TASK DEFINITION: In this task, you are given product reviews about dvds. The goal is to classify the review as "POS" if the overall sentiment of the review is positive(the reviewer is satisfied) or as "NEG" if the overall sentiment of the review is negative(the reviewer is not satisfied).
PROBLEM: Great cartoons, but some are not well restored . We bought this installment of the "Disney Treasures" series when it was released late in 2005.  My 9 year old son and I just watched these cartoons again (Oct. 2006) and we both love them.  I would have to agree, however, with those reviewers who have noted that visually the cartoons in this Vol. 2 of the "Chronological Donald" were not restored to the same degree of perfection as those in earlier releases, including Vol. 1 of the "Chronological Donald" and the release containing many Donald World War II cartoons entitled "On the Front Lines".  There is a clear difference in quality, which is apparent when the Donald cartoons previously released in "On the Front Lines" and repeated in this collection are compared to the cartoons that are new here.  The former are visually superior, not because they were better to begin with, but because they have been more carefully restored and transferred.  This is a shame.  One hopes that in Chronological Donald Vol 3 (apparently not to be released in 2006, but perhaps in 2007) there will be a return to the quality of Vol. 1 and "On the Front Lines."  One might even hope for a new, improved Vol. 2, but that is probably not in the cards

SOLUTION: POS

PROBLEM: Alexander and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Movie . I apologize the the children's author for mis-using the title of a very good book, but it seemed so right!  Assuming that the Greeks lived much like the Oliver Stone asserts, and why not, then it was hard to be Macedonian, Greek, and royal.  There is enough angst in this movie for the rest of Alexander's cut short life.  Three hours of this much angst is three hours too much.  I give it 2 stars for the scenery, the story that is probably pretty spot on, and the fact that someone had the good sense to have Sir Anthony Hopkins and Christpher Plummer in the movie.  They are the redeeming features of the whole thing.  But I would not recommend this movie to anyone looking for a more historical venue.  Read a good book about it!!  Sorry, Oliver, but it's JFK all over again.  Plausible, but just not the case

SOLUTION: NEG

PROBLEM: This Sequel Is Not So Bad. It Is Only Unnecessary. . What it this? Disney's original animated film `The Jungle Book' was made in 1967, and after almost 40 years they released a sequel `The Jungle Book 2.' What is the point of doing this anyway?    To be fair, the sequel is not a horrible film. It has more colors (more light colors in the jungle) and comes with the original's exhilarating `Bare Necessities.' Who can dislike this song? And the introductory part using stick puppets is cleverly done, letting us into the world of the wild child Mowgli and his friends.    But after that, about 10 minutes or so, the film suddenly starts to look not-so-ambitious attempt to re-tell the story of the original, which should have been ended 40 years ago. In this sequel Mowgli, who is fed up with the rules of the village, goes back to the jungle where his friend big bear Baloo is living and dancing to that charming song alone. Now Baloo is happy to meet the boy again for he is lonely and needs a partner to do the musical number.    But we are not so happy. That is partly because their reunion virtually ignores the original film's conclusion, and partly because we know the same story has just begun again. The difference between the 1967 version and this one is that Shanti also steps into the jungle with a little boy Ranjan, but this slight difference means little to us because both of them are quite unmemorable.     After all, the problem is not the fact that the story of `The Jungle Book 2' in fact retreads that of the original because few people would still remember the details of the film made 40 years ago. The real drawback is that in `JB2' nothing interesting happens except the last 10 minutes where the bad tiger tries to kill Mowgli. The film provides musical scenes (which are decent themselves), but they only stretch the thin story. Even though I love the song Bare Necessities, I don't want to listen to it three times in a short film that only runs 72 minutes.    To me (I am living in Japan) the most shocking thing about the film is that like the so-so film `Return to Neverland' `The Jungle Book 2' was originally made for video, and then was chosen for theatrical release in USA and UK. That they can do such a thing is as unaccountable as the company's choice of the material for the sequel

SOLUTION:
NEG