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

Q: when i first heard that romeo & juliet had been " updated " i shuddered .
i thought that yet another of shakespeare 's classics had been destroyed .
fortunately , i was wrong .
baz luhrman has directed an " in your face " , and visually stunning piece with this film .
it revolves around the two rival families , who in this version each run multi - million dollar enterprises .
these rival companies / families are the capulet 's and the montague 's .
the younger generation of these two families have formed gangs , who despise one another .
as the storylines goes , romeo montague ( played by leonardo dicaprio ) and juliet capulet ( claire danes ) meet at a fancy dress party , and it is love at first site .
i never believed love at first site was possible until i saw this film ,
the scene in which romeo 's eyes meet juliet 's through the fish tank
is one of the most memorable .
of course , they can not publicly reveal their love , for their families are arch enemies .
so they marry in secret
, this is where things begin to go wrong .
the story , as with all good shakespeare , ends in tragedy .
the cinematography is spectacular to say the least , and the soundtrack provides the perfect atmosphere in which to " lay our scene " , as the film says .
there is very little to criticise .
the performances are convincing , and several of the film 's younger stars may find that it provides a launch for their careers .
the modernisation of the script is ingenious and clever .
despite the well known storyline , this latest version still manages to cause tears among many members of the audience ( especially the younger generation ) , and this is certainly a great credit to the film .

A: P
****
Q: with his last two films - shine and snow falling on cedars - australian director scott hicks has proven his cinematic flashbacks to be some of the best out there , and his latest , hearts in atlantis , is no different .
its structure - beginning and ending in present day with one long flashback in the middle - is similar to the green mile , which is a bit ironic considering both were based on stephen king books .
the parallels do n't end there , either .
atlantis was adapted by william goldman , who had previously penned the big - screen version of misery and is in the process of working on the script for king 's dreamcatcher .
even the film 's content is a bit reminiscent of mile .
in fact , it 's the perfect blend of the feel - good ' 60s nostalgia of stand by me ( also by king ) and mystical power hokum of mile .
king 's atlantis is a book comprised of five related short stories , but the main focus here is on the first ( and longest ) tale , called low men in yellow coats ( the film 's title comes from the second chapter ) .
it 's set in 1960 harwich , connecticut , where 11-year - old bobby garfield ( anton yelchin )
lives in a boarding house run by his cold , self - centered mother elizabeth ( hope davis , joe gould 's secret ) , who seems to care more about her wardrobe than her son .
bobby spends his time with his two closest friends , john sullivan ( will rothhaar ) and tomboy carol gerber ( mika boorem ) , who become something like the kevin , paul and winnie of harwich .
when a new tenant moves into the vacant room , the fatherless bobby finds a male role model in ted brautigan ( anthony hopkins , hannibal ) , a mysterious stranger who is vague enough about his past to make bobby 's mom suspicious enough to at least momentarily turn her head away from the mirror .
ted teaches his young neighbor about the wonders of literature ( after his cheapskate mother gives him a library card for his birthday ) , dispenses prophetic words of wisdom and even pays bobby one dollar a week to read him the local newspaper and keep his eyes peeled for the low men , a group of people chasing ted to exploit his special powers .
i wo n't go into what these powers are , but they 're considerably toned down from the book ( and do n't involve black stuff flying out of ted 's mouth , a la mile ) .
atlantis ' present - day setting which bookends the film is based on the novel 's final chapter , titled heavenly shades of night are falling , and features david morse ( in yet another connection to the green mile ) as a married , middle - aged bobby who learns of the death of both of his childhood friends and returns to the dilapidated boarding house in which he spent his formative years .
atlantis is nowhere near as flashy as hicks ' cedars , which is disappointing but understandable considering the switch from the completely amazing robert richardson to the occasionally amazing piotr sobocinski , the oscar - nominated cinematographer behind krzysztof kieslowski 's red .
the acting is solid from everyone , including hopkins , who never once makes you think of dr .
lecter .
most impressive are youngsters yelchin and boorem , who both had tiny parts in along came a spider .
while i did n't really have much of a problem with goldman 's screenplay , i do need to point out at least one inconsistency .
goldman , for those of you who do n't read premiere , writes what seems like an annual criticism of everybody else 's films , carefully explaining why they all suck , make no sense and insult their audiences , while somehow failing to mention the crap that he 's penned ( like the general 's daughter ) .
it 's mean - spirited but fun to read , mostly on account of nobody else in hollywood having the balls to say anything remotely negative about anybody else in the business ( including michael jackson , o .
j . and robert blake ) .
in atlantis , which is supposed to be told through the eyes of young bobby , one would assume he would have to be in each scene in order to have the memory to which to flash back .
well , he 's not , and it does n't make sense .
1
: 41 - pg-13 for violence and thematic elements

A: P
****
Q: plot : a rich guy who does n't believe in love , orders a mail - order bride for himself .
that very evening , the couple is married and fall madly in love soon thereafter .
but what 's this ?
one of them might not be the person they are pretending to be ?
wow . . .
a sin , indeed .
critique : easily
one of the worst movies that i 've seen all year .
too long , too boring , too predictable and too ridiculous for anyone interested in watching a good movie .
what the hell were they thinking when they made this thing ?
( it 's no wonder that the film has been sitting on the racks for about a year ) this felt like a really bad tv movie of the week , with some nudity stuffed in from time to time , just to wake up the audience .
have you ever switched channels and fallen upon one of those ridiculously melodramatic tv movies , one that you just could n't help but switch back to from time to time , just to make sure that it was n't part of some sick joke ?
well , this movie is exactly like that , only it is n't a joke , it is n't on tv
and you are asked to pay money to see it ! !
i say again . . .
what the shite were they thinking ?
okay , so where do i start ?
first of all , the trailer of this film gives away the movie 's main plot twist , the betrayal .
so for the first half hour of the film , you 're basically just sitting there , watching these two " lovers " go through the motions until the " betrayal " occurs .
whoopee , big surprise .
second of all , angelina jolie is horribly miscast in this part .
why ?
well , it 's like this : not for one second
do you ever believe that she is not a nasty backstabbing woman !
i mean , it 's like all of those people who complained about jack nicholson being psycho from the start of the shining , well , the same goes here .
every look in jolie 's eyes screams " psycho " !
then of course , you have the case of the " patsy " husband , a man who just ca n't seem to figure out anything in time .
i mean . . .
how boring is that for the audience ?
you 're watching this guy screw up time after time after time , and somehow , we 're supposed to feel sorry or care about this dude .
no , thanks !
and if we do n't care about him , and we really do n't care about her ( she 's a beeyatch and as confused as we are about her actual motivations in the film ) , who the hell are we supposed to care about in this film ?
well , i 'll tell you .
the only thing that i was worrying about the whole way through this picture was whether or not i 'd actually fall asleep before the end credits rolled .
no suspense , no chemistry between the leads , no real love or passion , no sense of surprise , plenty of plot holes for everyone and an extra moronic ending
.
so why am i even giving this film a rating of three points ?
well , it 's actually pretty simple .
i liked the locations in the movie and the groovy score , but my primary reason for slipping three notches onto this bedpost is for the gratuitous shots of jolie 's boobies ( that 's two points right there ! )
and another one for antonio 's ass ( hairless , just for the record ) .
everything else in this movie was pointless , boring and just plain stupid .
try imagining a soft - porn movie .
. .
but without the plot !
that 's pretty much what you 've got here .
a low point in the careers of both stars .
oops , i almost forgot to mention the crappy dialogue . .
.
god
oh mighty . .
. make it stop ! !
where 's joblo coming from ?
american psycho ( 9/10 ) - cruel intentions ( 8/10 ) - eyes wide shut ( 6/10 ) - fatal attraction ( 8/10 ) -
playing by heart ( 7/10 ) - under suspicion ( 7/10 ) - what lies beneath ( 8/10 ) - what women want ( 4/10 ) - whipped ( 7/10 )

A:
N
****