .
clarity is n't exactly this movie 's striving virtue , so it was a little hard to pick up .
not much could have really happened though .
the main events in this long two - hour film are explicit homosexual and heterosexual sex , graphic drug use , extreme violence , and strong language .
lots of explicit material is never a bad thing when there 's a reason , but there 's no purpose to anything in this film .
most of the sex and violence scenes come off as silly , while the heavy drug use comes off as ridiculous and depressing .
it appears pi ?
eyro ( who co - wrote with marcelo figueras , from a novel by ricardo piglia ) purposefully adds more blood and lovemaking for his own amusement .
he makes the actors as sweaty and dirty as possible , makes them snort cocaine , gives them guns and condoms , and lets them go .
burnt money is pointless .
the performances are bad .
it tries to thrill and shock , but only causes boredom
.
god forbid it will ever get a distributor .
another disappointing film from this year 's so - called emerging masters series .
pass on by .
[EX A]:
N