TASK DEFINITION: In this task, you must classify if a given review is positive/negative, indicating your answer as P or N.
PROBLEM: gregg araki 's the doom generation was
possibly the very worst film ever made .
so why did i see his latest teen bisexual angst opus ?
first of all , some of the reviews were fairly positive .
also , the cast , consisting of cameos from dozens of washed up
ex
tv stars ( including christopher knight , eve plumb , shannen doherty , and david leisure ) was promising .
last of all , i wanted to give arraki one more chance .
i mean , the guy ca n't be that untalented , can he ?
the answer to that question is three letters long .
nowhere follows the character dark on his wild and odd journey through los angeles .
since arraki does n't know how to make anything coherent , it 's hard to describe the plot .
let 's just say that dark spends the bulk of the movie whining that his girlfriend wo n't make a commitment to him and jealous because she sleeps around with other guys and girls .
the only remotely compelling storyline involves sarah lassez as a teen who has a chance encounter with a famous tv star .
he turns out to be a nice guy who does n't care for fame and wishes he could walk down the street without being mobbed by fans .
this story has a shocking twist and a tragic end that i did not see coming .
it is the first time i ever felt any compassion for a character created by arraki , and this can be attributed to the appealing performance of lassez .
i thought maybe arraki was improving in his craft .
he works better with the camera this time around , especially in the early scenes .
halfway through the film , i did n't necessarily find myself enjoying the film , but it seemed like a considerable improvement on the doom generation .
then as the movie went on , arraki loses all sensibility and introduces us to exploding heads , twisted sex games , and alien abductions .
it 's sad , because he almost actually had some decent material here , but he ruined it with his usual in your face
" i 'm such a renegade maverick filmmaker , look what i can do " attitude .
the performances are generally better than in the doom generation , which is n't saying much .
at least we do n't have to suffer jonathan
" i am the most hideous man in america " schaech .
we are , however treated to another round of james " i 'm more wooden than keanu " duval .
sarah lassez gives the best performance in the film , and kathleen robertson ( formerly of 90210 and now arraki 's wife ) and rachel true are talented actresses caught up in this mess . of the tv star cameos , john ritter is the most interesting as a deranged right wing tv evangelist .
if i prefer nowhere to the doom generation , it is only in the way that i would prefer being assassinated than receive constant physical torture .
maybe greg arraki does n't want you to like his characters .
maybe he wants to laugh and make fun of those of us who try to care about them .
maybe he just wanted to piss me off .
if so , he was successful .

SOLUTION: N

PROBLEM: probably the most popular and praised film of all time , turned out to be a primitive and predictable costume drama with a dose of social criticism .
everyone knows about the greatest and most famous shipping disaster of all time .
and the actual catastrophe is masterfully crafted by director james cameron , combining visual -and sound effects , he re - creates the frightening atmosphere of the sinking ship in the middle of nowhere .
i liked very much
the emotional and brutal contrast between the first and the third classes .
while their cabin is slowly filling up with water , a mother is telling her children a fairytail -- " .
.
and they lived happily ever after . .
"
.
and then the ship goes down
and the few survivors are left alone under the stars and the chilling air .
however , the actual disaster is happening almost at the end of the movie , while the first two hours are just beautiful sets and bad dialogues .
in the present day , the rms titanic is explored by brock lovett ( bill paxton ) , a treasure seeker looking for the coeur de la mer diamond , lost during the sinking .
somewhere inside the ship , lovett 's crew discover a sketchbook of an artist long dead .
here , in the shape of a nude young lady , is a window into the distant age of 1912 .
lovett is extremely surprised when he get 's a phone call from rose dawson , claiming that she is a model .
she is immediately helicoptered onto the vessel , and she gets the first glimpse of the fated ship in 80 years .
as the memories come flooding back , she once again becomes rose dewitt buketer ( kate winslet ) , the fianc ?
e of wealthy cal hockley ( billy zane ) and daughter of ruth dewitt bukater ( frances fisher ) .
on board there are rich and poor , everyone trust in the ship 's designer ( jonathan hyde ) and her master , captain e .
j .
smith ( bernard hill ) .
on board the ship , rose , unhappy and restless meets jack ( leonardo dicaprio ) - a young american artist , poor , brave and attractive .
a love story slowly emerges and the two lovers must not only experience the difference between the social classes , but also face the greatest power on earth - death .
cameron could as well have called his picture " the never ending love " or " love at first sight " , as he concentrates all his energy on the young couple , and not on the disaster itself .
the plot is anything but original and the dialogues sometimes resemble a television soap - opera .
the director does n't even try to overcome his empty script . because of its primitive and predictable plot , titanic is totally depending on the visuals that truly are breathtaking .
russel carpenter 's rich , majestic and incredibly detailed cinematography is certainly award - worthy .
everything from art direction to visual and sound effects are a top notch .
but it does n't help much when the costumes are more convincing than the actors who wear them .
the actors are not to blame , because their characters are more like caricatures , in other words - fake .
jack is a man with many talents : he is a talented artist , handsome , brave , honest , strong , funny . . .
you name it .
he does n't have any dark side , he does n't make any mistakes , that for a second would make him human .
jack is perfect , but he is - poor .
on the other hand we have cal .
he is a bastard that treats rose as an odalisque and not as his wife - to - be .
he lacks everything jack possesses , but he is -- rich .
this childish contrast between the social classes is one of those things that makes titanic nothing more than a mediocre picture .
cameron knows precisely what we want to see .
his film therefore contains certain minimums to draw an audience - attractive actors , a " tragic love story " , beautiful visuals ( including expensive special effects ) , a dose of social criticism , a fascinating historical event ( we love true stories ) and last , but not least - an incredible media support , which proclaimed an average picture the " greatest film of all time " .
on the outside titanic looks perfect , but behind that sparkling curtain of incredible visuals - is emptiness - nothing to think about .
the main weakness of this film , which ironically became its success , is simplicity .
cameron enables our basic and if you wish - primitive emotions : love , hate , fear and helplessness .
everyone understands the power of love and the threat to our beautiful couple is likewise imaginable - a sinking ship .
titanic is a typical hollywood production , totally and completely dependent on visual perfection to hide its primitive plot .
it 's a good picture , but absolutely not a masterpiece .
it 's among hundreds and thousands good films released every year , not better or worse than the average american film .

SOLUTION: P

PROBLEM: i 've heard it called " jaws with claws " and that 's a fair summation of the plot , though that tag line does little to quantify quality .
director stephen hopkins ( blown away , predator 2 ) and screenwriter william goldman ( maverick , misery )
would have you believe that this is an epic historical drama about man against nature , based on what really happened in africa to the railroad workers trying to build a bridge to the 20th century .
they 've stacked the deck with two big stars ( val kilmer , michael douglas ) , a bigger production design , beautiful photography ( by academy award winner vilmos zsigmond ) , and a score
so overblown that it makes the lion king soundtrack sound like chamber music .
the movie does n't make a lick of sense , though , either as an epic or as your basic boo - fest
.
in fact , some of the bits are
so laughably ludicrous that you may think you 've stumbled into the sequel to mystery science theater 3000 :
the movie .
how about the three guys with rifles , who trap a lion and then ca n't even hit the damned thing ? or the ham - on - wry acting of michael douglas , who chews more scenery than the animals ever do ? ?
or , my favorite , lions so agile that they can even climb onto rooftops ? ! ?

SOLUTION:
N