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

[Q]: this is crap , but , honestly , what older american audience is going to be able to resist seeing jack lemmon and james garner as bicker- ing ex - presidents ?
especially when their supporting players in- clude dan aykroyd as the current commander in chief , lauren bacall as a former first lady , and john heard as the dan quayle - ish vice president .
yup , you 're talkin ' pre - sold property here and , for warner brothers , the perfect fit into their now - ritual grumpy old men holiday slot .
for the non - discriminating viewer , my fellow americans is fine .
the raw star power alone will have audiences applauding this atrocious political- thriller road - comedy .
( they did in mine , heaven help us . )
for the rest of us , the movie is immediately tiresome .
the tone is terrible and the banter is worse .
forget
wit-- lemmon and garner merely exchange profanities through most of the movie .
( has anyone counted the number of first penis references ? )
sure , some of the bits are absurdly funny , including a men 's room macarena joke , the appearance of an elvis impersonator on a trainload of tarheels , and an all dorothy marching band performing " over the rainbow " at a gay men 's march .
the get there from here , though , you have to submit to one of the most offensively overbearing musical scores of all time .
judas priest , is there a single moment of silence in this film ?
even the dialogue gets drowned out .
what a waste .
[A]: N


[Q]: seen may 2 , 1998 at 3
: 40 p .
m .
at the crossgates cinema 18 , theater # 13 , with chris wessell and sean o'shea for $ 5 .
[ theater rating :
*
* * 1/2 : very good sound , picture , and seats ] the big - budget , mega - hype " event " movie is becoming so trendy now it is becoming a weekly routine instead of a seasonal one .
gluttony is hollywood 's favorite sin , but it is the movie - goers who pay the price by being dealt the same things over and over on an ever - worsening basis .
" lost in space " is the latest such offering - a film
so poor it would be twice as good if it were mediocre
.
it 's made up of every element of science fiction , but at no time does it evoke the slightest amount of wonderment
the genre was meant for .
audiences ' attention spans are rapidly decreasing and as is the trend with such films , this one opens with a fast - paced space battle which serves not only as the most interesting scene in the film ( probably because it has " star wars " written all over it ) , but as the producers ' way of showing off their budget through the special effects .
battle scenes are worthless without tension , and since we have no idea what the setting is it 's impossible to care about anything that happens .
in essence , the entire segment works like a teaser for an arcade game , not a piece of filmmaking .
we meet the robinson family - a family of five that does not get along but has been chosen to act on earth 's behalf in effort to find another planet worthy of colonization due to the exhausting of our natural resources .
each member of the family has a special trait and personality , and yet none of them seem like actual people .
professor john robinson ( hurt ) is the intelligent , quiet leader who has devoted so much time to his work his family and marriage are suffering without his realizing it ( it 's obvious what role this aspect will play ) .
of course this is all established through extremely melodramatic scenes such as the children and parents arguing and bickering among themselves and with each other , while the necessary problems are " resolved " at the right moments .
the only thing worse than the screenplay is the fact it 's presented in a completely serious manner without a trace of satire , and is so pathetic it 's laughable
.
the first act is not a building of a story , but a juxtaposition of scenes that serve no purpose other than to plug in all the required elements ( such as plot , conflict , and characterization - god forbid ! ) .
we 're provided with the minimum amount possible of these elements to keep the film from being completely silent .
in fact , it might as well be since
the dialogue is virtually non - existent .
yes , the characters do speak , but they do not talk .
they say things that only relate to the conflict , but they never really interact ( unless it 's the cartoony flirting scenes between arrogant major don west ( leblanc ) and uptight , unemotional judy robinson ( graham ) ) .
it 's amazing that after an hour of trite dialogue and generic plot devices
that so little happens .
eventually the pacing rapidly increases , but the amount of genuine interest does not .
the story finally gains some prospective by living up to its title as the robinsons find themselves lost in space after narrowly managing to defeat dr .
smith ( oldman )
, the cartoony villain , and his plans for sabotage .
what ensues is a series upon series of completely unrelated conflicts .
the first such scene takes place on an abandoned spaceship and what ensues could best be described as " alien " -lite .
the story changes again when the robinsons crash land on an alien planet and must act quickly to escape it and survive .
but there 's never any real notion of suspense here because the script
constantly wanders aimlessly .
plotlines are developed , but each becomes totally irrelevant as the story changes from scenario to scenario .
the atmosphere attempts to be surreal by incorporating time travel and various time paradoxes , but it 's presented in such a ridiculous way it 's utterly boring
.
by the time the last act rolls around , there is no sense of a payoff building .
the ending does not go out on a high note with any kind of climax , instead , it seems to come to a sudden halt ( but at least it ends at all ) .
" lost in space " is major film production at its worst .
it 's frightening that a film so poorly written , directed , and acted might be considered mainstream entertainment .
[A]: N


[Q]: ok , i admit i had a bad attitude about this film from the start .
a romantic comedy about the trials and tribulations of single working parents ?
with a couple of incredibly cute kids thrown in for good measure ?
yuck .
but it 's not really too bad .
it has a lot working against it , for me at least .
in addition to the above , it is typical of a lot of recent movies in that it is really just a glorified made - for - tv movie , but longer and with bigger stars , and you have to pay to see it .
it does win you over , though , even if it is painfully predictable .
just think about it :
two single parents , with their cute kids , are thrown together due to a missed field trip .
through a day of near disasters , they cont inually meet , get in one another 's way , cause trouble for one another , and generally insult one another at every opportunity .
in fact , they hate each other so much that we know that they are , or soon will be , in love .
the only people who hate each other more than lovers are married couples .
so this film is predictable , just as the screwball comedies of the classical hollywood cinema were predictable ( and the screwball genre is obviously hoffman 's model for this film ) .
will they get fired from their yuppie jobs ?
will they make the big soccer game that is so important to their kids ?
will pfeiffer realize what a jerk her ex - husband , a drummer for bruce springsteen , really is ( are n't they all ? ) ?
will they finally kiss ?
well , what do you expect ?
but there is a certain amount of satisfaction in having our expectations fulfilled , especially when it is done with as much humour , along with a lack of sticky sentimentality , as it is in this film .
pfeiffer and clooney have a certain chemistry together
that is surprisingly charming , and the kids are neither shoved into the background nor allowed to steal the show .
one word of caution , though .
this film is being billed in some places as a " family " movie .
do n't let that stop you .
however , i think most kids , especially boys , would be pretty bored by this move .
after all , nobody gets killed and there are no explosions .
all in all , a good , non - offensive date movie .
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 .
[A]:
P