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

' bicentennial man ' is a family film without any external motive with the exception of providing the minimum dose of entertainment .
chris columbus , the director who gave you " mrs . doubtfire " , plays on sentimental strings and mushy dialogue to make his point .
based on the short story by isaac asimov , it is supposed to be a science fiction story about a robot who wants to be human , which as you can imagine is very difficult .
starting in a not too distant future the film concentrates on a wealthy family that buys an android to help them with the house and children .
soon this robot , called andrew ( robin williams ) shows abilities that makes his owner mr .
martin ( sam neill ) very curious .
andrew is interested in art and music , he " enjoys " making clocks , which clearly shows that he has genuine emotions .
it shows out that because of a small failure in the " electrical circuits " and " positronic brain " andrew has accidentally gained a soul .
this makes him unique and his evil creators worried .
then mr .
martin decides to teach andrew all the things he was n't programmed to do .
soon andrew wants to leave the house in pursuit of freedom , destiny and love .
this film can be described as a disney version of blade runner , a film that still shines as the biggest gem in the crown of science fiction .
ever since that film , the subject of humanity still stands as one big controversy .
what makes us human ?
the thoughts ?
the emotions ? is it possible to become human ?
at what point can we say to a robot " now you are one of us " ?
these are very tough questions that require a serious and thurral approach .
it is obvious that columbus did n't take them very seriously .
when you think about it , this film is not really meditating on the question
" when is a robot no longer a machine , but a human being ? " , but tells a story about racial discrimination and lack of understanding .
andrew is so complex and emotional from the very beginning that the audience immediately accepts him as a human being , and only the society has troubles with it .
in other words , it is as far from reality as from the academy awards .
further more , there are other annoying problems .
to this day no serious filmmaker has dared to speculate about the future in more than 50 years from now .
this has not been done for obvious reasons , because the filmmakers are well aware of the fact that they lack the knowledge and imagination to perform such a difficult task .
columbus is the first to have crossed that line .
the result is , as you might imagine , primitive , unrealistic and incredibly disappointing effort .
the world is simply frozen in time .
neither the society , fashion , culture or values have changed over 200 years .
mom is still working at the kitchen , doing the dishes .
when you think back to the late 17th century and then compare it to the world we live in today , you 'll see a slightly bigger difference .
i am not saying that everything should change .
it is unlikely that the human rights will change , but it 's even more unlikely that there will not be any progress in science , technology and fashion .
i suppose it 's possible to watch this as a some sort of bizarre fairytale , but it 's really hard .
robin williams is hidden behind c and speaking in a robotic way .
as always he does a decent job , as does sam neill .
but it does n't really matter .
it is the sentimentality and length that turns
this picture into a tiresome experience .
pretty much like last year 's " meet joe black " , this is a primitive and unresolved story which is presented with a splendor and professionalism that it does n't deserve .
great actors and a talented crew have worked hard to achieve something that will be instantly forgotten .
when isaac asimov wrote this story , the future seemed far away and magical .
everything seemed possible .
now is the future of asimov 's time , and we know that it is not as magical and perfect as it seemed a long time ago .
for the same reasons that the young generation of today can not be amazed by julius verne 's " 20 000 leagues under the sea " , so ca n't we accept this story as a potential reality .
let us hope that next year 's " a. i. " will be more rewarding .
N

a film that means well , but is too pushy in promoting its belabored point and too sentimental to be compelling as a drama .
it 's jeroen krabb ?
's melodrama about a community of jews in antwerp in 1972 who ca n't forget their bitter past .
the heroine is an attractive , carefree , nonreligious 20-year - old , chaja ( fraser ) , who wants to forget her jewish roots by getting involved in student demonstrations , screwing a student rebel leader , and living with her gentile friends away from her nagging mother
( s ? gebrecht ) and her self - absorbed , eccentric father ( schell ) .
her parents are survivors of the holocaust concentration camps , and her home life is filled with angst .
her mother is in denial about the past always busying herself by cooking soup and baking cakes and complaining about everything , while her father is more openly loving but has recently been absorbed in searching for two suitcases filled with mementos , a family album , silverware , and his old violin .
he buried them in a garden during the war while fleeing the nazis , but ca n't locate them now due to all the changes in the city .
out of frustration after quitting her job as a dishwasher and facing eviction from her apartment , she reluctantly accepts a job as a nanny with an hasidic couple that an old man in her parents ' apartment building , mr .
apfelschnitt ( topol ) , tells her about .
the hasidics are ultra - orthodox : they do n't go to the cinema or watch tv , adhere to strict dress codes , and strictly observe their religious laws .
chaja is at first put off by the way they expect her to follow their rules , but soon finds the wife , mrs .
kalman ( rossellini ) , to be kind and she becomes attached to one of her 5 children , a 4-year - old named simcha ( monty ) who does n't talk .
the stern mr .
kalman ( krabb ? ) is not friendly to her and considers her to be a whore because of the way she dresses .
to hammer home the point of how anti - semitism has n't gone away
there 's a barrage of overdone and uninvolving scenes with a sneering concierge ( bradley ) , who keeps making nasty remarks about jews and tries to make things inconvenient for them by preventing the jewish family from using the elevator .
the film is done in by its ham - fisted script as the story , adapted from carl friedman 's book " the shovel and the loom , " goes from one false note to another until it gets lost in all the goo of its sentimentality .
it starts off telling chaja 's story of how she 's a lost jewess trying to find her identity , then to her nanny role as she loves a mute child stuck in an insulated environment , and then it makes it a story about the lingering effects of the bitter past that ca n't be forgotten .
the effort seemed heavy - handed , as the film kept delivering too many obvious messages that it ponderously kept delivering through the stock characters .
the supporting cast consists of all wooden characters who give their roles a cartoonish flavoring
: chaja 's parents are given no human shades , while the janitor villain was a particularly annoying role that was one - dimensional and falsely acted .
the only ones who fought through the script and showed some feelings were fraser , whose effervescent face was expressive of both the trying times she was going through and the joys she felt -- but most admirably showing how she could be so mistaken as to think that she could forget her roots ; while rossellini gave a warm performance of a woman suffering in silence , but is strong in accepting her faith .
topol 's reassuring performance as the wise man who says all the right things to fraser , acts as the true voice of the filmmaker in explaining all the sufferings with common sense .
the film brazenly uses little simcha to get across its agenda of pointing out how the patriarchal world can be cruel when it ca n't love : it starts out by showing how under chaja 's loving care he 's taken to the duck pond and soon starts jabbering away , beginning by saying ' quack , quack ' and then going on to ask the four questions during a passover seder .
but by showing how the boy is so terrified of his strict father that he wets his pants in his presence , refuses to speak because of his stern dad , and eventually becomes the victim of a tragic accident , the film thereby exploits the boy 's sufferings and his story just becomes tiresome and not sincerely done
.
i felt i did n't just see a movie , but i attended a lecture for the whole 100 minutes of this serious but unappetizing story .
it was the kind of movie that you hoped would somehow end soon , as it seemed to be in the habit of rehashing its same viewpoint unnecessarily -- the message it keeps sending was already received .
in the last shot where father and daughter are hopelessly digging for the lost luggage , one has the impression that no one in the film learned anything about themselves or the past .
that seems strange , since i thought that was what this film was supposed to be about . unless i was mistaken and the film 's real aim was to make us cry over simcha .
N

when a film is produced on a shoestring budget by a couple of hardworking filmmakers and when it tells the story of a genuine tragedy , the easy path for a reviewer who hated the movie is to give it a pass .
toss out your usual objectivity , ignore how many times you checked your watch while viewing it , forget how unbearable it was to sit through , and find some meaningless way to compliment it .
this , of course , will be of no service to your readers , but at least you 'll avoid the hate mail from the movie 's fans .
thus it is with a heavy heart that i review the movie paulina ( not to be confused with the recent movie paulie about a talking parrot ) .
directed by vicky funari as a labor of intense love - she spent the last one third of her life on film - the movie blends documentary footage with historic and fanciful recreations to relate the bitterly sad and true story of paulina cruz suarez .
paulina was a maid in vicky 's household when vicky was young .
i got to learn the film 's background when i attended a screening in which the two women who made it were present .
for those without such context , the reaction to the film may be that it is a parody of a bad indie film .
the acting is amateurish , the story is maudlin , and it has all the visual appeal of a bad home movie . grainy and overexposed , the movie
, shot on 16 mm film and videotape , has little to recommend it .
confusingly composed , the movie jumps about jarringly as it tells its story .
quite bloody at times , the story , full of horrific images , seems designed to shock and repulse us .
why else would you include a scene with a completely nude and bloody 8-year - old paulina ?
another scene has a teenage paulina being fondled on a bus by the man sitting next to her .
in retaliation , she bites off part of his finger .
this covers the both of them in a bucket of blood .
the passengers on the bus then view the girl in their minds as everything from saint to sinner .
one , for example , sees her as an aztec priestess holding out a large heart that she had just cut from a body .
the lugubrious tale has paulina being raped and beaten .
certainly she had to endure a miserable life .
but that does not guarantee that a movie about her will necessarily being good .
i felt trapped in the theater watching it .
only the opportunity to talk with the filmmakers afterwards made the movie bearable .
paulina runs 1 : 28 .
the film is in spanish with english subtitles .
it is not rated but would be an r for violence and nudity and would be acceptable for older teenagers .

N