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

[Q]: i am a steven seagal fan .
i only say this now because " mufti splenetik " is n't my real name and because i probably need to explain why i went into this film expecting great things .
any proud seagal fan worth his beans will tell you that the seagal formula is something you can depend on .
seagal films can always be counted on for minimal dialogue , heaps of expendable baddies with extemely crunchable bones ( which we 'll always hear when seagal does his limb - twisting thing ) , rarely a female co - lead in sight ( unless it 's a real - life model - wife who has n't worked since weird science ) and , usually the worst possible titles you can imagine .
not to mention very straightforward plots , generally all - round bad dialogue and mr implacable leather - face himself in that same black outfit he 's been in since nico doing his " my hands are sharp , nimble knives " thing , seagal the stoic , sir petrified ponytail , duke of dull .
in the glimmer man , seagal breaks out of this formula : he gets a * sidekick *
, attempts to banter , and puts on a new vest .
he 's also put on quite a lot of weight .
small potatoes , you may say , a man should be able to accessorize and banter if he wants to , but damnit , if it ai n't broke , why fix it ?
( more on this disappointed person 's dashed expectations later ) .
as jack cole , seagal is a homicide detective with a questionable past .
while he and his partner ( played by keenen ivory wayans ) are investigating a series of ritual killings , cole himself becomes a suspect , especially when a background check run by campbell reveals practically nothing on cole .
it turns out that cole is a former trained government assassin ( you just ca n't trust these homicide detectives ) , someone whom victims used to catch just a glimpse of in the jungle before he pounced on them , and hence , well , you know , that " glimmer man " thing .
an increasingly fishy homicide investigation in the present soon leads to the gradual uncovering of a larger , more threatening conspiracy that involves a crooked businessman ( bob gunton ) , cole 's former cia boss ( brian cox ) and deals involving chemical weapons .
the glimmer man plot is pretty standard stuff , drawing ( as with his other films ) elements from the hotter films of the year ( eg , se7en ) .
it 's the other changes that disappoint .
for example , although there 's a fair amount of violence in this movie , there 's also the disastrous pairing of seagal with keenen ivory wayans , probably the best known of the wayans tribe ( how many are there , exactly ? ) from television 's " in living colour .
" wayans plays whiney straightman to seagal 's bead - adorned and brocade - draped cole , keeping up his " are you crazy " part of the dialogue with wasted zest .
as campbell , wayans confines himself to bemoaning his new partner 's eccentric habits , but the chemistry between the two is minimal , and seagal 's wooden comebacks make for painful watching .
a cook in under seige 2 , seagal is now a buddhist who speaks chinese and wears prayer beads and intricate silk jackets over his normal black ensemble .
he chants , refuses to fight unless truly provoked and introduces campbell to powdered deer penis to cure his allergies .
again , a benign ( if trite ) plot device except for the fact that these new character traits require seagal to speak more than usual .
heck , he has to deliver punchlines and carry a steady conversation with someone other than himself for a large part of the film .
is that a lot to ask of the seague ? too much .
seagal 's best characteristic used to be that he knew his purpose in this already complicated world of movies : to crunchily snap off bad guy appendages , and to do it silently , and alone .
not for seagal , the snappy one - liners of arnold and stallone , nor the attempts to show that he can act , much less think .
no kindergarten cop , no oscar , just simple , unadulterated deathblows .
that 's really how it must have started : like - minded fans who knew what they wanted streamed in to watch the seague do his thing , knowing that never in the seagal universe would they ever have to see him do anything else .
we trusted him .
we got to know him .
now , betrayal .
i do n't know if i can watch another seagal movie without that little niggling doubt that he 's going to try to be funny again .
i 'll try , but it wo n't be easy .
if you have n't watched the glimmer man yet ,
you might want to wait for the video to come out .
it 's easier to just fast forward the dialogue parts and linger on the action sequences .
after all , if we ca n't depend on our fantasies , what can we depend on ?
the flying inkpot rating system :
* wait for the tv2 broadcast .
*
* a little creaky , but still better than staying at home with gotcha !
*
* * pretty good , bring a friend .
*
*
* * amazing , potent stuff .
*
*
*
* * perfection .
see it twice .
mufti spelenetik is still a steven seagal fan .
everybody makes mistakes once in awhile .
[A]: N


[Q]: ugh .
that about sums this movie up .
just , ugh .
the original godzilla movies are somewhat of a cult classic , and when reviewing the previous films , each film had a certain degree of intelligence .
and that was the reason they found such an enviable cult following ; in spite of bad special effects , horrible dubbing , and a man in a lizard suit , they maintained a certain degree of . . .
how to put this ? . . .
dignity ?
not quite the word i 'm looking for .
you understand , right ?
and in 50 years , godzilla has maintained that degree of ' whatever ' . leave it to america to screw the whole thing up .
> from the ' geniuses ' that brought us " independece day " , arguably the worst sci - fi movie of all time , to ruin whatever reputation godzilla had .
while they do bring us eye - popping special effects that will amaze you ,
they lost what was at the center of all the original godzilla movies -- a storyline .
summing up the movie is simple .
heck , i can do it in one sentence : giant lizard attacks a giant city and a bunch of nobodies stop it .
simple as that .
matthew broderick
stumbles over his lines , and it 's hard to picture hank azaria in any role besides his classic dog - walking character on the television show " mad about you " .
the dialogue seems to be improvized , almost as if there was no rehearsel done at all .
i can see the scene on the set right now .
"
all right !
we spent all of this money making big special effects , and we 've got ta get this movie out by summer
or it 's going to bomb in our faces .
so , you actors just say what ever comes to the top of your head , all right ?
make up something , m'kay ?
good .
roll film ! !
"
the special effects are enough to keep you interested through one viewing , and some of the cinemtography is well - done ( the scene with the black umbrellas comes to mind ) .
still , an hour into it , you will become antsy , wondering how long they can drag it out . and drag it out they do ! !
i have to laugh .
the slogan for the film is , " size does matter " .
i think they cut this too short .
it should read , " size does matter .
acting does not .
"
[A]: N


[Q]: this film is based on the campy tv show from the 1960 's under the same appellation .
mind you , most people ( including yours truly ) who will see this movie will not have seen any episodes from the original series .
the movie is really a stand alone in that regard .
the family robinson .
. .
lost in space .
plot : set in the year 2058 , the family robinson is chosen to sail out into space in search of other planets that might contain the natural resources earth needs in order to survive its future .
a colonization process , if you will .
they are joined by able pilot west ( leblanc ) , and evil uninvited stowaway ( oldman ) , who does not want to see the trip conclude on a successful tip .
eventually , their trek goes awry , and all are " lost in space " .
"
how do get back to earth ?
" is the question that infests the rest of this sci - fi epic .
critique : this film reminded me a lot of the fifth element ( 6 . 5/10 ) from the summer of 1997 .
it 's a film with a lot of flash , but very little actual substance .
admittedly , there is n't an annoying character like chris tucker from the other film , but this film does run a little too long , and did lose me in regards to its complex time - travel / multi - dimensional story line .
having said that , the special effects in this movie were amazing , and the overall look and feel were also way above average .
you really felt like you were in the future , and riding through space with these poor souls .
unfortunately for this chosen family , their 10-year old son is the smartest one in the group , and the father is too wrapped up in his work to notice the rest of his family ( ever heard that one before ?
yawn ! ) .
the acting is ok , and i was especially surprised at the solid performance by tv friend 's matt leblanc who shows us all that he 's definitely more than just a pretty face .
on the down side , the family riff - raff that cuts through most of the picture is lame and time - consuming ( even though
we got ta give them credit for " trying " to develop characters in a sci - fi pic ) , the story line is hard to follow , the evil character in the movie actually tells people that he 's " evil " , and the movie goes on for about 20 minutes too long .
on the slick side , many of the special effects are really cool
( the sequence in which the family is " paralyzed " during the hyper - drive is awesome , and the animated monkey that joins the family halfway through the flic is mucho cool ) , the credit presentation at the end of the film is slamming , and
the adventures that they fall into are somewhat thrilling
( i will also admit that " somehow " they got me to semi - tear up near the conclusion of this picture . . . .
very odd . . . . . ) .
overall , if you 're a big sci - fi fan , check this movie out for the special effects and challenging narrative , and if you 're not , i would still suggest seeing this movie , but then you could probably wait until it comes out on video so that you forward past some of the boring parts .
little known facts : this film will always be remembered as the movie that knocked titanic ( 7/10 ) out of the top spot at the box - office after 15 straight weeks at number one .
garry oldman is british , and was once married to uma thurman for about six months .
mimi rogers was tom cruise 's first wife .
[A]:
P