instruction:
In this task, you must classify if a given review is positive/negative, indicating your answer as P or N.
question:
the following review encompasses two versions of dune :
dune : the theatrical version ( 1984 ) runtime : 137 minutes capsule review : cut down to just over two hours by nervous studio executives , the theatrical version of dune is a spectacular mess and may be incomprehensible to those unfamiliar with the book .
the film 's visual splendour , mystical beauty and impressive action scenes only partly compensate for gaping holes in the narrative .
dune : the extended version ( 1988 ) runtime :
189 minutes capsule review : a bit of a throw - together assembled by mca tv special projects for cable television .
it was disowned by director david lynch
but it 's considerably closer to his original vision by virtue of its improved characterisation and clearer storyline .
quality dubs of this version from the out - of - print japanese laserdisc release are available from various dealers on the world wide web .
*
*
* the review
*
* * released in 1984 and made on a then mammoth budget of $ 40 million , the film of frank herbert 's cult novel dune was eagerly awaited by sci - fi fans .
director david lynch ( blue velvet , eraserhead , twin peaks ) was working on his biggest production to date , a mammoth undertaking filmed under trying conditions on location in mexico .
the screenplay was lynch 's own , chosen after the script submitted by original author herbert was rejected .
dune is set in a universe ruled by powerful families overseen by a successive line of emperors .
the key to cosmic power is the planet arrakis ( dune ) , a windswept desert planet that 's home to giant sandworms and the precious spice melange .
the spice is the most valuable commodity in the universe .
it extends the life and expands the consciousness of those who consume it .
most importantly , it allows the navigators of the spacing guild ( once human but now hideously mutated ) to " fold space " and navigate their spacecraft across mammoth distances instantaneously , enabling interstellar commerce and trade to flourish .
lynch 's film by necessity excises parts of the book while retaining the story 's two main strands .
one is the long - standing rivalry between two families , houses atreides and house harkonnen , and their battle for lucrative mining rights on arrakis .
the second strand is the emergence of young paul atreides as the reluctant messiah long - awaited by the natives of arrakis , the fremen .
the deeply religious fremen want control over their homeworld , and young paul may be the fulfilment of their prophecy that a man would come from the outer worlds and lead them to freedom .
unfortunately , this epic story unfolds in a confusing and haphazard manner in the theatrical cut of the film , which runs 30 to 60 minutes shorter than what lynch originally intended .
the thinking among universal 's oh - so - wise money men was that films over two hours in duration were not popular with audiences at the time and would not do well at the box office .
with lynch 's initial cut running at closer to three or more hours , the studio demanded that further cuts be made .
what a great idea !
why not trim down an already complex film so as to make it almost incomprehensible ?
the most glaring consequence of this one - eyed stupidity is a hopelessly jumpy narrative , leaving us with badly underdeveloped characters .
thus their personalities are vague , their motivations unclear and , in the case of paul 's father duke leto , their demise rather meaningless .
the end result is a distinct chill : we ca n't warm to most of the cast and we do n't care much for them .
and it hardly helps that the voice - over narration is sparse and that the dune - esque language and terminology sounds like so much gobbledegook to those unfamiliar with the book .
dune is also a very serous film .
the constant " self - talk " by various characters makes it so serious and self - absorbed at times that you may find it hard not to wince with embarrassment .
the overall impression is a world full of people so intense that no one is allowed a joke lest the universe come crashing down around them .
humour - or at least a gentle kind of humour as distinct from the harkonnen 's mad , sadistic kind - is hard to find .
you may balk at the comparison , but as a writer lynch could well have done with some lessons from george lucus ' star wars trilogy .
the theatrical version is still some way from being a complete disaster , however .
it still possesses enough of lynch 's stylistic quirks and enough visual invention to sustain the interest of viewers with a taste for imaginative sci - fi .
special effects whiz
carlo rambaldi 's giant sandworms are an awesome sight .
both the production design ( anthony masters ) and costume design ( bob ringwood ) are striking and original .
and the magnificent score by toto and brian eno is one of the most underrated soundtracks of the last twenty years .
with these elements in place and the benefit of freddie francis ' lush cinematography , the film is at least a feast for the senses .
see it in the widescreen format if you can .
and despite all the cuts , several cast members still make a strong impression , most notably kenneth mcmillan as the supremely nasty baron vladimir harkonnen .
sian phillips also registers strongly as the reverend mother gaius helen mohiam , leader of the bene gesserit religious order who 's secret aim is to manipulate paul 's destiny for its own shadowy ends .
as paul atreides , the young kyle maclachlan starts off somewhat shakily , but as his character grows in strength so does his performance
and he emerges as a credible leader of the fremen crusade .
the conclusion ?
any assessment of this film must take into account that frank herbert 's original novel is a complex piece of work and presents a tough challenge for any filmmaker .
david lynch took a brave stab at it and , partly due to forces beyond his control , ended up with an officially released version that fails in several key respects .
dune certainly confused and frustrated a lot of people on its release .
many chose to stay away altogether , as the film 's disastrous box office showing attests .
the extended version , however , is a rather different beast .
in 1984 lynch stated his intention to release his own special edition " director 's cut " of the film on home video , a clear indication of his dissatisfaction with the version that ended up in the theatres .
but , alas , he failed to do so , choosing to move on to other projects .
in a way , then , it is partly lynch 's own fault that what appeared instead was an unauthorised extended version , put together in 1988 by mca tv special projects for airing on cable networks in the usa .
stung into action , lynch successfully petitioned the director 's guild to take his name off the credits and replace it with " allen smithee " , the standard pseudonym for directors who wish to disown their own work .
he also had the screenwriting credit changed to the anonymous " judas booth " .
certainly , looking at the results of mca 's handiwork there 's at least half a dozen instances that , for sheer technical sloppiness , are good enough reasons for the director to object .
but these gripes must be considered in light of the improvements that the extended cut of dune offers in several crucial areas .
most of the changes involve the restoration or extension of cut scenes and the addition of extra narration , both of which fill many holes in the original version 's storyline .
paul 's relationship with his father and associates is more intimate , with moments of humour and warmth lacking previously .
the political skulduggery involving the emperor , the spacing guild , the bene gesserits and the two warring houses is far better explained .
paul 's initiation into the fremen way of life on arrakis is also fleshed out considerably .
and as further background , a new prologue has been added featuring narration and painted stills to give us a brief history of the dune universe .
as a piece of storytelling , then , mca tv 's version of dune is clearly superior .
as a piece of editing , however , it is at times surprisingly inept .
the use of painted stills in the new prologue works well enough , but their occasional appearance once the action begins is inappropriate .
there 's some sloppy cutting , too , and in a few instances shots even appear out of order .
and the use of repeated footage to fabricate certain scenes ( eg .
ships coming and going , soldiers coming and going ) is at times clearly out - of - context
.
this is the kind of thing to which lynch objected , and
rightly so .
it should also be noted that several questionable scenes and shots from the theatrical version were deleted to satisfy the censorship demands of u . s . television .
but the most notable omission is a gratuitous piece of nonsense from lynch that was n't even in herbert 's book .
the scene features baron harkonnen killing a beautiful young man in front of his slobbering henchmen by pulling out his " heart plug " .
its a surreal and disturbing episode that 's very lynch - esque but adds nothing to what we already know
: the baron is a nasty piece of work .
despite its own peculiar flaws , then , the extended version of dune is a generally superior film .
all up , it contains 35 minutes of restored footage and approximately another 15 minutes of either altered , fabricated or newly created sequences . unless the idiosyncratic lynch has a sudden change of heart , the " alan smithee " version remains the closest we 'll get to what the movie should have been .
on repeated viewings , one suspects it is closer than what lynch would be prepared to admit .
still , as one of this century 's great science - fiction novels , some fans and perhaps the late herbert himself would argue that dune deserved a better fate in its transfer to the screen .
with rumours circulating of a new six hour mini - series planned by production company new amsterdam entertainment in 1998 , it is unlikely that we have heard the last of the dune saga .
answer:
N


question:
it seemed like the perfect concept .
what better for the farrelly brothers , famous for writing and directing comedies with offensive subject matter , than to make a movie about a guy with a split personality ?
it 's exactly the sort of thing the brothers relish : poking fun at something serious ( in this case mental illness ) , throwing all care to the wind to get a laugh .
jim carrey 's signed on too ?
even better .
the national alliance for the mentally ill even helped out by levying complaints against the brothers ' new film before its opening , claiming it was misrepresenting the condition of split personality , labeling it incorrectly as " schizophrenia , " and so forth .
such a protest seemed like just the sort of thing that would , of course , only add more fuel to the farrelly brothers ' fire , proving that some people just could n't take a joke , and that the farrellys would be helping the more enlightened viewers to yet another dose of their brilliantly subversive comedy .
yes , it all seemed perfect , but one thing went wrong : their movie is n't funny .
it 's not for lack of trying .
the farrellys utilize in " me , myself & irene " their most high - concept premise ever : carrey plays charlie baileygaites , a man who after being dumped by his wife for a midget limo driver , decides to bury all his aggressive feelings deep down inside and never release them .
this , of course , means all his neighbors exploit his entirely too - forgiving nature , making his job as a rhode island state trooper increasingly difficult .
soon enough , charlie 's repressed aggression manifests itself into a second , independent personality named hank , a deep - voiced , boorish ogre unafraid of taking the assertive actions his predecessor had been unable to muster .
this guy is n't above crashing a car through the wall of the barber shop in which he 's been insulted , or holding a little girl 's head underwater because she refused to stop jump - roping in the street .
then things start getting lost in the most complicated plot the farrellys have ever attempted , and the film runs off its tracks .
some have suggested that this is n't a problem , because the farrelly brothers ' brand of humor does n't require plot to work .
they 're wrong , of course : plot was greatly instrumental in building up the kind of rollicking comic energy that infused the farrellys ' last effort , 1996 's " there 's something about mary .
"
( 1999 's " outside providence " was technically an earlier project . )
the brothers ' earlier film was n't funny merely because it contained outrageous gags ( despite what some newsmagazine articles would have you believe ) , but rather because its most outrageous gags were entirely unexpected .
in " mary , " the farrellys managed several times to pull off a neat sleight - of - hand trick : they 'd have you thinking the story was going one way , then reveal its real direction in delightfully surprising fashion .
" me , myself & irene , " by contrast , seems to have been made by folks who looked at " mary " and saw only the surface grossness , missing all of the subtle machinations that really made it work . having been produced by the same guys who made " mary , " " irene " seems like an even bigger disappointment .
the brothers pile on the offensive humor , taking shots at race , midgets , albinos , mental illness , and all manner of bathroom jokes .
but they have n't come up with a way to make any of it fresh most of " me , myself & irene " comes off as rote , by - the - numbers , adolescent comedy .
the plot , with carrey forced to drive alleged fugitive irene p . waters ( renee zellweger ) , who 's in more trouble than anyone knows , back to new york , has an ending that 's entirely predictable from the get - go .
( think charlie and irene will fall in love ?
yeah , me too . )
the farrellys then introduce scores of different characters , and none of them ever manage to do anything you have n't already expected them to do , no matter how outrageous their actions might be .
compared to the curveballs the farrellys are used to throwing , this stuff is almost entirely soft - tossed , presenting an obvious problem : when gross - out humor loses its shock value ,
it 's no longer funny , merely gross .
the jokes that do work are milked over and over until their effectiveness runs dry .
take , for example , the subplot involving charlie 's three black sons ( anthony anderson , mongo brownlee , jerod mixon ) .
the incongruity of it all is funny for a while , with three burly black men discussing higher math in ghetto language and white - bread carrey mouthing said language with an entirely too - pleasant smile on his face .
but by the end of the film , they 're still doing the same schitck it has n't been elevated to another , funnier level , and it has n't been dropped either .
that 's too bad , because it ceases to be amusing about halfway through .
" me , myself & irene " reeks of wasted opportunities .
there ought to be more focus on how other people react to charlie 's new personality , and on how charlie deals with the consequences of hank 's actions .
this does n't really happen nearly every supporting character learns about charlie 's condition early on , so they do n't have any opportunity to be surprised by it .
the film throws what looks like a patented farrelly curve in a scene towards the midway point ( involving an albino companion charlie and irene pick up called , appropriately , " whitey " ) , but the script does n't go anywhere with it , instead leaving the thread twisting in the wind before awkwardly tying it up during the climax .
jim carrey is a gifted comedian , both physically and vocally , but
he 's left with nothing much to do here
except contort himself in a manner similar to steve martin in " all of me .
"
it 's a great showcase of flexibility and split - second role - shifting , but none of it is terribly funny .
carrey does n't pull any stunts we do n't expect him to pull , and the farrellys ' script does n't give him anything else to pull : the situations in which he must perform the role - shifting are n't set up in any meaningful way .
perhaps carrey can take solace in the fact that his supporting actors fare no better .
zellweger 's irene is not a strong female lead mary in " mary " may have been part adolescent fantasy , but she was also intelligent and strong - willed .
irene is nothing in particular , as the film never makes clear whether she 's ditzy , clever , or neither . as such ,
she gives us nothing to latch onto as the only " sane " person in the film .
chris cooper is stuck playing exactly one note as a corrupt fbi agent , and his character is entirely too straight - laced for a movie like this .
he , like the others , does absolutely nothing unexpected .
after viewing the shapeless mess that " me , myself & irene " eventually dissolved into , i was stuck wondering whether or not the farrellys had outsmarted themselves .
maybe their kind of comedy can only work for so long until audiences get wise to it and stop being shocked .
but i do n't believe it -- good filmmakers find ways of surprising their audiences even after people have grown attuned to their style .
if the farrellys are indeed good , smart filmmakers ( and i still think they are ) , they 'll rebound just fine .
even after that happens , though , i 'll still consider " me , myself & irene " to be a high - caliber misfire .
answer:
N


question:
synopsis :
valerie , a high school junior who does n't look a day under 22 , writes bad poetry , complains about how much she hates school , fantasizes about a young guy on trial for raping and murdering six women , chooses him as a pen pal , and plays hooky to see him in court .
after a jailbreak , the killer puts on big sunglasses , wears a half - buttoned jacket , and uses his fatal charm to go after valerie .
comments : " alan smithee " directed fatal charm , which should have been more appropriately titled " fatal bore " or " fatal crap " . if you find out that a film you 're about to see is directed by " alan smithee , " then
you should seriously , seriously , seriously consider watching something , anything , else .
"
alan smithee " is a pseudonym which a number of directors have used when they produce something really bad .
frankly , i 'd be embarrassed if i had directed this turkey
, so i think i understand why the director might have picked the " alan smithee " moniker for this film . where to begin with this painfully poor thriller ?
let 's start with the acting .
it 's pretty bad .
amanda peterson plays valerie and shows at least some talent ( the rest of the cast do n't ) , even though her performance is n't exactly stellar material .
she 's also miscast
; she seems way too old to still have a year of high school to complete .
her scenes with valerie 's mother , played by mary frann , are a joke .
the two look as though they 're a couple of coworkers going out to lunch together , rather than a daughter with her mother who just does n't understand .
christopher atkins , a handsome enough actor who plays the killer , adam , looks like a clown in the second half of fatal charm .
trying to appear malicious and dangerous , he wears large sunglasses and a half - buttoned jacket .
if disney decided to do a zany comedy caper about the unabomber , atkins would probably be a perfect candidate for the lead , but he does n't cut it here .
early on in the movie , a number of scenes occurs in a courtroom .
outside of the laughably poor performances given by the actors portraying lawyers , the people sitting in the benches provide the silliest effort at drama in the film .
they constantly shift and turn and arc their heads in mock interest in what has got to be one of the worst perfomances that a large group of people have given at one time ever .
fatal charm 's storyline , such as it is , inspires more yawns than thrills .
the script belabors a red herring , early on , about a second suspect who may have committed the murders for which adam ( atkins ) is charged with .
this suspect , however , turns up strangled and drowned halfway through the film : an obvious plot fault .
even for the idiots who did n't consider the movie 's title as valerie and a blond newsreporter commented how innocent and charming the defendant seemed , it becomes quite obvious that adam is dangerous when the other suspect washes up .
so , the audience must wait ( if they have n't already stopped watching ) as the necessary details fall into place and the killer goes after the heroine in the drawn - out finale .
the video box for this dud describes fatal charm as an " erotic thriller " .
a thriller it is n't , and neither is it particularly erotic .
i ca n't imagine , if someone were in the mood for something " erotic , " that he 'd be happy after watching this fluff .
a few erotic moments occur in the film ; they take place in a van with little lighting and are filmed out of focus ( see , they 're supposed to be valerie 's fantasies -- how creative ) .
on a personal note , i was disturbed by the ludicrous english literature class shown in this film which valerie had to suffer through .
it 's no wonder why she hated high school so much .
as an instructor of english myself , i have a hard time accepting the fact that in a course emphasizing great literature , a teacher would stoop to reading a student 's bad poetry ( of course , it 's valerie 's ) about boyfriends out loud and then embarassing its author in front of class with questions about the poem 's inspiration .
i guess the public school system is still setting dubious standards for its students .
fatal charm wo n't charm anyone , unless there 's someone that 's charmed by boring , lifeless , insipid , suspenseless thrillers . if you happen upon this turkey , just keep moving on .
answer:

N