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

[Q]: best remembered for his understated performance as dr .
hannibal lecter in michael mann 's forensics thriller , manhunter , scottish character actor brian cox brings something special to every movie he works on .
usually playing a bit role in some studio schlock ( he dies halfway through the long kiss goodnight ) , he 's only occasionally given something meaty and substantial to do .
if you want to see some brilliant acting , check out his work as a dogged police inspector opposite frances mcdormand in ken loach 's hidden agenda .
cox plays the role of big john harrigan in the disturbing new indie flick l .
i .
e . , which lot 47 picked up at sundance when other distributors were scared to budge .
big john feels the love that dares not speak its name , but he expresses it through seeking out adolescents and bringing them back to his pad .
what bothered some audience members was the presentation of big john in an oddly empathetic light .
he 's an even - tempered , funny , robust old man who actually listens to the kids ' problems ( as opposed to their parents and friends , both caught up in the high - wire act of their own confused lives . )
he 'll have sex - for - pay with them only after an elaborate courtship , charming them with temptations from the grown - up world .
l .
i .
e . stands for long island expressway , which slices through the strip malls and middle - class homes of suburbia .
filmmaker michael cuesta uses it as a ( pretty transparent ) metaphor of dangerous escape for his 15-year old protagonist , howie ( paul franklin dano ) .
in his opening voice - over , howie reveals a morbid preoccupation with death on the road , citing the l .
i .
e .
highway deaths of filmmaker alan
j .
pakula , songwriter harry chapin , and his own mother on exit 52 .
he 's both fascinated and disturbed by the l .
i .
e . , and those feelings are projected onto big john ( who follows howie around in his bright red car , but never makes a move to force the boy to do something he does n't want to do .
this makes him much more complex than the usual child molesters seen in movies -- he 's a beast , but ashamed of it . )
l .
i .
e . would have worked best as a half - hour short film about howie 's ill - advised foray into big john 's haven .
there is unnecessary padding with howie 's miserable dad ( bruce altman ) in the hot seat for a white - collar crime , degenerate youngsters who get their kicks from robbing middle - class houses , and some homoerotic shenanigans with wise - ass gary terrio ( billy kay ) , a handsome artful dodger . rather than add to the themes of suburban ennui ( not that we needed another movie on that subject ) , these awkward subplots pad out the running time to adequate feature length .
concurrently , the relationship between howie and big john is evenly paced and exceptionally well acted .
cox , sporting a baseball cap and a faded marine tattoo , is all bluff and bluster .
dano is quiet and at first glance seems so withdrawn as to be transparent .
we 're so used to child actors whose dramatic choices are broad and obvious ( calling haley joel ! ) , it 's surprising to see one who actually listens throughout any given scene .
the restraint is admirable .
but l . i .
e . 's
screenplay does n't always give them the best material .
when howie reads big john a walt whitman poem , the moment feels a bit too precious .
director michael cuesta lingers on an ecstatic reaction shot of big john , who may as well be hearing glenn gould performing bach 's goldberg variations .
it 's too much .
there are also some obvious dramatic contrivances involving big john 's other boy toy ( walter masterson ) , jealous over the newbie .
this plot thread predictably leads to violence .
not content to be a haunting , observational portrait of teen alienation in a royally screwed up world ( like terry zwigoff 's superb ghost world ) , cuesta lacks the confidence in his own work to end on an ambivalent note .
it 's typical of unimaginative cinema to wrap things up with a bullet , sparing the writers from actually having to come up with a complex , philosophical note .
in this regard
, l . i .
e .
( and countless other indie films ) share something in common with blockbuster action films : problems are solved when the obstacle is removed .
how often does real life work this way ? to extend the question : if a movie is striving for realism , do dramatic contrivances destroy the illusion ?
[A]: N


[Q]: i love this movie , and i 've just seen for the umptenth time .
unfortunately , it is also completly unknown and very few have seen it .
it 's my mission in life to spread the word : see this movie ! fred , george , doug and howie are reaching middleage .
three of them have a wife , kids and a house in the suburb with a mortgage to pay .
only fred is still a bachelor .
together they take the local train every morning to work in town .
on one of their organized thursday evenings at a bar , fred tells them of his boss and the arrangements he has made to keep a mistress .
he has gotten an apartment in downtown where he can meet her but has told his wife that he needs the apartment to spend the night after staff meetings every thursday night . since they always split everything four ways , they decide that they should get an apartment with a young woman as well , kathy .
however , kathy is n't completly honest to them .
in fact , she is a sociology student writing a thesis about the sex life of the suburban male .
with these four species she believes that she will make a very good paper .
ok , have one thing clear though .
the romantic rendezvous ' between kathy and each of the men are completly innocent .
the script stays above the waist - or to be precise , above the neck .
noboyd claims that kathy is their mistress
, the four guys call her their ' companion ' .
the censorship board here in sweden considered it to be suitable only for people above 15 years , but that only shows how long ago 1962 was .
small children could watch this without being corrupted .
kim novak is as lovely as always in this movie , even if she seems to be a bit too old for a student .
james garner is the playboy just like in many other movies .
i liked howard morris the best as howard the accountant who has to diet to support his wife .
tony randall is funny as always
.
1962 was more than 35 years ago .
how many accountants , copywriters or investment bankers can today afford to live in a house in the suburb with a lot of kids and a wife who does not work ?
this is the white middle class , i ca n't remember that i saw any blacks on the commuter train they use .
these are the people who can count on their kids to live an even better life than themselves .
perhaps this should also be a subject for a thesis in movie sociology ?
[A]: P


[Q]: senseless
( r ) marlon wayans is a very talented physical comedian , and it is that gift that brings senseless moments of life .
alas , moments are simply
that , moments , which are not enough to lift this fantasy / comedy above its one - joke premise . granted , that one joke is initially amusing .
when wayans 's darryl witherspoon , an economics major at stratford university , hits some dire financial straits , he becomes a guinea pig for a experimental drug that heightens all five senses .
after some initial side effects and problems controlling his superhuman senses , darryl learns to enjoy the benefits of his abilities and uses them to land a position at a highly esteemed corporate firm .
at this point , the film sounds more like senseful than senseless , but through some turns of the plot , darryl finds himself only able to use four of his five senses at once , essentially leaving him -- yes -- senseless .
this sets up some showcase moments for wayans 's gift for physical comedy , especially when darryl loses his sense of feeling and his body goes completely , hilariously limp . but these gags , and the gag behind the entire movie ,
quickly grows stale .
once darryl is shown without the use of all of the senses , instead of exploring any new comic territory , director penelope spheeris and screenwriters greg erb and craig mazin
take the easy way out and simply recycle each form of senselessness .
wayans approaches each go - round with gusto , but by this point he 's simply treading water for the rest of the film 's unfunny duration .
senseless would not be as problematic as it is if it did n't strive to be anything more than a comic trifle .
however , the raucous and often raunchy comedy is wrapped in a blanket of bogus sincerity .
darryl goes through the experiment in order to help his cash - strapped family , and this " serious " angle seems to come from an entirely different movie .
unlike wayans 's last starring vehicle , the surprisingly effective ( and serious ) the 6th man , the " emotional " content of senseless is forced and unconvincing .
any attempt at anything more substantial than broad comedy fizzles -- darryl 's romance with janice ( tamara taylor ) , a young woman who yearns for a man who is true to himself , does not generate sparks of any kind .
once his wb television sitcom the wayans bros .
comes to an end , the genuinely funny marlon wayans has a promising big - screen future ahead of him .
but if he continues to associate himself with projects as flat as senseless , his film career could go the way of his once - promising older brother , damon , who is now set to make his comeback -- on television .
[A]:
N