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

synopsis :
an aging master art thief , his supplier , and a young , buxom security consultant are all not who they first appear to be ( or are they ? ) in this convoluted mess involving a risky heist during the millennium .
comments :
this movie was boring .
plain and simple .
entrapment should not have been boring .
it stars sean connery , who can still carry an action film despite his age , catherine zeta - jones , a likeable enough film presence , and ving rhames , ultra - cool star of pulp fiction and mission : impossible .
it takes full advantage of the y2k computer bug fears ( a current " hot topic " in the news ) in its storyline , which is set at the end of 1999 .
it has some genuinely well - staged action sequences .
so , what went wrong ?
plenty , unfortunately .
the major problem with entrapment is its script .
it has a been - there , done - that feel to it .
nothing seems particularly inventive or original , so the whole movie lacks suspense and drags
( it runs nearly two hours ) .
the screenwriters , for example , periodically use a countdown to the millennium as a means of transition between scenes ( i .
e .
"
4 days to the millennium " ) .
this device was used much more effectively in the overlooked sci - fi film strange days .
the characters are not who they appear to be at the beginning , which is neat at first but the device wears thin once the umpteenth " surprise " revelation is made . entrapment , in other words , relies too heavily on the audience not knowing what each character 's true motive is , resulting in a convoluted story which leaves many scratching their heads in confusion .
the star power here is quite strong , but the viewer ca n't help but feel the actors are wasted in this production .
sean connery is given such mind - numbing lines as
" never trust a naked woman . " ving rhames ' character seems like an afterthought ; he 's not developed at all .
the camera zooms in frequently and leeringly at catherine zeta - jones 's tight wardrobe .
this , in and of itself , is not bad , but , after a while ,
it has a juvenile feel to it .
at least the species movies hold no bones about the fact that they 're exploiting the female body .
entrapment does the same under the thin disguise of plot development
( sean connery supposedly falls in love with the girl while watching her , in tights , arc and pivot around laser beams ) .
the tagline for this movie reads " the trap is set .
" it sure is , on those who spent money to see this movie .
entrapment really is n't that bad ; it is watchable .
i would suggest , however , one waits until this is on cable or television to see it .
N

this feature is like a double header , two sets of clich ?
s for the price of one .
not only do we get the usual tired sports chestnuts , but the banal rich girl - poor boy love story is tossed in for good measure .
an original moment in this loser is as rare
as a chicago cubs world series appearance .
the screenplay by kevin falls and john gatins , based on a story by falls , merely lobs
its plotline at the audience .
this is a story that needed sent down for seasoning and more coaching .
summer catch centers around ryan dunne ( freddie prinze jr . ) , a cape cod youth chosen to participate in the prestigious cape cod baseball league , supposedly a showcase for the best young amateur and college players in the country .
ryan is a blue - collar kind of guy .
he works with his dad taking care of the lawns of cape cod 's rich and famous .
he also , as we are informed early , his own worst enemy .
he has the potential and the talent , but always seems to self - destruct at the crucial moment .
so , ryan tries to remained focused on baseball .
then he meets tenley parrish ( jessica biel ) , daughter of one of the blue bloods whose lawn he manicures .
tenley , a name only a hack screenwriter could invent , is unlike her snobbish counterparts and falls for ryan . if you ca n't figure out where all this nonsense leads , then you need a remedial course in film viewing .
as always prinze is pretty to look at , but his performance mainly consists of facial expressions : puppy dog love , heartbreak , frustration , self - loathing or determination .
biel cries a lot , while bruce davison merely acts smarmy as her class - conscious father .
the only beacon is matthew lillard 's fun - loving billy brubaker , the team 's catcher .
summer catch borrows situations and stylings from other baseball movies , such as bull durham and the natural .
no curve balls here , no sliders .
every pitch is predictable . a blind umpire could call this movie .
summer catch is strictly rookie league moviemaking .
it has as much chance of making the movie hall of fame as the dodgers have of moving back to brooklyn .
N

when considering david fincher 's latest film , " the game " , four words come to mind .
" do n't believe the hype .
"
this michael douglas vehicle , from the director of " seven " , is n't nearly as clever or innovatively suspenseful
as it would have us believe .
the film draws us in with an intriguing concept ( aided no doubt by the riveting trailer ) where a jaded millionaire ( douglas ) is presented with the opportunity to enter into a living fantasy .
this is n't simply virtual reality .
this is real life with a deadly twist .
on his 48th birthday , nicholas van orton ( douglas ) is invited to dinner by his underachieving younger brother , conrad ( sean penn ) .
conrad has a special birthday present for his brother .
he hands nicholas a gift certificate and tells him to contact a company called consumer recreation services .
"
they make your life fun , " conrad tells him .
nicholas humors his brother , telling him he 'll call , but it 's clear he has no time for any foolish , " fantasy role - playing , " as he calls it .
then , for reasons that are never really made clear , nicholas decides to go to crs and see what they 're all about .
he ends up spending a whole day going through their screening process , which to me made no sense considering the tight schedule he keeps claiming to have .
nevertheless , when it seems nicholas has been rejected as a crs client , the weird things start happening .
of course , when we 've only covered about 30 minutes of screen time , what else should we expect .
douglas has built his modern career around playing powerful , violent and unlikable men being manipulated by unseen hands .
one of those films , " basic instinct " , came from the creative minds of writer , joe eszterhas and director , paul verhoeven .
the premise of " the game , " is not unlike the concept of another verhoeven film , " total recall .
" in that case , the premise was implanting someone else 's memories as a way to enhance one 's own life through a dream vacation .
yet , in both films , the real goal is to create a vicarious bond with the audience .
we live the adventure along with the protagonist , reacting to each twist and turn .
in theory , the key to the suspense is not being to tell what is real and what is n't .
all we can do is hang on until the end of the ride , when the truth is finally revealed .
now , for those of you who forgot , let me say this again .
" do n't believe the hype .
"
" the game " is not a thrilling roller coaster ride .
as a suspense - thriller , it does n't do much but spin in circles .
by the third reel , i was fighting back sleep and checking my watch as i endured the predictable plot
.
is it any wonder douglas wo n't be able to resist the charms of a mysterious , potentially life - threatening blonde ( ever heard of glenn close ?
no ?
well , how about sharon stone ? thought
so ) .
if anything in this film surprises you at all , i would guess you have n't seen that many films .
there is no suspense here .
trust me , i looked hard to find some .
i had to settle for contrived gimmicks and ridiculously implausible situations .
fincher aim 's for hitchcock but lands somewhere just north of joe eszterhas .
there are those that might say " the game " is not intended to be viewed literally .
i would submit that is exactly the way i tried to view the film .
the film simply does not have the teeth to bite into any real psychological issues .
there is a moment early in the film where van orton , realizing his game has begun , smiles as he walks through the airport trying to figure out who 's in on the whole thing .
he is charged by his paranoia .
he is looking at the world through new eyes .
it is the last thought - provoking moment in the film .
from there on , the director only wants to stay a step ahead of us .
any significant archetype that is set up in the beginning of the film is simply turned into a plot device .
at the outset , we 're told each " game " is tailored to the individual .
ultimately , this " game " is supposed to work like a crucible , trying this obscenely wealthy and emotionally detached aristocrat by fire , proving his soul .
yet , as douglas endures his personal gauntlet , we 're given very few pieces of the puzzle to illuminate us on who this man really is .
i wanted to like this film more than i did .
i look at it as just anothergreat idea , poorly realized .
i can think of at least two other superior films where watching the film did n't mean we were seeing what was really happening .
bryan singer 's " the usual suspects " for one , a film that was truly unique in its ability to get you lost in the details before pulling back to show you the full masterpiece on the canvas .
also , there is the underrated " jacob 's ladder , " with tim robbins , a film that really has to be watched twice before you recognize the significance of all its symbolism .
here are two examples of films that do n't simply manipulate for manipulations ' sake .
there are films that use their labyrinth structure to lead us to a meaningful place .
one major issue that comes up in " the game " is whether or not the whole " illusion " is just a highly sophisticated con game .
well , i can tell you right now , after you 've spent your $ 7 dollars , you may be asking yourself the same thing .

N