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.

[EX Q]: First let me say the director has some wonderful use of titles in his establishing shots. I really enjoyed them. I really enjoyed this movie but I got to say next to Pierce Brosnan, Greg Kinear is pretty lackluster. Brosnan melts into this character so well, that it is really hard to remember that this is the same guy that played bond. It also shows his range and depth as an actor. It is kinda of an indie flick and was really nice to see especially with all of the mainstream movies that flood the movies at this time of the year. I found the characters to be well crafted. The twist in the middle I felt was especially good. I also liked how the characters come off realistically. So many times we have in film these caricatures of people that are not really characters but walking-stereotypes... I like the different approaches this movie takes. I think of sideways when I think of this movie but I think this is more watchable and a better movie overall...
[EX A]: positive

[EX Q]: I've long wanted to see this film, being a fan of both Peter Cushing and David McCallum. I agree that the romantic sub-plot was a waste of time, but the talent of McCallum shines through this juvie role. Thank heavens for Turner Classic which aired the show last week. I can imagine that there were lots of problems with children after the war, especially with the way things were throughout the 1950s. Some of the boys are a bit scary. I certainly wouldn't want to met them on a well-lit street, much less a dark one. There were some good insights regarding the feelings of a firebug as well, or as they call him, a firefly.
[EX A]: positive

[EX Q]: the writing of the journalists and the required over eager reckless press officer and sobbing grandma was ham-fisted and cliché ridden.I cant blame the actors, but surely someone must have said "are you joking I cant say this!"This episode had a press perspective and police perspective, while the police perspective was standard enough, the press perspective and characterization was overdrawn exaggerated and at points insultingly unbelievable.I notice that this was an HBO co production, if so then perhaps the sledgehammer stereotypes can be explained in that light,I was completely cringing during the press conference scene. it lacked any credibility and did not remotely ring true. 40 minutes into the first episode and I am still waiting for the suspense.Skip Five Daysthis. the 2008/9 production with these characters is far better and more suspenseful even if the crime is over the top.This story had unforgivable moments which can only be described as staggeringly unbelievable.For a press officer to start a press conference without an investigating officer present to take press questions.so unbelievable it felt like amateur hour.I then began looking for Journalists called "Scoop" and for Perry White to make an appearance.I saw the 2009 Hunter before "five days"made it to Australia, not realizing it was a prequel and was looking forward to Bonneville and McTeer going around again.Head shakingly awful.
[EX A]:
negative