TASK DEFINITION: In this task, you must classify if a given review is positive/negative, indicating your answer as P or N.
PROBLEM: chris tucker is one of those guys you immediately get a reaction from -- you either find his helium voice , crazy eyes and jerky mannerisms funny or annoying .
i think i fall into the former category ( i 'm one of the few who thought his turn in " the fifth element " as a prancing , prince - like deejay was complete inspired lunacy and not the least bit aggravating ) , but his new vehicle " money talks " just does n't do him service
.
tucker is good in the movie -- and this is the kind of film that , if people see it , could make him a big star -- but he 's also really the only thing good about the movie .
in fact , if you see " money talks , " it should shock you beyond recognition that two of " toy story " 's writers penned the sloppy script .
tucker 's role here is that of franklin hatchett , a petty los angeles con artist whose carwash scams get him dogged by investigative reporter james russell ( charlie sheen ) .
after being busted on the job for some illegal business involving counterfeit passports , franklin finds himself on a bus to the county jail and handcuffed to slick international jewel smuggler raymond villard ( gerard ismael ) .
but villard 's thugs blow up the bus in an attempt to free their leader ( never mind that the explosion could have instead killed him ) , and because he and franklin are joined at the wrist , franklin is allowed to escape as well , but not before overhearing some important information regarding a diamond stash that -- for some reason or another -- is being hidden in a vintage roadster waiting to be auctioned off at an upcoming auto expo .
the local media mistakenly puts the prison break - out blame on franklin , which is where james comes back into the picture .
he makes a deal to protect franklin if , in turn , franklin gives him an exclusive interview .
this means james must present his new " friend " in the stickiest of situations -- a formal dinner party for he and fiancee grace ( heather locklear ) , also attended by her uber - rich parents ( veronica cartwright and nicely game paul sorvino ) .
and of course the bad guys track franklin down and try to knock him off , all the while he spars and forms an unlikely bond with james .
"
this ai n't no buddy movie , " claim the print ads .
yeah ,
right .
actually , for the better part of , oh , 20 minutes , it appears " money talks " has the momentum to cover entertaining ground , and this is mostly due to the presence of spastic motormouth tucker .
this is tucker 's first leading role , and if you imagine a slightly lankier , african - american jim carrey with a reliance on wild r - rated raunch rather than pg-13 physical comedy , you have a good idea of the conviction with which he assaults the role .
but you realize all too quickly that tucker 's overstated liveliness is the only thing " money talks " has going for it .
and a lively actor alone does not a successful movie make .
it 's all too easy to pick out everything wrong with " money talks .
" the plot is recycled buddy - buddy comedy - thriller tripe that seemed overused even when " nothing to lose " employed it last month .
everything is paint - by - numbers , especially the los angeles coliseum finale , which finds not one , not two , but three separate enemy factions firing at franklin as they pursue him through the bleachers .
the villains , as many as there are , are dull .
certain story elements are too coincidental .
and too much of the film 's dramatic agenda is played too straight .
a scene where grace confronts james after learning franklin 's true identity ( " you brought a killer into my parents ' house ! " ) is extremely silly .
you get the picture .
obviously , i did not have a pleasant experience at " money talks .
"
but the people around me appeared to be having a rip - roaring good time ( one gentleman several rows behind me chortled with such expressive conviction
i began fearing for his health ) .
but tucker , at least for me , is a pretty funny guy , and aces the movie 's best scene , where franklin passes himself off as vic damone 's son at james and grace 's engagement bash and toasts the couple with barry white lyrics .
tucker 's audience -- and he does have one -- will probably like " money talks .
"
those who he irritates , however , will have a more productive day staying home and scraping the gook out from under their toenails .

SOLUTION: N

PROBLEM: being that it is a foreign language film with no known names with a select number theaters showing it , " shall we dance " wo n't be seen by that many people .
and that 's a shame
- this is a funny , enchanting , and goofy movie full of laughs , surprises , and wonderful dance sequences .
the surprising thing about " shall we dance " is the universal appeal of the story .
a us version is in the works , and it 's no wonder -
it 's not really all that culture specific .
although there is a narrated set - up that adds some extra resonance to the proceedings ( about the view the japanese culture has about ballroom dancing ) , the movie is so rich in character and appeal that this added layer is n't at all necessary to understand or enjoy the film .
the only important unexplained japanese - specific reference that may leave some a bit puzzled is that 1000 yen is roughly $ 10 ( when you see the film - and you should see this film - you 'll know why ) . a middle aged company man realizes that achieving all the goals he set for himself in life ( a house , a child , and good marriage ) still does n't translate into a fulfilled life .
after glimpsing a melancholy beauty looking out from a dance studio window while on the train home from work , sugiyana ( koji yakusho ) decides after some trepidation to take up ballroom dance lessons in order to meet the woman who has stirred something in himself .
after finding the weekly fees for private lessons from the elegant and beautiful mai ( tamiyo kusakari ) too rich for his blood , sugiyama opts for groups lessons simply to be near her .
we then meet the players in this gem of a movie , who all have their own reasons for joining the class .
later on , we meet aoki at the dance studio ( naoto takenaka ) , a co - worker and all out weirdo and one of the laugh riot highlights of the film .
the story , laughs , and touching scenes evolve as the movie goes along .
it 's a pleasure to watch such a wonderful film that is propelled almost solely by the characters and performances .
it 's difficult to explain the charms of the film without revealing too much - the movie abounds with little revelations that subtly shape the characters , and in the end , each one is that much fuller and more understood by the time you leave the theater .
it 's one of those movies that only the french seem to make anymore - no big plot , no special effects , no gunplay , no tragic consequences , no forced examinations of the nature of love , and no insights into the nature of evil .
just a warm , funny , endearing film that will charm the pants off of you .
when was the last time you left a theater feeling all warm and fuzzy inside ?
" shall we dance " will do that to you without any treacly aftertaste .

SOLUTION: P

PROBLEM: if i were one of those arrogant critics who thinks his review has some great impact on the success or failure of certain films , i might say that i review movies that do n't look particularly good because i 'm doing a service to my readers by warning them against seeing it .
if that were true , i could put a banner at the top of my site that reads : " shay casey : seeing bad movies so you do n't have to .
"
but i know that 's bunk
- you're going to see whatever movies you want to no matter what i say .
so i have to tell the truth : every once in a while
i get a nasty , masochistic urge to see a bad movie .
you know the feeling , when you 're sick of seeing all these damn academy award contenders and you want to see something you can have a ball trashing mercilessly .
sometimes i think that 's why anyone goes to see pauly shore movies , ever .
admit it : sometimes you like seeing bad movies .
so do i .
so i saw " supernova .
"
truth be told , " supernova " was n't quite as bad as i thought it might be .
maybe i just felt sorry for the actors , or maybe i thought it could have been decent if the studio had n't started tinkering with the director 's ( walter hill ) final cut , causing him to want his name removed .
maybe i 'm becoming a softy .
in any case , i did n't find " supernova " as bad as the advance buzz would have me believe .
but it 's still bad .
the film takes place aboard the medical space vessel " nightingale .
"
the crew includes captain a .
j . marley ( robert forster ) , his new second officer nick vanzant ( james spader ) , head medical officer kaela evers ( angela bassett ) , medical technicians yerzy penalosa ( lou diamond phillips ) and danika lund ( robin tunney ) , and computer technician benj sotomejor ( wilson cruz ) .
there are some attempts at " characterization , " but all that means is that nick has a shady past involving a drug addiction , which puts kaela on edge , yerzy and danika have a relationship that requires them to make kissy - faces at each other every five minutes , and benj ( apparently gay ) is in love with the computer ( apparently female ) .
do n't expect any more explanation , because you wo n't get it .
anyway , the crew gets a distress call from a location deep in space to which a failed mining operation had been sent .
during the dimension jump ( i think that 's what it 's called , but do n't hold me to it )
, the captain is killed and the man who sent the distress signal ( peter facinelli ) is brought on board .
he calls himself troy larson , making him the supposed son of a man kaela once had a relationship with .
then a bunch of really predictable stuff starts happening .
have you seen " alien ?
" have you seen " event horizon " ( a lame movie in its own right ) ?
good .
then you 've seen " supernova .
" post - production cuts or not ,
there is nothing original about this screenplay , and nothing unpredictable either . after all , no one 's going to think for a second that troy wo n't turn out to be a villain .
but the bigger problem with " supernova " is that it can ' t just stick to the simple plot it 's afforded .
numerous re - writes ( the script may be credited to three people , but it 's a gross underestimate ) have crammed this lean 90-minute film with tons of extraneous plot threads that all remain underdeveloped
.
was there something about a limping robot shaped like a fighter pilot ?
did the ship 's computer learn something about humanity ?
what was that glowing lava lamp artifact troy brought on board with him ?
and just what does the film 's title signify , if anything ?
as far as i can tell , it refers to a very small plot detail that is n't developed , just like the rest of these unnecessary story elements .
character relationships in this film also make very little sense .
for some reason , every person in this film keeps having sex .
we get an unusually early sex scene between phillips and tunney within the first 10 minutes .
bassett and spader 's characters start off hating each other .
fifteen minutes and one bottle of pear brandy later , they 're engaging in some hanky - panky .
when troy the creepy stranger shows up on the ship , of course both female crew members will fall in love with him .
every single shift in character interaction happens extremely suddenly , which is only one of the many obvious clues to how much this film has been cut .
the most prominent example , however , may be the fact that when the film starts , there are no opening credits !
furthermore , the end of the film looks like they took what were originally intended to be the opening credits and spliced them in right before the real end credits .
maybe that 's why the film 's title is mentioned twice during the end credits , right between james spader and robert forster .
right after you get over the shock of not being told what movie you 're seeing ( lest you decide to walk out upon making that discovery ) , you might notice that the movie seems to have dropped you right in the middle of a scene , with little - to - no introduction to any of the characters or situations .
the rest of the movie feels like they skipped over the middle stuff in the character changes ( you know , where they explain things ) and just went from point
a to point b . point
a : danika is thoroughly enamored of yerzy and is ready to have his baby .
point b : tunney is now shagging troy and yerzy is unusually obsessed with the lava lamp thing .
does n't make sense .
since i did n't understand anything about these characters ' motivations , did i care when troy abruptly starts murdering them one - by - one ( and he does , knocking off three of them in about 10 minutes ) ? not a whit .
it 's a shame , because this cast contains a lot of talented actors looking for something to do .
they do n't find it .
bassett and spader
say every line in the same monotone voice with the same blank expressions on their faces . sexual tension ? more like constipation .
maybe they 're just embarrassed at having to utter such howlers as " this thing was made by someone more powerful than god and a whole lot less nice .
" not that we ever find out who that is , mind you .
the climax of their relationship ( taking place in a transport pod ) is probably the film 's biggest forehead - slapper .
as troy , peter facinelli inhabits the most obvious villain in history that no one ever suspected .
he 's awfully one - note , but it 's not as if he 's given any more notes to work with .
the rest of the cast does even less .
tunney stands around looking cute , then scared .
phillips broods .
cruz flirts with the computer .
then they all die and a star blows up or something , but i really was n't paying much attention by then .
" supernova " is pretty awful , but i 'm cutting it a little slack merely because i expected less than what i got .
that 's it .
if you expect it to be good ( for whatever reasons you may have ) , you 'll probably hate it more than i will .
even the special effects are fairly unimpressive , nothing you have n't seen before , and suffice to say the script is n't going to save the film
.
honestly , though , what do you expect from a film with about a dozen writers and a director who had his name removed and replaced with a pseudonym ?
it usually results in a bad movie , and that 's what " supernova " is .

SOLUTION:
N