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

godzilla is the ultimate culmination of the " who cares about plot " summer movie .
a loose remake of the 1954 " classic " japanese monster movie , godzilla , king of the monsters ( which is itself pretty thin in the story department ) , roland emmerich and dean devlin 's big - budget lizard - stomps - manhattan disaster flick has been written with the brain dead in mind .
the script is n't just " dumbed down , " it 's lobotomized .
godzilla lives and dies on special effects alone .
presumably , the primary target group for this film is teenage boys , the demographic most likely to shell out $ 7 repeatedly to see the same images of monster - instigated carnage .
that 's not to say that females and other age groups are immune to the special effects seduction ; they 're just not as readily susceptible .
this is the third straight movie in a row where emmerich and devlin have demonstrated that a mastery of computer - generated visuals is far more important for making money than the ability to write and direct for actors .
stargate was a financial success .
independence day was a runaway hit .
and , with godzilla already drowning in hype and merchandising tie - ins before it even opens , it 's virtually guaranteed at least $ 100 million .
nice numbers for a film that could have been penned by a not - too - precocious grade school kid .
godzilla is n't completely without merit , although it is close .
there 's a certain visceral thrill inherent in watching the giant lizard rip his way through manhattan ,
but it wears off quickly .
frankly
, while the special effects are competent , they 're not all that stunning .
there 's nothing new here
; it 's jurassic park meets aliens , with a little independence day thrown in for bad measure .
maybe it will require george lucas and his new star wars movie to take computer - generated visuals to the next level .
godzilla never really pushes the envelope , preferring to remain within a comfort zone .
the imagination of monster movies like king kong has been replaced by a crass , formulaic approach which disallows creativity .
( how disturbing is it to know that godzilla has been chosen to close the 51st cannes film festival ? ) worst of all , godzilla is n't even exciting .
with the possible exception of a mildly enjoyable car chase near the end , there is n't a sequence in this film that raises the pulse .
even the scenes with dozens of aircraft attacking the monster are so devoid of tension and suspense that they are yawn - provoking .
independence day may have been dumb , but it was full of " adrenaline moments " capable of getting the audience involved in the action .
in this aspect of its production , as in so many others , godzilla is lacking .
actually , part of the problem is that we 're never sure who we 're supposed to be rooting for : the green monster with an attitude or the paper - thin humans trying to stop him .
the plot , such as it is , can be summed up rather simply .
after sinking a few ships and leaving some footprints on tropical islands , godzilla shows up in the big apple .
he does some of the usual tourist things :
stops by madison square garden , visits the chrysler building , goes on a walk through central park , and takes the subway .
in the process , he knocks over a few buildings and steps on countless cabs , but he never has trouble with traffic jams .
on hand to stop him is an elite u.
s. army unit , led by a slightly less - arrogant - than - usual military man ( kevin dunn ) and a biologist named nick tatopoulos , who has a theory about godzilla .
in his opinion , the big guy is actually a lizard grown to enormous proportions as a result of the radiation given off by french atomic bomb tests in the south pacific .
in nick 's words , godzilla is " a mutated aberration ?
an incipient creature ?
the first of its kind .
"
as luck would have it , nick 's old girlfriend , audrey ( maria pitillo ) , is a reporter based at a new york tv station .
along with her cameraman friend , animal ( hank azaria ) , she decides to follow nick around as he trails godzilla .
then , just when the military has rejected nick 's theory about why godzilla is in new york , a member of the french secret service ( jean reno ) recruits him for a special assignment .
instead of stomping around tokyo this time , godzilla has chosen new york city .
unfortunately , manhattan has been destroyed so many times in recent disaster movies ( independence day , deep impact , armageddon ) that it 's becoming boring .
the whole tradition of monsters roaming around the city started with king kong , but the big ape was only about 30 feet tall .
he could climb the empire state building .
at ten times that height , godzilla would be more likely to knock it over .
godzilla contains a few lame attempts at humor .
there 's an ongoing feud between animal and his wife that plays like sit - com material , an unfunny and repetitive gag about how no one can pronounce nick 's last name properly , and a rather tame attack on film critics roger ebert and gene siskel .
both of the popular personalities have alter egos in the film : " ebert , " the mayor of new york , is played by michael lerner , and " gene " ( lorry goldman ) is his campaign manager .
ebert 's re - election slogan is , not surprisingly , " thumbs up for new york .
" the siskel / ebert stuff is amusing the first time it 's used , but , after a while , it grows tiresome .
and , although the " characters " do n't serve any real purpose , they keep popping up .
godzilla is saddled with an unimpressive cast .
this is largely because emmerich does n't want to risk a human performance upstaging his lizard .
that 's not to say that matthew broderick and jean reno are n't capable of good performances ( both have done their share of solid acting in the past ) , but they are n't a - list names .
then again , considering the quality of the writing , even pacino and deniro would have been hard- pressed to shine .
maria
pitillo ( dear god ) plays the love interest and hank azaria ( great expectations ) is on hand to present what is supposed to be comic relief .
ultimately , it does n't really matter what i ( or any other critic , for that matter ) have to say about the movie .
tristar has assumed that godzilla , like all self - proclaimed summer event motion pictures , is pretty much critic - proof .
it may also be word - of - mouth - proof .
those who want to see the movie will see it no matter what i write or their friends say .
so , when i go on record to assert that godzilla is one of the most idiotic blockbuster movies of all time , it 's like spitting into the wind .
emmerich and devlin are master illusionists , waving their wands and mesmerizing audiences with their smoke and mirrors .
it 's probably too much to hope that some day , movie - goers will wake up and realize that they 've been had .
N

i think that any competent member of the human race who 's ever seen a movie -- any movie -- could probably predict just about every turn in the wedding singer .
even though i try very hard to not predict films as i 'm watching them ( especially not romantic comedies ) , the plot of this particular film just advanced before me seconds , and sometimes minutes , before i actually saw it happen on screen .
but i do n't care .
not even a little .
my reasons for this are simple : 1 ) adam sandler is great .
2 ) drew barrymore is great .
3 ) the movie is so funny .
there are parts that left me gasping for air because i was laughing so hard
.
i have n't laughed this hard in a movie since austin powers .
sandler plays robby hart , a wedding singer who once had dreams of being in a rock band and writing his own music .
in the opening scenes , he seems like a happy - go - lucky wedding singer , at least partially enjoying his profession and doing a rather good job of talking down a really drunk individual ( steve buscemi ) who decides that his brother 's wedding is a good place to tell the whole world that his life , up to that point , was utter pointlessness .
a week later , at his own wedding , he is left standing at the altar by his ex - fianc ?
e , linda ( angela featherstone ) .
with his life in complete disarray , he meets julia ( barrymore ) , a waitress .
she is engaged to glenn ( matthew glave ) , and is to marry him in about three months .
julia and robby become good friends when she enlists him to help with the wedding plans .
soon ( and predictably ) it becomes pretty clear that glenn is a jerk , and that robby and julia really love each other .
oh sure , it 's trite .
and if anyone making this film expected us to , like , feel suspense or something while watching the wedding singer , then they truly underestimated their audience .
what makes the story bearable , aside from the terrific costumes and 80s music , are the performances .
barrymore is simply adorable here
( i 've never seen her look so close to the way she did in et ) .
not only is she pleasant to look at , but her acting job here really is a good one -- and it does n't hurt that the character is likable and adequately well - written .
and the jerk , played in full - force by graves , is just as despicable as any villain in any romantic comedy i 've ever seen .
naturally , the true star here is sandler .
i think the guy is flat - out hilarious .
he can say something that just is n't funny , and his delivery makes me laugh
.
his comedic performance here equals that of happy gilmore , but in this film he goes much further and proves to me that he can , indeed , hold his own as a leading man in a romantic comedy .
whereas his roles in his previous films kind of had sandler playing sandler , the wedding singer gives him a character that , for the first time , he actually has to fit into . as far as i 'm concerned he succeeded , and this film is testimony that he does , in fact ,
have some range in his talents .
and
the movie is just so funny .
perhaps the best moment is when he sings a song for julia that he claims is a little uneven because he began writing it while in a good mood and finished it after his fianc ?
e abandoned him .
this is the part that literally had me groping for a breath of air .
and while the film , like all romantic comedies , takes a hiatus from laughs towards the end because the plot has to finish up , there are more than enough truly hilarious moments in the first hour that make up for any slumps in progress during the second half .
my formal complaints for the wedding singer are n't very important .
the film is predicable , but who cares ?
the characters are extremely likable , the movie is ridiculously funny , and
the experience is simply enjoyable .
in addition to this , i ca n't imagine anyone seeing the preview and not wanting to see the film .
in that order , i conclude that it is pointless for me to even have written this review .
i just want everyone to know that i laughed .
a lot .
P

not since attending an ingmar bergman retrospective a few years ago have i seen a film as uncompromising in its portrayal of emotional truth as secrets & lies .
like bergman , director mike leigh is interested in probing his characters ' inner depths through hypernaturally blunt confrontations .
also like bergman , leigh engages in frequent closeups of his characters ' ravished and wracked faces . and the prominent mournfulness of a cello on the soundtrack recalls bergman 's own use of a bach cello suite in an earlier film .
all that is missing is a discussion of god .
which is not to say that secrets & lies is nothing more than an homage to the swedish master .
in fact , it is quite possible leigh had no such intentions in mind .
nonetheless , what we get is so far removed from the average moviegoing experience -- even from the reason we go to the movies in the first place -- that it takes some effort to adjust to the film 's rhythms .
once the adjustment is made , however , there are great rewards .
one such is the chance to see life on the screen as it really is .
though leigh may have adopted some of bergman 's stylistic touches , most obviously in an early scene of terse cross - cutting during a married couple 's strained conversation , as well as in that somewhat obtrusive score , the overall feeling of the film is that it eschews any " style " at all .
whereas bergman uses artifice as a tool to expose reality , leigh makes the camera a mere observer , almost as in a pbs documentary .
the effect of this is to focus all of your attention on the actors .
it is a tribute to everyone involved that , despite such scrutiny , only infrequently are we aware that anyone * is * acting .
much has been made of brenda blethyn 's performance , and rightly so , but it is only when you remind yourself that you are watching a fiction that you realize how good she is .
there are a few missteps .
for one , except for one scene ( tragicomic , as it happens ) , there is scant humor in the film .
this leads to a certain monotonous tone throughout .
and occasionally ( as with bergman ) the bluntness of the situations can seem forced .
for all that , this longish film manages to keep hold of your attention .
it is unfortunate that the audience for secrets & lies will most likely be limited to an intellectual elite , for there is nothing inherently intellectual about this film .
in fact , it might easily resonate more strongly for millions of working class filmgoers who will likely never see it .
there is even a sweet but significant irony in the film 's unspoken take on race relations , something an american audience at least would do well to observe .
nonetheless , secrets & lies is not for the faint of heart .
though there is nothing physically horrific to make one squeamish , the exploration of common human frailty can be so raw and unsparing that it is tempting to turn from the screen .
needless to say , it is also very depressing at times .
but for many of us , of course , so is life .
and though the film is too honest to tack on a phony happy ending , that same honesty allows it to admit that things can also get better .

P