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

[Q]: "
you damn dirty apes !
"
that 's just one of the inadvertenty hilarious lines from planet of the apes that 's taken on a comedic context over time .
no one back then seemed to realize how over - the- top charlton heston 's acting style was , but it shows now , particularly in this " mystery science theater 3000 " wannabe
that was taken for a film masterpiece in its time , actually winning one oscar ( for makeup , no less ) and being nominated for a couple others .
it also spawned multiple sequels like beneath the planet of the apes , escape from the planet of the apes , return of the planet of the apes , beneath the escape from the return of the planet of the apes , planet of the apes : the next generation , police academy of the apes . . .
the list goes on .
heston is an american astronaut who spends a few thousand light years in space with his three companions and ends up on a planet not too dissimilar from earth .
the thing is , on this planet humans ca n't talk or think and the guys in the gorilla masks are the dominant species .
heston 's companions are killed or turned into vegetables by the apon is imprisoned .
he surprises them all with his gift of speech , making two primate scientists ( roddy mcdowall and kim hunter ) believe heston is the missing link between ape and man .
believe me , we movie critics have been thinking the same thing for years .
when the two apes present the idea before a judicial counsel ( the head ape being shakespearean actor maurice evans ) , it is received as heresy , for all good monkeys know
god " created ape in his image .
"
but heston has already seen a cave that contains evidence that humans were originally the dominant species , before apes ever gained the ability to speak and run for president .
and he takes them there , holding up a baby doll and yelling , " if humans could n't speak , then how do you account for this talking doll ? ! " and how do you account for your acting ability , mr .
heston ?
the absolute most laughable scene comes with the movie 's surprise conclusion .
i wo n't reveal the details except to say it involves heston falling to his knees on a beach and yelling " god
damn you all to hell !
" several times in succession .
the movie is atrocious and should only be viewed by those members of society who like to watch bad movies and laugh at them .
what makes planet of the apes even more amusing is that it was supposed to function as some sort of social irony , a condemnation of fundamentals who reject the theories of evolution .
but let me tell you , if darwin could see the ape masks and hear the rotten dialogue exchanges ( heston [ to female ape ]
: may i kiss you before i go ?
ape :
but . . . you 're so . . .
ugly . ) , he 'd convert to creationism on the spot .
luckily for us , science - fiction movies have evolved over time to the point at which some of them are actually good .
[A]: N


[Q]: i am starting to write this review before going to see strawberry and chocolate , cuba 's oscar nominee for best foreign film , directed by tomas gutierrez alea ( who also directed the sometimes and in some circles critically acclaimed memorias del subdesarrollo-- " memories of underdevelopment " .
i saw memorias as part of a cuban cinema class back in the late ' 70s ; it merged the politics of the cuban revolution with mundane elements of the human condition .
i knew then that memorias was probably a state - sanctioned political missive , and now expect strawberry will follow suit .
fellow internetters , primarily in the newsgroup dedicated to cuba ( soc . culture .
cuba ) , have mentioned that strawberry is a harsh criticism of the revolution and its current state of affairs .
i have jumped to the conclusion that strawberry is nothing more than a veiled attempt at espousing the party line -- it probably looks like political criticism , but it ai n't so .
having some first hand and extensive anecdotal knowledge of castro 's repressiveness , i ca n't conceive of his tolerating honest and adversarial criticism of the revolution , and i ca n't imagine his letting anyone even suggest his failure as a leader of a failed movement .
as kids say these days , duh ! , the revolution 's current state needs no criticism ; its physical and spiritual crumbling is self evident .
the proper questions to put relate to castro 's legitimacy .
i bet the film takes castro 's power for granted , and that this or any other movie , produced under cuba 's state control , can not question his right to run cuba 's political show ( ongoing now for more than 36 years ) .
that 's why i just ca n't believe strawberry is an honest criticism of the regime .
let 's see what happens after the room goes dark and the screen lights up .
i saw the film -- twice .
i was right ; castro remained intact .
strawberry negotiates the relationship between a young " dialectic materialist , " as he describes himself , and a homosexual photographer ( diego ) in 1979 cuba .
the young man ( david ) is the son of peasants ; a symbol of the revolution 's reason for being .
grateful to the revolution for the opportunity to receive a university education , he studies political science instead of literature , his avocation , because he perceives it is his duty .
therein lies a likely unintended irony , since cuba has no need for political theoreticians .
cuba 's government is castro .
diego 's lifestyle is the antithesis of revolutionary life .
he enjoys the finer things -- tea , opera , art .
he does not do " voluntary work " for the revolution .
his small apartment is a sensual oasis .
the moniker " bourgeois " figuratively hangs over his head during the early parts of the movie .
however , he is a " revolucionario " in his own way .
the supporting roles are filled by : an aging busybody with a heart of gold and a troubled psyche ; david 's roommate , who rally takes the communist party line to its expected extreme ;
david 's ex - girlfriend , who dumped him for another guy , yet wants to bed him before she leaves for italy with her husband ; german , a gay sculptor whose work diego is attempting to exhibit , and who strikes a faustian pact with the government .
gutierrez alea and co - director
juan carlos tabio
do a fine job at almost showing that homosexuals can be revolutionaries too .
heck , towards the end of the film you begin to think the guy deserves a medal for his patriotic fervor .
he really loves the revolution ( as supposedly does everybody else in cuba ) and wants to make it better by exposing and correcting some of its flaws .
real criticism is missing though .
this movie is political window dressing .
luis aguilar leon 's op .
ed .
piece on fresa in the miami herald ( 10 march 1995 , at 21a ) did not color my judgment ; it presaged my intuition .
aguilar leon expressed my sentiment about this film 's political angle best : like many artistic manifestations in cuba , strawberry and chocolate sprang from a totally manipulated environment .
as art critic ivan de la nuez well states in the latest issue of the magazine postmodern notes , the silenced artists are those who refuse to accept " the charade in which artists can provoke up to a point , while the institutions legitimize themselves by forbidding them to go beyond that point .
" although terrible propaganda , this is otherwise a fine film .
[A]: P


[Q]: seen april 16 , 1999 at 10 p .
m . at crossgates cinema 18
( guilderland , n .
y . ) , theater # 15 , by myself for free using my hoyts ' critic 's pass .
[ theater rating :
*
* * 1/2 : very good seats , sound and picture ] do you realize that every time you encounter a new person you 've just become part of a story ?
everyone has their own life story , both past and present , and every time two or more interact , they become part of each others ' story ( not necessarily an important or even significant part , but a part nevertheless ) .
that seems to be the basic theory behind ` go , ' where several characters ' chance encounters all effect each other in extreme ways .
in order to test this theory screenwriter john august and director doug liman assemble a cast of characters that would n't usually be the types to have an entire film revolve around them , such as a teenage supermarket cashier , a bottom - of - the - drug - food - chain dealer and two struggling soap opera actors .
these types of characters might not sound all that original , but consider that they will all be somehow effected by a strip club bouncer and his psychotic father , a mid - level drug dealer , a narc obsessed with multi - level - marketing , horny wedding guests , a zen lovemaker , two shrimp - scarfers and a cute normal teenage girl to round things out .
how they will all come together is the process the film deals with .
i 'd imagine the concept to the film started out as the creators ' testing themselves to see if they could actually pull it off and the outcome is a terrific achievement in filmmaking and the craft of fiction in general .
the film starts out as anything else , with little indication of what 's to come .
we meet ronna ( polley ) , a depressed los angeles checkout girl who does n't seem to have much desire to do anything except work just to pay her rent .
she 's not very charming , especially to her customers , but this is played mostly for laughs rather than characterization and it works .
maybe this is because she 's not a very afeminite character , but she 's far from masculine - a creative character indeed .
things start to progress when ronna reluctantly agrees to take the hours of the goofy , hyperactive , yet likable simon ( askew ) , an english teen into vices for the sake of the experiences .
this agreement starts a three - pronged storyline as it allows simon to go to las vegas for the weekend with his friends and in turn drags ronna and her friends into buying and selling an experimental drug .
the process of which will not only bring ronna close to being arrested but also to death .
nearly the same can be said for two other characters , zack ( mohr ) and adam ( wolf ) , who we do n't think much of when they first appear as supporting characters , but later will become major players to the film 's makeup - another process used by the filmmakers to elaborate on the theory of how significant insignificant interaction might be .
once the pace is picked up the film really begins to show its mettle .
when the title screen ` ronna ' is flashed shortly after the aforementioned turning point scene , it 's clear this film is n't going to employ the standard linear method of storytelling .
considering how good it is up until that point , it 's a long overdue change of pace needed in movies today .
and so the film begins to take shape , first by following ronna and her friends on a one - night adventure that begins with a drug deal instigated by zack and adam ( who were actually looking for simon ) , which does n't exactly go as planned , but that 's what keeps it all so interesting .
the second storyline starts at the same moment as ronna 's story , but this time the camera chooses to follow simon instead .
simon and his three friends head to ? vegas for a night on the town and
in the process experience things they never would have imagined .
the third arc , about zack and adam , again overlaps with ronna 's story telling much of the same story but from a completely different angle .
we 're shown things we never would have expected were going on while following ronna .
and many of the events that do happen to ronna because of zack and adam are n't even their fault - they just happened to be where they were when they were .
i 'd really like to dissect each of the three storylines and especially how the film wraps up in the end , but that would take up too much time and space and spoil everything for those who have n't seen the film .
perhaps the greatest element to the film is its constant surprises and unpredictability , and not due to plot twists or a confusing screenplay , just through great filmmaking .
still , i can list and analyze nearly everything the film does so well : ?
direction : trying to piece together such a complex story is no easy task and for a rookie filmmaker such as liman ,
it 's a great accomplishment .
he does n't just depict a story , he wraps us up in it all , pulling us into the fray so that we experience every high and low .
?
screenplay : besides being chiseled with detail and creative in general
, it 's clear the script has been inspired by many sources , with both obvious and subtle references , yet it never screams ` rip - off . '
?
tone / mood :
where other hollywood films have failed to bring the charm of the independents to the mainstream , this one is able to create its own sense of the macabre .
it 's not overly - dark or twisted and the comedy is n't so satirical for it to be considered a black comedy , more like ` macabre light . ' ?
cinematography / art direction : able to photograph both the intense and the lighthearted in the same manner . ?
characterization : for nearly every character introduced , no matter what role they play in the big picture , we 're able to get a sense of who they are , what they 're thinking and how they came to be in their situations .
even when their actions are surprising , it never seems very out of synch . ?
performances :
every actor nails their role ( see above ) . ?
theme / theory
: the film does n't seem to be concerned with conveying any kind of political or social messages , instead , it 's more of a philosophical experiment .
in fact , it might not have meant to do that intentionally , but there definitely is something existential to it all . . . .
and to think that ` go ' is just a big comedy and adventure !
( 4/23/99 )
[ see also : ` the big lebowski , ' ` clerks , ' ` jackie brown , ' ` pulp fiction , ' ` true romance ; ' also by liman : ` swingers ' ]
[A]:
P