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

disaster films have a tendency to be very formulated and very cliched .
to see a disaster film with actual originality , or at least a decent plot twist , would definitely be a welcome surprise .
unfortunately , folks , it 's not likely .
dante 's peak is cliched , and at times corny , but also pretty decent . to be honest , i was n't very interested in seeing this film , and word of mouth , as well as several reviews , did n't make it sound promising .
so
i was pleasantly surprised that to find that this movie was n't bad at all .
it 's pretty run of the mill , but it 's not something i would say is merely " ok " to watch .
in case you do n't know , dante 's peak is about a volcano and the city which lives in it 's shadow , dante 's peak ( who would 've guessed , eh ? ) .
pierce brosnan plays the volcanologist sent to study the volcano and , perhaps more by hunch than actual scientific proof , is determined that the volcano will be arupting in the very near future .
due to the lack of more substantial evidence , nobody warns the small town , and when they finally do , it 's in the middle of the town meeting that the volcano finally blows .
brosnan , all around good guy , will , of course , save the day .
. .
or at least the mayor of dante 's peak ( linda hamilton ) .
naturally the two will become infatuated with one another .
( if you think i just ruined a plot development , you have n't seen very many movies ! )
there 's also the virtually neccessary kids and pet dog to tug at your heart strings .
and of course , the kids or the dog ( at least one or the other ) will do something heroic . . .
but hey , i do n't want to ruin all the surprises !
if there was a part of you that was hesitating seeing dante 's peak merely because it was rumored to be a waste of time ,
i urge you to watch it and decide for yourself .
it 's not brain food , but it succeeds at what it 's meant to be . . .
an enjoyable , suspenseful movie about the fury mother nature can unleash !
P

warner brothers ; rated pg-13 ( mild violence , sexual situations ) ; 132 minutes director : luis mandoki screenplay : gerald di pego ( from the novel by nicholas sparks ) cast : kevin costner , robin wright - penn , paul newman , illeana douglas , robbie coltrane , jesse james , john savage .
review by :
geoff berkshire
i 'm not an overly cynical guy .
there have been many glossy hollywood romances that have carried me away with their romanticism over the years .
however , i have my limits and i also have standards .
this brings us to the subject at hand : message in a bottle , the big ticket romance that warner brothers ' unleashed upon the movie going public just in time for valentine 's day .
the story , what little of it that there is , involves boring chicago tribune reporter theresa osborne ( robin wright - penn ) dealing with her recent divorce and trying to raise her young son jason ( jesse james ) .
during a brief stay somewhere in new england she finds the titular message in a bottle while on a morning run by the ocean .
the letter , written to a mystery woman named catherine , instantly captivates her .
upon her return , theresa shares it with her best friend lina ( illeana douglas ) , her boss charlie ( robbie coltrane ) , and the entire city of chicago ( the newspaper publishes an article about it ) .
it turns out that the message was written by grieving widower garret blake ( kevin costner ) and so theresa travels to north carolina and tracks him down .
he turns out to have a colorful father ( paul newman ) but is otherwise perfectly dull and overly obsessed with sailing .
this is somehow attractive to theresa and the two begin their awkward courtship .
of course she does n't tell him that she found his letter , she wants to but the rules of this type of film require him to find out later ( preferably right after they first make love ) .
this way garret can get very angry and the relationship can be threatened .
the discovery of the message and garret 's discovery that theresa discovered the message are really the only two noteworthy events that happen during the nearly two and a quarter hour running time of this film .
there 's a truly lame subplot about garret 's relationship with his dead wife 's family ( he gets into a bar fight with her brother , played by john savage ) and then the necessary tear - jerking ending .
a fun way to pass the time is to take bets on exactly who will die , although it becomes pretty clear by the second reel .
the actual death sequence is one of the most ridiculously forced , and unintentionally humorous , sequences filmed since .
. .
well , since costner 's the postman ( 1997 ) .
message in a bottle is one slow moving film .
last year audiences were offered endurance tests such as the horse whisperer and meet joe black but both of those films resemble jerry bruckheimer productions next to this .
they also had redeeming qualities in the form of quality performances and some stand out technical work .
message in a bottle has a decent enough cast but they 're fighting the material all the way , and losing badly .
costner and , especially , wright - penn are both likable and attractive enough to cheer for but their characters are simply too boring .
they also fail to generate any kind of real romantic chemistry .
the supporting players are given very little to do .
the reliable douglas is particularly wasted .
old pro newman gives his all and occasionally threatens to kick some life into this dead horse of a film .
a confrontational scene he has with costner near the end is especially well played .
however , too frequently he just reminds us how unexciting our lead characters are .
the film is very polished on the technical side to be sure but it only works to undercut the story .
gabriel yared , who previously set the romantic moods of the english patient ( 1996 ) and city of angels ( 1998 ) with his scores , overdoes it a bit here .
caleb deschanel 's camera makes everything look a little too beautiful .
do the offices of the chicago tribune really need to look heavenly ?
the editing by steven weisberg is troubling not only considering all that could have been cut out but is also simply messy at times .
the real offender here is screenwriter
gerald di pego .
working from a best- selling novel by nicholas sparks ( which i have not read but have been told is on the same literary level as the bridges of madison county ) , di pego creates one of the most uninspired scripts of recent times .
its strict adherence to clich ?
s brings to mind such disasters as i still know what you did last summer ( 1998 ) .
there simply is n't an original scene in this film .
the dialogue is rarely better than laughable and this is only accentuated by the excessively long pauses every character takes while speaking .
this is director mandoki 's first film since when a man loves a woman ( 1994 ) , the solid meg ryan / andy garcia romance .
he 's simply going through the motions with this .
message in a bottle is easily the worst of the several romantic offerings available in theaters at the moment and vies with what dreams may come ( 1998 ) as one of the most misguided romances of the decade .
N

when i originally saw the trailer for " analyze this " a few months ago , i must admit ,
i thought it looked kind of lame .
and then when the commercials started popping up a week or two ago , i thought it looked outright bad
.
but then when " analyze this " finally opened a few days ago , an odd thing happened .
it got great reviews .
critics were proclaiming it " hilarious " and a " dead - on parody of mob movies " .
well , with praise like that , i figured , it must be good
and so i headed off to the theater .
you know that expression that says always trust your gut instincts ?
well , turns out that expression is more valid than i ever gave it credit for .
" analyze this " is slow , unfunny , and badly acted .
do n't get me wrong , i think that deniro is one of the top ten greatest actors of the century , but he is just out of his league here .
i think the problem is he did n't quite know how to approach this material .
he plays his character , mob boss paull vitti , somewhere in between the realm of comedy and drama . if he had played the character straight , along the lines of leslie nielson in the " naked gun " series , he probably would have been a lot more successful .
as it is , though , he plays the character completely serious at some moments , and for laughs at others .
this does n't work .
it creates an uneven character that never breaks out of the deniro mold ; you always know it 's him . and the movie is badly paced , too .
it never takes off .
it just crawls from one scene to another without any forward momentum .
i think the blame for this should be placed on the script .
it 's obvious the writer had a good idea for a movie , mob boss faces breakdown and needs the services of a psychiatrist , but once this is established , the movie does n't really go anywhere .
the formula of the film seems to be this : billy crystal says no to deniro , deniro forces him , and much wackiness ensues .
this formula of sorts is repeated several times throughout the movie .
i 've said it before and i 'll say it again : the only thing that matters to me in a comedy is whether or not it 's funny .
if " analyze this " had been funny , the pacing and bad acting would n't have bothered me .
i would have been too busy laughing to notice .
but as it is , i only chuckled a few times .
the only really funny scene is a dead - on parody of " the godfather " .
sadly , though , i do n't think anyone in the audience i saw it with realized it was a parody , because i was the only one laughing .
but my sense of humour , i have come to realize , is vastly different from the general population .
i loathed " there 's something about mary " , yet loved " baseketball " .
now , if you want a movie that * i * think is funny , go out and see " office space " .
it 's full of genuine laughs and wo n't leave you glancing at your watch every 10 minutes , as " analyze this " did .

N