instruction:
In this task, you must classify if a given review is positive/negative, indicating your answer as P or N.
question:
depending on who you ask , the original sin was either the eating of the apple , the act of disobedience against god , or the act of betrayal .
but in case you did n't know this , do n't bother remembering it . . .
the words " original sin " never come up in the movie of the same name , let alone the concept of it .
the closest the film even gets to catholicism is in its narrative ( the story is told by angelina jolie to her priest while on death row in cuba , circa 1900 ) .
regardless of its senseless title , original sin does actually have a plot ( albeit
one of the most mangled acts of screenwriting
since the art of war , based on the book waltz across darkness ) .
boy ( antionio banderas ) places personal ad sometime around 1900 , searching for a wife .
since this is a century ago , we narrowly dodge a remake of green card , only to find that the girl ( jolie ) faked her photo and is actually beautiful .
skipping a few moderately useless sex scenes ( getting the question out of the way , yes , we get to see angelina jolie 's breasts again ) , the girl turns out to be a con artist , swindles boy for his money , and heads for the hills .
original sin then briefly tries to be a thriller .
we see boy go whore - chasing , saying he wants to find girl and kill her .
but as soon as boy actually finds girl , instead of following what might have been
a promising ( or at least not completely fucking boring ) thriller , the film degenerates into the worst dissection of the virgin / whore complex since milk money .
girl toys with the idea of reforming her con - girl past , all the while avoiding the " other man , " a lover that keeps making her start these scams in the first place . add insult to injury with some of the worst stylistic choices in cinematic history ( literally half of the film is either in slow motion or uses a strobe effect ) , and acting roughly the caliber of a b . b . gun , and original sin is one of the most torturous films of the summer , definitely front running to make my bottom ten of the year .
do n't even bother with original sin , but if you do go , be honest with yourself and admit its pure sex appeal .
just keep in mind that although this film may not be the most original on the block , it 's much worse than a sin .
this is sacrilege .
answer:
N


question:
i love movies .
i really do .
every time i watch great movies like goodfellas ( 1990 ) or raiders of the lost ark ( 1981 ) , a tear comes to my eye due to the awesome talent , skill and entertainment that is on display .
even lower grade films such as the naked gun 33 1/3 ( 1994 ) or ghostbusters ii ( 1988 )
while not exactly brilliantly well made , are certainly not a waste of celluloid and present entertainment value .
then there 's my favourite martian , the exact opposite of what a movie should be : a hurried , poorly written and acted movie with one goal , to make money .
disney , ever since the lion king ( 1994 ) have lost their magic touch , but this dross just shows how far disney have sunk
.
christopher lloyd plays a martian who crash lands in front of t .
v reporter 's tim o'hara car ( daniels ) , and soon tim finds the martian in his home , trying to recover and fix his spaceship .
along with his ' zoot ' spacesuit , voiced by wayne knight , must fix his spaceship before it explodes , and also try to stop his identity being revealed to the public , firstly by o'hara , but later by rival t .
v presenter brace channing ( hurley ) , by calling himself tim 's ' uncle martin . '
' laughter ' is supposed to arise from the ' comical ' events , but never does .
many bad films have good intentions , but my favourite martian does n't appear to try to provide any entertainment .
filled to the brim with wham bang special effects , my favourite martian offers little more than some nice eye candy .
christopher lloyd mugs his way through the entire movie
, i 've never seen a man pull a face for 93 minutes until now .
jeff daniels plays ' staple nice guy ' and his role is useless .
his performance is incredibly lazy , although his paperthin character does n't deserve more than the performance he gives .
darryl hannah looks as pretty as ever , but her role is somewhat , erm , limited .
hurley mistakes ' acting ' for ' shouting and looking like a twit ' and wins the david wilcock award for ' most irritating , godawful performance in a moving picture . ' way to go liz !
for the supporting cast , disney manage to assemble every character actor out there , during the film i was going ' he was the guy in .
. .
ah .
. er . . . ' before finally giving up and switching off . another major setback is the staple ' comedy sidekick . '
unfortunately , the writers ( sherri stoner and deanna oliver , if anyone cares ) forget that a comedy sidekick needs to be ' funny . '
instead , they deliver zoot , the martians deeply unfunny sidekick .
although meant to be a manic character
no doubt , every line that comes out of his ' neck ' is a dud .
a real dud .
citizen kane delivers more laughs a minute than his hell spawn piece of polyester .
even the kids in the audience were insulted by this character : not one child even bothered to smirk .
it 's a nice special effect , though .
another problems with this comedy are the gags themselves .
or rather , the lack of them .
my favourite martian reaches a new level of toilet humour : it goes past the bowl , down the pipe and into the sewer .
now , toilet humour can be funny , as dumb and dumber ( 1994 ) humorously showed .
but here , characters farting , belching and almost getting crapped on ( literally ) is not ' amusing . '
it 's insulting .
there 's one good gag right before the credits , but it appears the guy who wrote that gag tragically died and his unfunny twin continued .
either that , or they were hoping that easy to please six year olds would n't mind the fact that his movie is beaten by men at work in the funny stakes .
yes , men at work .
yowza !
the fact that a lot of money was pumped into this film , and that they actually got people to agree to be in this film just depresses me even more .
there are thousands of brilliant films out there
that ca n't get distribution , yet
trash like this
gets released nation - wide with ease .
thankfully , as soon as it makes it 's money , it will never be seen again , and my favourite martian will end up where the two lead characters do near the end of the movie : down the toilet .
answer:
N


question:
any movie about the underground music scene is a difficult beast to master .
any meaning found in the underground is usually lost by the dumbing - down of the experience to make it " more accessible " to the general public .
or the film is produced and directed by people that have about enough understanding of the subject matter
that they ought to work as production assistants for vh1 . human traffic , a new film exploring the british underground party / rave scene and the people immersed in the world of clubbing , pubbing , drugs , sex , and the beautiful , beautiful music , is an example of how it really ought to be done .
the film follows five brits in their young twenties during a wild weekend of parties , drugs , dancing , sex , pop culture discussions , relationships , and wanking off in front of a mirror while mum interrupts .
the cast of character consists of jip ( john simm ) , our narrator , who has a bit of a problem with his willy , known as mr .
floppy .
koop ( shaun parkes ) ,
our black dj maestro , who has insecurity issues , afraid his girlfriend nina ( nicola reynolds ) is shagging other men .
nina herself ca n't stand her mcjob and longs for the freedom of the weekends .
lulu ( lorraine pilkington ) , jip 's best mate , is tired of her cheating boyfriends .
and moff ( danny dyer ) ca n't seem to escape the black hole of his awful life .
the film follows these five individuals during one weekend as each of them discovers love , friendship , and self - fulfillment , all against the raging party background .
human traffic is proof that cinema can still tell us deep stories while being visually alive , as director justin kerrigan 's subtle use of the camera lets the audience become part of the action .
the use of direct communication to the audience by the collection of characters works well , making the viewer the subconscious mind for the characters .
dialogue is crisp and moves with an even pace , and the acting is confident .
however , the two females leads tend to promote their relationships and dialogue with a bit of unneeded urgency that shows through when poignancy is needed .
human traffic does not try to explain the rave scene .
instead , it gives the audience the ability to listen to the people inside it , letting you choose your own convictions about this powerful musical movement that brings together strangers , friends , and lovers for one blissful night of music and peace .
answer:

P