TASK DEFINITION: In this task, you are given a review of movie. Your task is to classify given movie review into two categories: 1) positive, and 2) negative based on its content.
PROBLEM: It's just breathtaking in it's awfulness-- you really must see it!Depending on your perspective, Dylan Walsh is either the savior or the problem here: since he's the only one on screen that can actually get his lines out with something akin to natural cadences and inflection, he either ruins the movie by pointing up everyone else's flaws, or he saves it by providing some context for their awfulness.I'm inclined to the later view-- thanks to him, it works as high comedy. He's the 7 footer in a game of dwarf basketball, his skill set just doesn't apply in this context, and his discombobulation is delicious.The real treat though is Ms. Eastwood, whose inability to speak in plain English is so pervasive I actually googled her, expecting to learn that she was a Russian beauty who pronounced her lines phonetically, with no understanding of their meaning. But no: she's just a talent free American who will leave you laughing with every line she drops. Whether she knew what the lines meant must remain an open question.

SOLUTION: negative

PROBLEM: I'm among millions who consider themselves Cary Grant fans, but I can't think of a single reason to recommend this movie.I don't understand the casting of Betsy Drake and it appears no one else did,if we're to judge from the small number of films in which she played afterwards.Most fans will agree that Katharine Hepburn was superb at chasing and catching Cary Grant in Bringing Up Baby.Here the director or writers try to rehash the idea,but it fails miserably.I've read comments about how "creepy" Drake was,but I thought that was far too mild a description. Franchot Tone walked through this one as if he were hungover.A casting disaster is one thing.This film is a total disaster.This one doesn't deserve 10 lines of comments and I don't know why that's a requirement.Too bad this one was preserved when so many worthwhile films lie rotting in vaults.Unless you want to torture someone,give this one a wide berth.

SOLUTION: negative

PROBLEM: The film had some likable aspects. Perhaps too many for my taste. It felt as though the writer/director was desperately trying to get us to feel the inner conflict of ALL of its characters. Not once, a few times...but all of the time. This is the job of television, not cinema. The location of the train station was well chosen and I enjoyed Sascha Horler's performance as the pregnant friend. I felt as though Justine Clarke's performance was wan. Her reactions to things felt forced, as though the director were trying to vocalise the themes of the film through her protagonist's expressions. I also can't believe that a director can make the wonderful Daniela Farinacci into an unbelievable presence. I cannot understand the choice of pop music slapped over entire sequences. This is a lazy device, especially where the pop music comes from no place diagetic to the film and/or where the lyrics of the song feel embarrassingly earnest. That said, there is a breezy quality about the film that evokes the Australian heat and local attitude with originality. It does create an atmosphere of heat and sunshine. Especially with the usage of wonderful animation sequences that rescue the film from complete mediocrity, infusing it with passion and hand-crafted charm. I am curious why the dialogue feels so overworked. "Who knows if there's a god? Like some guy sitting there up in the sky telling us what to do" or whatever the line was. Perhaps one of the more embarrassing moments was the friend returning home from cricket with a bunch of flowers to declare to his wife "I'm giving up smoking." An anti-smoking commercial? A TAC ad with some tasteful animation? I had to leave the cinema at the 50 minute mark -- it was all too much.

SOLUTION:
negative