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

any remake of an alfred hitchcock film is at best an uncertain project , as a perfect murder illustrates .
frankly , dial m for murder is not one of the master director 's greatest efforts , so there is ample room for improvement .
unfortunately , instead of updating the script , ironing out some of the faults , and speeding up the pace a little , a perfect murder has inexplicably managed to eliminate almost everything that was worthwhile about dial m for murder , leaving behind the nearly- unwatchable wreckage of a would - be ' 90s thriller .
almost all suspense films are loaded with plot implausibilities .
the best thrillers keep viewers involved enough in what 's going on so that these flaws in logic do n't become apparent until long after the final credits have rolled .
unfortunately , in a perfect murder , the faults are often so overt that we become aware of them as they 're happening .
this is a very bad sign .
not only do such occurrences shatter any suspension of disbelief , but they have the astute viewer looking for the next such blunder .
of course , in the case of a perfect murder , at least that gives an audience member something to do besides concentrating on the inane plot and the lifeless , cardboard characters .
a perfect murder is n't a strict remake of dial m for murder , but it does borrow heavily from frederick knott 's play ( which was also the source material for hitchcock 's version , as well as a 1981 made - for - tv retelling ) .
emily hayes ( gwyneth paltrow ) is the wealthy wife of powerful wall street mover - and - shaker steven hayes ( michael douglas ) .
their marriage is n't going well -- emily resents steven 's controlling instincts , and , as a form of rebellion , she is having an affair with a penniless painter , david shaw ( viggo mortensen ) .
when steven learns of the relationship , he decides to confront david , but his approach is n't that of a typical cuckolded husband .
instead of yelling or threatening , steven offers david a proposal that 's too good to resist : for $ 500 , 000 in cash ( $ 100 , 000 before , the rest after ) , he is to break into steven 's new york apartment and kill emily .
( of course , after getting the first payment , david never bothers to ask how he 's supposed to get the rest . )
ultimately , i 'm not sure which of the three main characters we 're supposed to be sympathetic to : the cold - hearted husband , who wants his wife dead so he can get his hands on her fortune ; her mercenary lover , who is willing to do the deed for half - a - million ; or the woman , who is happily carrying on an extramarital affair .
not only are these individuals all profoundly dislikable , but they 're not interesting .
( it 's possible to make a good movie with detestable characters -- see reservoir dogs -- but there has to be something compelling about them , which , in this case , there is n't . )
steven , emily , and david are all lifted directly from the screenwriting 101 text book on stereotypes .
the actors in this film are obviously just on hand to get their paychecks .
michael douglas is playing the kind of heartless tycoon that he can do in his sleep -- he 's gordon gekko with an unfaithful wife .
gwyneth paltrow , who was recently delightful and appealing in sliding doors , is simply awful here .
she now has the dubious distinction of have starred in two of 1998 's worst thrillers ( the other being hush ) .
at least viggo mortensen ( g .
i .
jane ) has a little fun with his part , but then he usually does interesting things even in bad movies .
the thin supporting cast includes david suchet , the star of " poirot , " as a police inspector , and sarita choudhury ( kama sutra ) as emily 's best friend .
a perfect murder is a plodding production that generates almost no suspense from beginning to end .
there are n't many twists and turns in the unexpectedly linear script , which makes the ending inevitable almost from the start .
it 's surprising to see director andrew davis , the man behind the fugitive , involved in this mess
, but , like his stars , he too needs to earn a living .
it 's just that remaking hitchcock , and doing it so badly
, hardly seems to be an honorable way to go about getting the dough .
N

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 .
P

in the finale of disney 's " mighty joe young , " a 15-foot tall , 2000-pound gorilla holds a frightened young boy in its clutches as it topples from a crippled ferris wheel and plummets to the ground .
upon impact , rugged everyman and perennial do - gooder bill paxton rushes in , containing the emotional crowd with an earnest " move along now folks , there 's nothing to see here .
"
ok , so those are n't exactly the words he uses , but it 's probably one of the few clich ?
s not uttered in this unnecessary remake of an unnecessary remake of that mother of all monster movies , " king kong .
"
1949 's " mighty joe young " was an update of that classic creature feature , also based on merian c . cooper 's original story ( 16 years after " ' kong
" it appeared the world was ready for a new take on the beauty and the beast fable ) .
now some 49 years later , at least according to disney 's way of thinking , the world is ready for one more .
not so .
the only --
and i mean only -- reason to see the 1998 version is for the special effects .
and these , unfortunately , run hot and cold .
today 's joe young is designed and produced by special - effects whiz rick baker , who has been wowing audiences with his state - of - the - art make - up effects since 1971 's " schlock " ( which , incidentally , featured a baker - enhanced " gorilla " ) .
joe is a combination of animatronic effects , computer graphics , and that old standard , a man in a monkey suit .
while there are occasional flashes of brilliance -- baker 's had a lot of practice with simian effects , after all , including " gorillas in the mist , " " greystoke : the legend of tarzan , lord of the apes , " and the 1976 remake of " king
kong
" --there 's also some surprising cheesiness .
one of the film 's most embarrassing moments is when paxton 's band of african trackers first encounter and pursue the larger - than - life primate ( in a scene unashamedly ripped off from " the lost world : jurassic park " ) .
paxton jubilantly extols the beast 's majestic gait at the same exact moment as joe , and the computer effects driving him , stutter to a halt .
also , if the film 's producers had wanted us to focus our attentions on the titular ape they should n't have paraded female lead charlize theron ( " trial & error " ) around in a seemingly - endless wardrobe of spaghetti - strapped tops .
even joe seems distracted at times .
the film piles on the clich ?
s
like there 's no tomorrow , including the predictable plot
( anthro - zoologists ship gigantic gorilla to l .
a .
where urban havoc is inevitably wrought ) , predictable villain ( a lithuanian
i think i overheard someplace ) , predictable love story ( bill and charlize -- surprise ! ) , and predictable denouement ( " ' twas box - office receipts that killed the beast " ) .
kids raised on " men in black " ( non - monkey effects also by baker ) are going to find ron ( " tremors " )
underwood 's outing a little lame by comparison .
while certainly better than 1978 's " king kong lives " ( itself a lousy sequel to a not particularly good remake ) , " mighty joe young " proves how the mighty keep falling .

N