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

SOLUTION: N

PROBLEM: notice : this is a review and analysis of exotica .
the first part of this piece is the review , the second part contains some analysis of the movie which might be construed as spoilers . if you have not seen the movie and after reading the first part you intend to do so , then save the second part for the discussion afterwards .
starring : bruce greenwood , mia kirshner , elias kosteas , don mckellar , arsinee khanijian , sarah polley director : atom egoyan screenplay : atom egoyan exotica is a film that grows on retrospection .
exotica keeps the viewer guessing about the relationship between the various characters in the film .
all of the people know each other , but apart from that , there seems to be no other reason why to select such set and follow them in this fictional account .
the director hints for possible solutions , using a multi - line plot , so popular with critics in mystery train , and used to good advantage by quentin tarantino in pulp fiction .
exotica reaches a whole new dimension using this technique .
at the end it is surprising to see how well the pieces of the puzzle fit together , in spite their apparent unconnectedness and even misleading features .
the out - of - chronological - order technique has become ever so popular ,
perhaps even de rigueur , for biographical films .
similarly , we can now expect to see more movies in the future which will use , to varying extent , converging multiplots .
on a first glance , once the multi - plot puzzle in exotica is solved , there seems to be little left to look at . but perceptive minds which take the time to dig further will be rewarded with interesting views on life or rather , commentaries on views of life .
exotica is very much worth seeing .
it opened to critic 's praise worldwide ( i first saw it in mexico city , last december ) .
in canada , it broke records for a movie of its kind , which prompted the american distributor to go for a wide release .
apart from a strong plot , acting is very convincing , and the soundtrack seems as if made for the movie .
the spoon - fed - entertainment crowd may not appreciate this movie , and thus it might last little on screen .
but if you want to try a movie a cut above the crowd , with an originality that is ever so rare , by all means see exotica .
analysis
( * * spoilers
*
* ahead ) what is behind the complex plot in exotica ?
first , a common theme of the quest for gratification by monetary means .
the lone tax - auditor , the repressed homosexual pet shop owner , the pregnant woman which runs the nightclub , the rich man which has the club remodeled , the audience at the movie theatre , all use personal wealth to buy palliative relief for the penuries of the soul .
.. .
then we have the quest for gratification through visual means by most of the same people , including those who sit watching exotica .
.. . in that regard exotica stands for onlookers at a nightclub , for the rich man looking through silver mirrors , and poor - rich people looking at other 's people lives through a silver screen .
exotica also stands for unwanted society attention into the lives of other people , such as the tax auditor and the pet shop owner .
exotica is the customer agent looking at the pet shop owner , which in turn is looking at the core of the problems between the strip dancer and the tax auditor through the detached eye of a gay person ( no attraction to the strip dancer ) , and only interested on avoiding jail ( no personal relationship with the tax auditor ) .
in exotica everybody is watching , and what is worse , everybody knows .
second , exotica is about isolated people holding back their feelings ; about people which by voluntary or involuntary means transfer their view of reality to other characters .
the strip dancer becomes the proverbial daughter , the dj becomes the proverbial killer by means of breaking the relationship between the father and the proverbial daughter .
the niece becomes the baby sitter , the baby sitter becomes the dancer , and the dancer becomes the proverbial daughter .
the pet shop owner becomes the proverbial dj , by finding the proverbial daughter .
a chain made of real and imagined links coming around full circle , just as everything comes around to a fitting whole at the end of the movie .

SOLUTION: P

PROBLEM: a friend invites you to a movie .
this film would evade the explosions and special effects of standard summer fare , and be grounded in reality .
the plot is as follows : after a terrifying incident , a mother and her independent daughter separate from the father and move away from the city .
they need fresh air to get some perspective , maybe to start over .
romance begins to brew , however , as one of the locals , played by an international superstar in rugged clothing , sparks things up , ( especially at a country - western slow dance ) .
it stars a rising young starlet , helms a good cast , and is directed by one of the better actor - turned - directors in hollywood .
you accept .
you jump at the opportunity to see , what you believe to be ,
_ the horse whisperer _ .
but , poor moviegoer , you have been conned
. alas , you find yourself watching , incredulously , _ hope floats _ .
oh , woe .
your hope has sunk .
why was this movie made ?
why was it released ?
it is a travesty on nearly every level , and has the authority to sink the careers of nearly everyone involved .
at the hands of a better script , the film could have been a gem .
but it is clueless as to what it is about , and only succeeds in transferring same cluelessness to us poor viewers .
_ hope floats _ stars sandra bullock as birdy , who , after discovering her husband has been cheating on her with her best friend ( on national television no less ) , takes her daughter and drives back to her home , helmed by a countryish bumpkin eccentric played by gena rowlands , ( she decorates with stuffed wildlife ) .
birdy 's nephew , travis ( played by _ leave it to beaver _ 's cameron finley ) , is under her custody , and in one of the film 's many failed in - jokes , is always seen wearing a different halloween costume .
what is the point of this ?
does it make any sense ?
is it supposed to be funny ?
the point of the film is to show that the family is eccentric , but i was convinced that the grandma should have been locked up for endangering the mental welfare of a child .
all of this undercuts the plot , of which there is none .
there are only many scenes that are supposed to register emotion .
there 's the scene where birdy , who used to be the prom queen , is humbled by approaching a peer she once mocked , for a job .
there 's the scene where birdy dances with her father , in the hospital for alzheimer 's .
and then there 's the sentimental scenes with justin , played by harry connick jr .
, who is taking a liking to her again , showing her a beautiful pad that he built from scratch .
and during each of these scenes , i was sidetracked by my earlier question .
what sort of eccentric grandmother go through such great pains as to provide a dog costume , a kermit costume , a cowboy costume ( with whip ) , and a full furred barney costume for her grandson to wear during dinner ?
what sort of warped ramifications would this lead for the rest of his life ?
outside of this , there are other sure signs of screenwriters block .
when the daughter stands up to the bully at school .
when birdy almost loses her job .
when the family pulls in a goofy lip - synch to cheer someone up .
when someone dies .
when the daughter cries , ( no , wails ) in exasperation that her father is not coming back .
in a movie like this , you notice the strings being pushed , and you sit there , comatose , hoping it will end . who can survive such a debacle ?
i worry for bullock 's career , which has been running on auto - pilot for the last few years .
she has an attitude , a solid perkiness , and can drive a bus -- but she ca n't handle the emotional scenes , much less hold a southern accent .
harry connick , jr .
is worse -- stick with singing , or get some acting lessons , please !
gena rowlands is the best part of the film .
but she 's such a good actress , that it staggers the mind that she 's weighed down by such lukewarm material here
.
it would be a severe tragedy if the recurring star of john cassavettes ' great films is known for this film .
two notes to forest whittaker : ( 1 ) cut the slow - motion sequences .
there are twelve times where you undercut your own direction by such a failed trick .
have you done so
, you could have shaved off ten - minutes of this almost unbearable debacle .
( 2 ) you 've had to know something was wrong if your cinematographer 's filter makes the candlelight appear like little " x " s .
you 're not a bad director , but you ca n't change a terrible script
.
there 's a recurring scene where birdy , working at the neighborhood fotomat , finds the machine go wrong , and image after destroyed , warped , dark image appear .
think about it .
a succession of destroyed images may have been more entertaining than this movie .

SOLUTION:
N