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

[Q]: paul verhoeven , the dutch auteur who dragged his violent , sexually aggressive aesthetic into american film , has never been what i 'd consider a thoughtful director ( though some of his films , notably starship troopers , have been lauded as artistic achievements ) , but he is the kind of hollywood film maker who 's managed to , no matter what the budget , make his films distinctive and even sometimes smuggle stimulating themes into the lavish high concepts on which he toils .
starship troopers was essentially a b - monster movie remake of his enthralling dutch war film soldier of orange ( a great film that 's nearly impossible to find on video , yet showgirls is everywhere ) , in which he cast a troop of stunningly attractive mannequins ; the square jawed casper van dien and denise richards ( who may actually be 45 % silicone ) , in what feels like an american propaganda picture set to monotonous scenes of graphic carnage .
it 's not a completely successful film , but
as a failure
it 's certainly an interesting ( and mostly entertaining ) one .
my favorite verhoeven films were the ones he made before he hit our shores ; spetters , a dark near pornographic coming of age film set within the sub - culture of drag racing and the aforementioned soldier of orange ( have n't yet gotten around to seeing the 4th man or turkish delight ) .
i believe his best hollywood film to be robocop , a bleak super - hero satire with a robotic hero that 's as touching as schwarzenegger 's in t2 .
that movie was violent but not in the overdone cartoonish manner of more recent verhoeven pics .
its violence seemed to be there for a purpose , namely to create an atmosphere of unpredictable dread , not to simply titillate an attention deprived audience .
there 's a jaw - dropping scene within the first ten minutes of robocop wherein the lead villain toys with a cop before snuffing him .
he tortures the officer by taking glee in his victim 's every fearful tic .
it 's a startling moment of barbaric , maddening violence that effectively sets the tone for the film that could be designated as splatter punk - noir .
in hollow man kevin bacon brutally slays a dog because it just wo n't shut up , he impales a co - worker , drowns another and so on .
but why ?
his character is introduced as a smug genius , the kind who 's always impeccably dressed and races a sports car while generic rock tunes blare from his stereo for the world to hear , sort of like a scheming uber villain from dallas or melrose place , though once the character becomes invisible , this film has him pull a 180 shift into a psychotic movie monster .
the kind who just wo n't die .
hollow man 's protagonists are the completely bland but beautiful scientist linda ( elizabeth shue , acting as if she were rebecca of sunnybrook farm ) and her lover , a hunk of beef scientist played by josh brolin who 's saddled with the film 's worst lines
( " i 've lost cohesion again ! " ) .
they 're a typical aaron spelling couple , good - looking but as vacant as george
w .
bush 's republican national convention speech ( i .
e .
bush referring to clinton ; " ? ?
?
so much promise ? ? ?
but to what end ?
to what end ?
"
-- this actually got applause !
suddenly warren beatty does n't look so absurd ) .
the rest of the film 's characters are all well past thirty , though act like annoying high school party animals insulting one and other with a series of strained one - liners
; is it just me or have
labored insults become big budget hollywood 's new character developing technique ?
ahh , what a cynical time we live in ? ? ?
as the picture opens we meet cain ( kevin bacon ) , an egocentric scientist working with the crew of aforementioned irritating scientists on a top secret ( so top secret the government has only provided them with a dilapidated warehouse in which to perform their extensive experimentation 's ) project with the goal to make invisibility a possibility ( for what purpose is never hinted at ) .
they 've performed several experiments on animals and have nearly solved the quandary causing caine , in a twist worthy of the film 's 1950 's late show origins , to impulsively experiment on himself .
caine neglects to let the pentagon in on his plans and somehow gets two of his co - workers to lie for him
so the rest of the crew will think the pentagon gave the go ahead .
our mad scientist is turned invisible ( after several fx - heavy complications ) , then he inexplicably
( it 's hinted that the process of invisibility has made the animals into more savage creatures , but this is never explored , and if that was the case why the hell would anyone be stupid enough to test this out on a human ? ) begins raping , assaulting and murdering anyone he pleases , always with a lame wisecrack ready a la freddy krueger .
it grows abundantly clear with each new release that it 's verhoeven 's films that have become hollow .
like the rest , this one is cold , heartless , and full of contempt for humanity , but in addition to all that it lacks any trace of wit , insight and makes no statement other than " audiences will pay for anything these days " .
it 's an affront to anyone looking for something stimulating on an intellectual level , or even those hoping to spend a saturday night with a fun , thrill - a - minute ride .
verhoeven has instead served up an utterly routine mad slasher flick with nobody to root for and no reason to care .
the previews make hollow man look like an irresistible flick .
how can one not have a good time at a film that utilizes state of the art fx to illustrate an invisible man getting down and dirty with his bad self ?
a couple weeks ago , after seeing the trailer , a bunch of friends and i got into a long discussion of how invisible man flicks never go so far as to have the invisible individual indulging in their newfound ability .
hollow man looked like the first film to do so and whoa , in a serious manner to boot .
but oh yeah , it is directed by paul verhoven not atom egoyan or peter greenway .
verhoeven delivers the sleazy " goods " , but not in a watchable or thrillingly disturbing manner , here
it just feels icky and uncomfortable .
the director keeps his camera trained at his nubile actresses , caressing their breasts with his lens all while faux - psycho music strains in the background .
it 's plainly obvious that verhoeven is n't exploring voyeurism ( like in the classic peeping tom ) but exploiting it and not even doing that very well .
it 's funny that with all the technology $ 90 million can get you verhoven is stuck at trying to figure out how to show a woman 's naked breast manipulated by an invisible hand .
most vexing is that the invisibility aspect is used simply as gimmick in yet another slasher movie wherein characters do stupid things just so the villain can pop up for more attacks .
in fact it 's largely irrelevant that bacon is invisible since , by the end , most of his potential victims don infer - red glasses that track his body heat .
as in every mad slasher film we get the killers pov ( a scene where he spies on his neighbor while she undresses triggered unpleasant memories of slumber party massacre ) , and lots of scenes where people are unknowingly stalked .
the film only provides one moment that i found genuinely creepy .
it happens when a lab assistant ( kim dickens , who looks like she stepped out of playboy ) in the middle of a chit chat with an invisible bacon , suddenly pauses .
"
are you looking at me ? " , she queries , obviously haunted .
it 's a little moment in a big film with nothing to offer but
ground breaking special effects set to a plot that should have run its course by 1982 ( the apex of the mad slasher craze ) .
those special effects are so stunning they alone keep this from being as bad as urban legend or i still know what you did last summer .
and they 're the only reason to check out hollow man , preferably as a mid - week bargain rental .
you 've been warned .
but you probably wo n't listen , will you ?
tis ' a pity ? ? ?
[A]: N


[Q]: when casting the key part of the voice of moses , most people 's first candidate would probably not be the controversial actor val kilmer ( the saint and the island of dr .
moreau ) , but he was dreamworks 's choice in their first traditionally animated movie , the prince of egypt .
the selection of kilmer proved to be a wise one , but the biggest risk dreamworks took was n't in the casting department .
the radical departure was that they decided to use the medium of animation to make a biblical epic , a la cecil b .
demille , to move our hearts and minds rather than to tickle our funny bones .
in the press kit producer penney cox says that they wanted to make a film for adults based on sophisticated themes but one that did not exclude children .
animated movies for adults that are appropriate for kids and that are not comedies , now
that is something fresh
.
let me admit up - front that i was quite skeptical as to whether dreamworks could pull it off .
dreamworks 's antz seemed to be a movie not quite appropriate for any age group .
the prince of egypt may be harder to market than antz , but it is much more satisfying .
like antz and unlike the more modest casting of pixar 's a bug 's life , the prince of egpyt has half of hollywood doing the voices .
danny glover is the voice of jethro , jeff goldblum of aaron , steve martin of hotep , helen mirren of the queen , michelle pfeiffer of tzipporah , martin short of huy and patrick stewart of seti .
you can figure out for yourself who does the voice of god .
the movie , which is weakest in the story department , is a cliff 's notes version of demille 's the ten commandments .
the script by kelly asbury and lorna cook has an obsession with touching briefly on every classic event in moses 's life .
demille took over three and a half hours in order to do it justice .
at less than half of that , the prince of egypt rushes through so much material that it does n't establish sufficient depth for us to bond with the characters .
we meet moses when the queen finds him floating in his little basket .
we watch him grow up and become best bud and a chariot racing partner to ramses ( ralph fiennes ) , the future pharaoh .
moses is a free spirit and a practical joker until he finds out his true identity as a jew .
( " all i 've ever known to be true is a lie , " moses complains . )
after finding out his real identity , he sees for the first time the oppression of the jewish slaves that are all around him .
after leaving egypt , moses comes back to ask ramses to let moses 's people go .
this leads to the classic scene of the parting of the red sea , which is one of many places where computers were used to enhance the traditionally hand - drawn animation of the most of the production .
it is the absolutely stunning visuals that make the movie so compelling .
drawn with a rich palette of luxurious roses , blues and golds , the picture looks sumptuous from its first frame to its last .
the construction of the temple is shown in blowing dust , and other scenes are shot with the glow of a rising sun .
the most original visual sequence in the film occurs during a dream moses
has .
done with an explicit two - dimensional look , the colorful images painted on the temple walls come to life to tell their own animated story .
even though it has its weaknesses , the prince of egypt is a noble attempt to carve out a new genre -- serious animated movies for adults that are acceptable for the entire family .
this awe - inspiring movie deserves to be seen .
the prince of egypt runs about 1 : 30 .
it is rated pg for thematic elements and would be fine for the whole family .
how old a kid would need to be to be interested depends on the child , but those over 8 will probably like it .
[A]: P


[Q]: synopsis : bobby garfield ( yelchin ) lives in a small town with his mirthless widowed mother ( hope davis ) .
bobby 's world revolves around his friends , especially the spritely carol ( boorem ) .
then one day , a new boarder arrives at bobby 's house .
ted brautigan ( hopkins ) is an enigmatic man to whom bobby takes an immediate liking .
as the bond between bobby and ted deepens , bobby becomes privy to ted 's great secret , an event which will change both of their lives forever .
review : a small but enchanting movie , " hearts in atlantis " easily recalls another king - inspired coming - of - age film , " stand by me " , both in terms of its setting and the sentiment it conveys .
" hearts " is a tribute to the magic of childhood , to those summers when the days seem neverending , and nothing means more than your closest friends .
unlike " stand by me " , there is a supernatural element to " hearts " , but although it is key to the plot , it is not prominent .
like " stand by me " , this is a mostly character - driven film , and as such it benefits greatly from superb casting .
yelchin is very good
as bobby , finding a good mix of innocence and resignation .
more splendid still is boorem , whom i praised highly for her work in " along came a spider " and who is simply radiant here as carol .
and then there is hopkins , who despite playing such a quiet , introspective character as ted , nonetheless commands our attention every time he is onscreen .
less successful is davis , whose strident elizabeth comes across as overly cartoonish .
i also found it odd that bobby and carol 's other friend , sully ( whose death as an adult sets up the movie 's flashback framing device ) , is paid virtually no attention .
but hicks ' direction is lovely without being cloying , and despite the movie 's general lack of incident , it never ceases to weave its spell over the audience .
[A]:
P