Q: What's an example of a movie review?
An example of a movie review is here: A true wholesome American story about teenagers who are interested in launching their own rocket in a rural West Virginia coal mining town, after the launch of Sputnik in 1957.

Through trial, tribulations and perseverance beyond belief, they are ultimately able to achieve their goals.

Jake Gyllenhaal, as the leader of the group, is excellent in the title role. As his motivating science teacher, Laura Linney is quite good but her southern accent is over the top.

There is a standout supporting performance by Chris Cooper, a head miner, who wants his son to follow in his footsteps, but gradually comes around at film's end.

What makes this film so unusual for our times is that there are no bed-hopping scenes and no profanity whatsoever. It is the epitome of an American story that is well done.

Besides the science angle, we have the father-son disagreement, football scholarships as a way to escape coal mining, and the loving spirit of family.

Why aren't pictures like this recognized more at award times?
Problem: Write a positive (OPTIONS:
- negative
- positive) movie review.

Answer: Zentropa has much in common with The Third Man, another noir-like film set among the rubble of postwar Europe. Like TTM, there is much inventive camera work. There is an innocent American who gets emotionally involved with a woman he doesn't really understand, and whose naivety is all the more striking in contrast with the natives.

But I'd have to say that The Third Man has a more well-crafted storyline. Zentropa is a bit disjointed in this respect. Perhaps this is intentional: it is presented as a dream/nightmare, and making it too coherent would spoil the effect.

This movie is unrelentingly grim--"noir" in more than one sense; one never sees the sun shine. Grim, but intriguing, and frightening.
Problem: OPTIONS:
- negative
- positive negative
=++++=
Answer: 'Mojo' is a story of fifties London, a world of budding rock stars, violence and forced homosexuality. 'Mojo' uses a technique for shooting the 1950s often seen in films that stresses the physical differences to our own time but also represents dialogue in a highly exaggerated fashion (owing much to the way that speech was represented in films made in that period); I have no idea if people actually spoke like this outside of the movies, but no films made today and set in contemporary times use such stylised language. It's as if the stilted discourse of 1950s screenwriters serves a common shorthand for a past that seems, in consequence, a very distant country indeed; and therefore stresses the particular, rather than the universal, in the story. 'Mojo' features a strong performance from Ian Hart and annoying ones from Aiden Gillan and Ewan Bremner, the latter still struggling to build a post-'Trainspotting' career; but feels like a period piece, a modern film incomprehensibly structured in an outdated idiom. Rather dull, actually.
An example of a movie review. negative (OPTIONS:
- negative
- positive).

A: I have seen this movie many times, (and recently read the book the movie is based on) and every time I see it, I just want to slap all four of them. The fact that they don't clue in to the fact that Tom Hank's character is flipping into his D&D(oops M&M) :) persona ("Oh, he's just acting in character.") outside of the gaming session. That and the fact that after three months of therapy, let's just destroy all that and feed his delusions! These kind of people are what give RPGs a bad name.

Also the corny 'love ballad', and the music done by 'cat on a piano' and 'stop us if we get too annoying' are almost enough to set your teeth on edge!
Q: What's an example of a movie review?
An example of a movie review is here: In 1993, "the visitors" was an enormous hit in France. So, the sequence was inevitable and unfortunately, this sequence ranks among the worst ones ever made.

This is a movie that doesn't keep its promises. Indeed, it's supposed to tell a sole story. Jean Reno must go in the twentieth century and take Christian Clavier back in the Middle Ages so that time can normally follow its course. The problem is that Clavier feels completely at ease in the world of the twentieth century, and so make him get back in the Middles Ages is rather hard... Instead of this, the movie goes on several other stories without succeeding in following the main plot. As a consequence, the movie becomes sometimes muddle-headed, sometimes a bit of a mess.

But the movie also suffers from the performance of nearly all the actors. Reno and Clavier fall into the trap that however they could avoid in the first movie: they're going over the top and become annoying. Then, why did Jean-Marie Poire the film-maker engage Muriel Robin in the female main role? He made a mistake because she seems ill-at-ease and is absolutely pitiful. The other actors aren't better: Marie-Anne Chazel is nonexistent and Christian Bujeau, unbearable.

Of course, the movie contains a few good moments with efficient gags but it often falls into vulgarity and easiness. Certain sequences and dialogs are affected. It also appears hollow because Poire takes back elements that secured the success of the first movie. Thus, a young girl takes Reno for a close relative of her family and asks him to take part in her wedding.

A labored and disappointing follow-up. Anyway, what's the interest of this movie otherwise commercial?

Q: What's an example of a movie review?
An example of a movie review is here:
After seeing the trailer for this movie and finding out Spike Lee was directing, I was excited to hear about this event. I wasn't alive at the time, I didn't live in New York, so I expected more of a history lesson than anything. What I got was some interesting acting, a lot of sex, and about 30 minutes worth of film that actually had anything to do with the Son of Sam. I guess the film wasn't about the Son of Sam, but it was a peek into the summer of '77. Label me disappointed.