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

Q: steven spielberg 's " amistad , " which is based on the true story of a group of africans who revolted on board a slave ship , then were captured and taken to america where a legal dispute ensued over who " owned " them , is concerned with several different aspects of this story .
first , the film addresses the issue of the inherent evils of slavery .
second , it deals with the historical involvement of several american politicians in the case , including president martin van buren and former president john quincy adams ( anthony hopkins ) .
last , and most importantly , it examines the cultural confusion experienced by the africans who were forced into slavery and the damage done to their native culture in africa by the slave trade .
" amistad " succeeds at least partly with all three of these elements .
i have to admit that i was a little skeptical as to how much i could really get out of another " anti - slavery " movie .
having seen several other movies and documentaries about slavery , i doubted that there was much i did n't already know about it .
fortunately , i turned out to be wrong .
for one thing , spielberg 's camera never once gets near a southern plantation and instead sticks to the slave ships and the slave traders ' operations in africa , so " amistad " was dealing with a different part of the history of slavery from the very beginning .
and some of the images here are , in fact , much more harrowing than what we usually see in movies about slavery .
one scene in the middle , in which the crew of a slave ship dispose of some of their " excess " slaves by throwing them overboard to drown , has to be one of the most disturbing film images of the year .
spielberg digs farther into the evils of slavery than i was expecting he would , and in fact he probably goes about as far as a movie director can without getting an nc-17 rating .
the stark suffering of the africans is contrasted sharply with the shallow luxury of the politicians , such as president van buren and queen isabella of spain , whose naval officers were involved in the legal dispute and who was only a small child at the time .
exposing politicians as narrow - minded , opportunistic hypocrites is fairly standard stuff , of course , but spielberg and writer david franzoni
do it well enough that it still comes off as something more than just a simple exercise in audience manipulation .
the film also examines the contentious nature of the slavery issue at the time , such that john quincy adams ( and probably other politicians like him ) , who clearly disapproved of the practice , was reluctant to get involved in the case until it was appealed all the way to the supreme court .
the biggest success of " amistad " is probably the characterization of cinque ( djimon hounsou ) , who emerges as the de facto leader of the kidnapped africans and struggles to communicate with baldwin ( matthew mcconaughey ) , the lawyer who represents them in court .
through cinque , we are given a window into the native culture , as he and the displaced africans try to explain to the prison guards what they need for a proper burial of a dead tribe member , or find an illustrated version of the bible and try to understand the story of jesus christ .
cinque sees the dispute with a clarity and simplicity that , again , contrasts with the technicalities and mechanics of the legal process and of the political squabbles .
"
what kind of country is this , where laws ' almost ' work ?
"
he asks baldwin in bewilderment , when he learns that the case must be re - tried before the supreme court .
spielberg 's direction tends a little bit towards the manipulative side at times , such as when he adds a heavy orchestral swell to cinque 's angry outburst in the court room .
still , there is n't enough of this for it to be a serious problem .
the main flaw in this film , which prevents it from earning four stars , is that it seems like spielberg and franzoni ca n't quite handle all of these issues at the same time , so instead they settle for addressing each one separately and simply editing the results into the same movie .
this summer 's contact , for example , dealt with several issues at once , but each of them was somehow present in almost every scene and , most importantly , all of them were resolved at once .
" amistad " tries to pull it all together in the end with a speech from adams , but it somehow feels a little forced , and in any case the speech itself , which lasts almost fifteen minutes , wears out its welcome about halfway through .
perhaps the best way to describe it is this :
" amistad " is three four star films edited into one .
almost every individual scene works , but the final product is lacking the necessary focus and coherence , and thus is less than the sum of its parts .
however , i ca n't honestly say how it could have been done differently , and in any case the story comes through with enough raw emotional power that it is still a very good film , and thus
i recommend it to anyone who can handle the disturbing imagery .

A: P
****
Q: is jimmy stewart the greatest actor of all - time ?
it 's quite possible .
his career spanned over 40 years , and he acted in more movies than most actors ever could .
yet , when he is talked about in the media , he is generally thought of as an actor who played one type of role : the nice guy .
and that 's really a shame .
"
the naked spur " features jimmy stewart in a role completely different than what people would expect from him .
it 's a western , which stewart specialized in around this period , and it casts him as a desperate man out to collect a bounty on a man who used to be his friend .
before he finds that man , though , he runs into two men who agree to help him , thinking he is a sheriff .
when the criminal is eventually caught , the two men discover stewart 's secret , and decide they want a piece of the action too .
the rest of the film is a suspenseful journey in which each man suspects the other constantly .
also featured is the woman travelling with the criminal , well played by janet leigh .
we 're never too sure who 's side
she 's really on until the end .
leigh is an actress probably best known for her role as the " shower lady " from " psycho " , and that 's unfair .
she gives a strong performance as a woman who is pulled between these two men .
stewart gives a performance unlike anything i 've ever seen from him .
he usually keeps cool no matter what occurs , but here , he gets downright hysterical at times .
i think perhaps he took this role to prove to the public that he was more than just a " nice guy " .
his performance borders on psychotic at times , but
i loved watching every second of it .
it 's roles like this one that make me admire him as much as i do .
he was an actor unafraid to take chances , and even ruin his public image .

A: P
****
Q: you 've heard all the hype .
you 've seen all their faces - natalie portman ( the professional ) as queen amidala , liam neeson ( schindler 's list ) as qui - gon jinn , ewan mcgregor ( trainspotting ) as obi - wan kenobi , and jake lloyd ( jingle all the way ) as young anakin skywalker .
if you 've read any reviews , you 've also probably heard that this movie fails to live up to the magic and humanity of the first trilogy .
you also may have heard that this one 's too kiddie - friendly , and does n't have enough content for adults .
believe the hype .
the effects are stunning , the digitalized creatures are amazingly realistic ,
the lightsaber duels are amazing , and queen amidala 's sumptuous robes are fit to be worn by queen elizabeth .
but there 's something missing here , and it is n't budget or effects
- it 's everything money
* ca n't * buy .
the actors struggle as best they can to flesh out broad - stroked and flat characters .
the most successful at this is liam neeson who , as qui - gon jinn , a jedi master to young obi - wan kenobi , has quiet dignity and a wise , commanding presence .
he is the anchor to this movie , as he is the one character who george lucas apparently spent some time fleshing out .
portman 's queen amidala and mcgregor 's obi - wan kenobi do n't fare nearly so well .
amidala , the future mother of luke and leia and the queen of a peaceful planet being invaded by the trade federation ( ? ! ? ) , comes off as stoic , stilted and caricatured ( it appears as though she was a vulcan geisha in a former life ) .
and obi - wan , although mcgregor makes him very endearing , has so little screen time that he 's nothing but a robin to qui
- gon jinn 's batman .
however , mcgregor does struggle manfully to infuse this surprisingly small supporting role with a spark of genuine insight and humanity ,
and he does a good job .
he also absolutely nails alec guiness ' ( obi - wan in episode 4 - 6 ) scottish accent , and that really makes his presence in the film more profound than it might have been otherwise .
in fact , lucas seems to bank on that preexisting knowledge quite a bit , and that 's one of the problems with this film .
i would never call myself a " star wars " fan - especially not considering what it means to be a fanatic these days - but i 've always enjoyed the films along with everyone else in america .
however , if you are the one person in america who * has n't * seen the films at all or even recently , or who does n't bother to brush - up on the names of obscure characters , you may be hopelessly lost .
for example , one of the film 's main ( nefarious ) characters is senator palpatine .
for those of you not recently steeped in " star wars " trivia , emperor palpatine is that scary hooded apparition who was darth vader 's master in " return of the jedi " and " empire strikes back .
"
so , obviously , his appearance in " phantom menace " is meant to stir some echoes of his later role in the series , thus making his role here more meaningful .
a lot of the movie is like that .
r2-d2 and c-3po make token appearances , and it 's obvious that lucas is banking on the audience 's pre - existing fondness for them . . . because he does n't do much to add to it in any way .
same goes for jabba the hutt , who does n't look as much mean here as he does corpulent and lazy .
even * planets * make foreshadowing guest appearances in this film - tatooine ( the desert world where luke grew up ) ,
coruscant (
the cloud city from " empire strikes back " ) , and alderaan ( leia 's home planet - which we never actually see - that gets blown up in " star wars " ) show up or are mentioned briefly in passing .
what 's the result of tying so many plot points and characters to future films ?
the answer is that this one seems surprisingly empty .
there 's no meat - no substance - that makes you want to love the characters as they are , not as they will be .
another problem is that there are actually * too many * alien characters in the film .
i was distracted by the fact that two of the main evil characters - strange looking aliens who looked like gila monsters - had mouths that barely moved , making them look more like muppets than actual characters .
and jar jar binks , a silly roger rabbitish amphibious character , is intended as comic relief , but what he really becomes is annoying - and fast .
unlike chewbacca and c-3po , who got their humanity ( if you 'll pardon the expression ) from their interactions with the human characters , jar jar is often left to interact mostly with others of his kind , at times making the movie seem like nothing more than a very expensive " teenage mutant ninja turtles .
" furthermore , the dialogue is often stilted and corny , and sometimes downright infantile , thereby rendering some characters into nothing more than bystanders to the plot .
oddly , this is n't just
*
my * judgment - lucas has said that he designed this film for kids .
well , he 's done a good job .
the hero of this film , of course , is young anakin , but it was very hard for me to feel any kinship or identify with an eight - year - old boy .
that 's not jake lloyd 's fault , though -
he does a good job of being a cute kid , which is apparently all lucas asked of him .
that 's another mistake , of course , because the cute tyke becomes darth vader .
warning : spoilers ahead ! ! ! !
in my opinion , there was not nearly enough foreshadowing of anakin 's future evil in the film .
the boy is all blond flowing hair and rosy cheeks , and there 's nothing more than a spark of aggression in him throughout the entire movie .
he has a doting mother ( pernilla august , making her first english- language film ) and is a slave to a gross flying gnome on tatooine .
but the only indication the audience gets that this kid is n't all
hearts and roses is yoda 's hesitation in allowing him to train as a jedi under qui - gon jinn .
his explanation ?
" his future is clouded .
"
( warning : major spoiler ahead .
enter at your own risk . )
of course , the noble qui - gon dies at the hand of darth maul , a scary - looking sith lord who excels at the jedi arts , but has turned to the dark side .
this dude has maybe two lines in the entire movie , but he establishes his presence through his amazing moves with his double - sided lightsaber , and his scary facial makeup .
because qui - gon never gets a chance to train the young anakin in the ways of the force , obi - wan , qui - gon 's young padawan apprentice ( one level below knightdom ) , must take over the training himself .
so , at the end of the movie , we end where the saga actually begins - with obi - wan kenobi and his young apprentice , anakin " darth vader " skywalker .
did this story need to be told ?
i would say no .
but is it a worthwhile movie to see ? absolutely .
if you do n't enter the theater with jedi - size expectations , and you simply want to be treated to an enjoyable visual spectacle , then
this is your movie .
the tatooine pod races are a triumph of effects and computer animation .
the digitalized backgrounds on some of the planets are an astonishing sight . and yoda and young obi - wan are worth seeing for their origins in a simpler , happier time .
above all , this is a fun movie .
not deep , not meaningful , and not profound .
but fun .
maybe next time , lucas will hire lawrence kasdan to co - write the script , and the guy who directed " empire " will direct . because if lucas does the next one himself , it will be lacking the one thing it needs the most - potential . : )

A:
P
****