In this task, you must classify if a given review is positive/negative, indicating your answer as P or N.
--------
Question: plot : lara croft is british , rich and kicks a lot of ass .
she also likes to raid tombs but when the illuminata discover that all nine planets are about to stand in alignment for the first time in 5000 years , and that lara holds the key to time , well , needless to say , they want to nab it from her .
oh yeah , lara also likes to sport a lot of tight shirts .
. .
hummana - hummana - hummana .
. .
critique : angelina jolie was great in this movie .
there were also about three " action scenes " that were pretty cool to look at in this film .
uhhhhhm , unfortunately the rest of the movie sucked
! bad dialogue , generic sidekicks and bad guys ,
a lame mystery , yoda - esque moments with mumbo - jumbo being sprouted about and even
some crappy cgi near the end .
all in all , this movie was n't the horror show that some of the early reviews had warned us about , especially since every other scene does feature jolie 's torpedoes begging to burst out of her lucky shirts , but it was quite the letdown nonetheless , especially when you consider the major opportunity that the filmmakers had here to create a cool , hip woman hero , based on a popular video game .
i do n't know , i guess you have to put most of the blame on director simon west , who did n't really tie the whole movie together all that well .
the film lacked energy , a consistent pace and well . . .
a fun time !
i felt kinda depressed while watching this movie .
all that " father " crap was horrible and the dialogue given to poor john voight to recite was just plain embarrassing
( and i 'm not even gon na mention his moustache . . .
hehehe ) .
why have this shite in the movie at all ? ! ?
i especially hated the scenes in which some ghost - like figure , friend or child would ramble on about lara croft 's father while all the time ,
i 'm not giving one ounce of crap as to what they 're talking about .
i guess that 's called lack of " character development " , right ?
that 's when a movie builds enough background into the characters on the screen , so that we could actually " get into " it and care about them .
i did n't care about anyone in this movie , and was bored during most of its " let 's explain why we 're doing all this gobbledygook " moments . and even though i thought that jolie kicked some mighty ass (
damn , did she look sexy blasting those guns or what ? ! ? ) ,
everybody else around her was so goddamn boring
!
her butler was a throwaway with no personality , her side - kick was supposed to be funny but
just annoyed me
every time he said the word " bugger " ( and he says it a lot , trust me ! )
and all of the so - called bad guys just spewed one - dimension !
they had no spark , no energy amongst them , and even though a few of the action scenes in the movie were cool ( see the trailer
and you 'll know which ones i 'm talking about ) ,
the overall picture was lame and the dialogue and mystical bull - crap just buried it even further .
also , for a movie that 's supposed to be about all of these exotic locations , i was n't necessarily impressed by any of its exterior shots , and even less so with its interiors , which all looked like they were shot in the same room .
mind you
, i wo n't go as far as to say that it 's the " worst movie of the year " ( remember that i actually have to go see freddie prinze jr .
movies also ! ) , but
it 's definitely the worst film that i 've seen during this summer movie season ( of course , it 's still early
and i 'm sure there are a few more garbage heaps coming down the pike ) .
skip this one altogether and rent any of the indiana jones movies instead . . .
trust me , you 'll miss the boobs but end your night with some rock - solid porn
and it 's all good !
where 's joblo coming from ?
raiders of the lost ark ( 10/10 ) - the mummy ( 8/10 ) - lost in space ( 7/10 ) - the mummy returns ( 6/10 ) - the general 's daughter ( 3/10 ) - romancing the stone ( 7/10 ) - wild wild west ( 3/10 ) - mission impossible 2 ( 7/10 )

Answer: N


Question: it 's probably inevitable that the popular virtual reality genre ( " the matrix , " " existenz " ) would collide with the even more popular serial - killer genre ( " kiss the girls , " " se7en " ) .
the result should have been more interesting than " the cell .
"
as the movie opens , therapist catharine deane ( jennifer lopez ) treats a catatonic boy ( colton james ) by entering his mind through some sort of virtual reality technique that 's never fully explained .
after months of therapy sessions in a surreal desert , catharine has no success to report .
meanwhile , killer carl stargher ( vincent d'onofrio ) has claimed another victim .
his particular hobby is to kidnap young women , keep them in a glass cell overnight , and drown them .
he takes the corpse and soaks it in bleach , then suspends himself over the body and jerks off while watching a video tape of the drowning .
although carl 's been doing this for awhile , he 's recently become sloppy , and fbi agent peter novak ( vince vaughn ) is closing in fast .
not fast enough , though , to keep carl from sticking another woman ( tara subkoff ) in the cell or to catch him before he suffers a schizophrenic attack that leaves him in a coma .
from the videos in carl 's house , peter can see that the drowning cell is automated and will fill with water forty hours after the abduction .
to save the kidnapped girl , peter has to find the cell before the end of the day , and comatose carl 's not talking .
so off they go to catharine in the hope that she can go inside carl 's mind and find out where the cell is in time .
the focus of " the cell " in on the ornate interior of carl 's mind , but the universe director tarsem singh creates seems more an exercise in computer - generated spectacle than an exploration of the psychotic personality .
for the most part , it 's style without substance .
in his own mind , carl is a decadent emperor in flowing robes , ming the merciless , as well as a frightened boy ( jake thomas ) abused by his father .
all in all , the mind of a psycho killer turns out to be a strangely dull place , and i kept wishing i could fast - forward to the next development .
singh is best known for directing music videos , particularly rem 's " losing my religion , " and " the cell " seems very much like a really long , really slow mtv video with the sound deleted .
singer lopez seems to think she 's in a video as well ; she devotes more time to posing in elaborate costumes than she does to acting .
the premise had great promise .
the computer - generated world within carl 's mind could have been a bizarre , surreal universe governed by insanity and symbolism rather than logic .
the first room catharine enters in carl 's head shows this promise .
she finds a horse standing in center of the room ; suddenly , sheets of sharp - edged glass fall into the horse , dividing it into segments .
the panes of glass separate , pulling apart the pieces of the still - living horse .
this scene is twisted , disturbing , and thought - provoking , because the psychological importance of the horse and its fate is left to the viewer to ponder .
another element that should have been developed is the effect on catharine of merging with the mind of a psychopath .
their minds begin to bleed together at one point in the movie , and this should have provided an opportunity to discover the dark corners of catharine 's own psyche .
like sidney lumet 's " the offence " or michael mann 's " manhunter , " " the cell " could have explored how the madness of the killer brings out a repressed darkness in the investigator .
however , catharine 's character is hardly developed at all , and lopez has no depth to offer the role .
bottom line : do n't get trapped in this one .

Answer: N


Question: with his successful books and movies , michael crichton is doing well .
with early successes with westworld ( 1973 ) and coma ( 1978 ) , and recent films such as jurassic park ( 1993 ) , his films have been entertaining .
however , he seems to taken a wrong turn somewhere with sphere .
this $ 100 million mess by good director barry levison ( disclosure ) is dull , long winded , and a huge disappointment .
considering the huge budget , the all star cast , and a story by crichton
, sphere is majorly disappointing .
the film opens with norman goodman ( hoffman ) , a psychologist who thinks he is visiting an airplane crash to console the survivors .
however , when he arrives , he his told by supervisor barnes
( peter coyote ) that he is actually investigating an spacecraft .
along with goodman is mathematician harry adams ( jackson ) , biologist beth halperin ( stone ) and ted fielding ( liev schrieber . )
they investigate the spaceship , find a massive sphere inside , meet an alien intelligence called jerry , and basically weird crap happens .
unfortunately , something went wrong along the way with sphere .
the film starts off entertaining enough , but throughout this very long movie , it just gets sillier and sillier .
the film jaunts along from scene to scene , never fully explaining what is going on .
the actors and directing do n't help , either .
hoffman is on autopilot ( and almost seems embarrassed ) throughout the movie , churning out dull lines , and probably wondering what the hell he is doing in this movie .
stone is useless , displaying no emotion , and fails to convince the audience that she has any feelings for hoffman .
the only person who seems to be having fun in this movie is jackson , who 's funny as the mathematician who slowly goes crazy and entering the sphere .
but he 's hardly in it , and by the end of the film he is just as dull as hoffman and stone .
the same goes for peter coyote , who hams it up as the officer , but is then killed off halfway through .
the director , barry levinson , who directed the better crichton adaptation disclosure ( 1994 ) messes up with the drama and the action .
the drama scenes are , quite frankly , boring , and the action scenes suffer from overkill , with levison throwing the camera all over the place ( much like the godawful speed 2 , 1997 )
the writing does n't help much , either .
although crichton is great with plots , he 's terrible with dialogue , and practically every line in sphere is a dud .
the speech is too simple
, i was hoping it would be a bit more intelligent .
practically every line is just stating the obvious .
none of it is smart .
also , where the hell did the budget go ?
the sphere itself is impressive , and there 's a few nice special effect shots , but
where the $ 100 million went is anyone 's guess .
there 's a giant squid attack in the picture , but not once does the audience see the squid , even though the film has a massive budget .
i assume the picture was trying to build up tension by not showing the squid , and if handled correctly it probably would .
but the whole scene is done badly , and i was just hoping we could see the stupid squid .
finally , the film has no idea what genre to be .
levison ca n't handle his own plot .
it leaps from hokey sci - fi , to horror , and finally the shining / event horizon psychological thriller .
and , of course , the film is very much like the abyss ( 1988 ) , although in it 's defense , crichton did write sphere before the abyss was released ( and is far superior to this rubbish . )
it 's not all that bad though .
the plot is all right , there 's a few jump scenes ( although nothing very scary ) and there 's the occasionally interesting bit .
but overall
, sphere is a big waste of some fine talent , a lot of money , and a potentially good movie .
not really worth seeing .
overall rating= review by david wilcock

Answer:
N