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

[Q]: at first glance , three kings looks to be just another war movie , the 90s version of all those favourite war movies with names i can not remember .
the 90s version , it definitely is , just another war movie ? not in your dreams !
imagine pulp fiction approach to saving private ryan , tha 's three kings for you .
believe it or not , it bears the cool of the former and the stark humane meaning of the latter .
the story brings us to the twilight of the gulf war , with the allied troops victorious .
majpr archie gates ( clooney ) leads an enterprising bunch of grunts to a rather unorthodox post - war looting spree ; the millions in gold bars secretly stowed away by saddam in a desolate village in the desert .
as the rest of the troops are celebrating their victory and getting ready to be shipped home , this ' wild bunch ' goes awol on an armed hum - vee ( the vehicle of choice of the us army ) .
they soon find out that they have much resistance , as they get tangled with the local rebellion against saddam 's forces .
frequently switching their modes between looters and robin hood 's merry men , they become consciously attacked by their own morals .
as the film begins to roll , it seemed to have a rather ' light ' mood to it . ' special ' effects such as when gates describes to his men how a bullet can kill simply paves the way for a light - hearted funny action movie .
three kings is much smarter than that .
as the conflict becomes more and more complex , the audience will be trapped in a limbo , trying to stay focussed on that light - mood / serious - mood that the film seem to portray .
i personally found this analogous to the same feelings of the main characters involved in the film ; trapped between their initial plan paved by greed and their own sense of humanity .
this simply made the entire experience of watching three kings
truly brilliant .
action sequences are not shot as your old - fashioned war films nor anything like steven spielberg 's in - your - face war violence .
they are carefully built to generate tension with just the right tight close - ups and pauses , right before the action starts .
not john woo for sure but more of sergio leone 's spaghetti western style ( tons of them starring clint eastwood ) . great performances by clooney and wahlberg but
the brilliance have to lie in the conception of this film ;
the screenwriter and the director .
three kings ranks among the best films of the year ,
well , for me at least . highly recommended .
[A]: P


[Q]: what would you do if no one could see you ?
well , if you 're a super smart bio - molecular research scientist working for the military , you 'd grope a co - worker and rough - up your neighbor from across the street .
that 's right .
of all the non - criminal possibilities brought about by rendering oneself invisible , in " hollow man " kevin bacon 's character opts to commit sex crimes .
er , it 's kevin bacon who plays the super smart military bio - molecular research scientist ?
something sounds horribly wrong already .
but this is a paul verhoeven film , and the sleazepin director of such open - crotch classics as " basic instinct " and the infamous " showgirls " never lets a little credibility get in the way of his voyeuristic tendencies which , when you come right down to it , is all this film is about .
"
hollow man " features a string of hapless , c - list actors
( among them bacon , elisabeth shue , josh brolin , and kim dickens ) in a grade - z plot with a lot of special effects that , frankly , do n't look much better than those used in the 1933 version of " the invisible man .
"
oh bacon glistens when he gets wet all right and looks like a rather fatty side of cheap flank steak when he 's attempting reentry but
otherwise it 's lots of " thermal " shots and inanimate objects
( elisabeth shue included ) bobbing around without any visible signs of support .
since invisibility , once achieved , is n't much of an effect ( the actors spend half their time conversing with nobody and the other half of their time talking to each other -- it amounts to much of a muchness ) , the director elects to wardrobe all of his female protagonists in loosely - buttoned sweaters so that the minute bacon 's character gets invisible he can head straight for them .
it 's as if that fascinating concept -- what would you do if no one could see you ?
--is
simply a verhoeven ploy to show some skin .
as a horror film , " hollow man " is unsophisticated and disturbing
( in its intent , not its achievements ) and not worth your time or your hard - earned dollars .
it 's minor verhoeven -- and even that 's not saying much -- and boy is it hollow .
[A]: N


[Q]: did claus von bulow try to kill his wife sunny in their newport mansion ?
that is the question reversal of fortune asks you to consider as it opens in a hospital ward , with a comatose sunny von bulow .
she is the main narrator of the film , in a narrative trick that was extraordinarily risky for schroeder .
the dramatic trick works , as sunny von bulow narrates a compelling story of murder , sex , unhappiness , and a lawyer 's moral dilemma
as he takes a case he thinks he can not win .
jeremy irons is claus von bulow , in what is his finest role , and one of the most devastingly evil performances in history .
he is as hated as any man alive , as cold as a cucumber .
his remorse for his wife 's comatose condition is nonexistant , and it is no wonder that even his children have difficulty accepting his version of what happened during christmas , 1980 .
the background to the case is such .
during christmas of 1979 , sunny von bulow fell into a deep coma from which she recovered and awoke .
the same situation occured in 1980 , only sunny never woke , and probably never will .
when examined , it was found that she had 14 times the normal amount of insulin within her blood .
claus von bulow is then accused of attempted murder by his stepson , convicted , and freed on bail .
he immediately hires alan dershowitz , the renowed harvard law professor , to acquit him .
ron silver is magnificent as a moral lawyer who can not stand what has happened to him .
we follow him through two very different cases ; the case of the johnson case , where two innocent kids are standing on death row for a crime they did n't commit , and von bulow , who he still has n't figured out .
dershowitz does n't know what happened to sunny , and he is extremely hesitant to take the case .
nevertheless , he does , based on certain things which happen during the investigative process that deeply upset him .
together with a group of law students , dershowitz concocts a defense and ultimately get the verdict reversed .
silver 's performance is one of a handful of solid roles in this deep film .
schroeder directs on many different levels , with multiple plot lines which blend in wonderfully in the mind of alan dershowitz .
there are flaws ; at times , the film gets overly theatrical .
yet , due to glenn close 's troubled and brutally honest performance as sunny von bulow , the use of her comatose body as a narrator works here fairly well .
the flashbacks are good , but at times schroeder does n't fill in the blanks .
the movie could have benefited with the increased attention of certain developments during the film , and it could have used a better ending .
the film progressed wonderfully before ending suddenly , without any intelligent conclusion .
the supporting characters are often neglected , and dershowitz 's team should have been allowed to grow character wise , but schroeder over - simplifies the story and the characters .
yet , for all these flaws , the film is deeply engrossing because of irons .
as von bulow , he is brutally evil .
anti - semitic , prejudiced , arrogant , protective , he is a rotten , lying monster , whose conviction may have been wrong legally , but morally he was to blame .
irons plays him to a cold perfection , with pathetic attempts to gain moral support for his claims to innocence .
he is an adulterous liar and a cheat who in all likelihood committed the murder .
however , the genius of reversal of fortune comes in its distinction between moral culpability and legal responsibility .
there is no doubt von bulow is responsible for his wife 's death by years of neglect and coldness .
however , legally , did he do the murder ?
schroeder dares the viewer to make up his own mind .
with all the character flaws , reversal of fortune is an engrossing puzzle because it is intelligent ; he wants the viewer to make up his own mind .
schroeder taunts the viewer with contradictory revelations , and then mentions that the answer to this compelling puzzle shall be revealed when we join sunny von bulow , in death .
for all the failed dramatic theatrics , this is one that works beautifully .
we do n't know what happened .
that sense of legal ambiguousness , along with von bulow 's obvious moral guilt , is why reversalf fortune works .
in the end , von bulow is as sadistic as ever .
irons is haunting , and that is why reversal of fortune is so good .
[A]:
P