In this task, you are given product reviews about dvds. The goal is to classify the review as "POS" if the overall sentiment of the review is positive(the reviewer is satisfied) or as "NEG" if the overall sentiment of the review is negative(the reviewer is not satisfied).
--------
Question: Two myths meet within a century old anthropological myth . What a challenge ! To take two characters like Aliens and Predators to invent a new story that could make them meet is more than a challenge. It is unimaginable. Each one has to be better than what they were before and yet both together have to be even more dramatic and formidable than each one may have ever been. Then you have to keep the human beings as the real center of the film, those who are really going to transfer their fear onto us, the audience. The situation has to be believable and has to allow no single minute of respite or lack of tension. The film-makers behind this adventure have revisited their good old mythology books and ransacked the backshop of the store known as The Old Curiosity Shop . So we revisit pyramid civilizations (three : Aztec, Egyptian and Cambodian) and the great myth of all times : the Antarctica from which all these pryramid civilizations are supposed to have come from. Then they revisited all the stories that are ranting and raving about some space visitors who would have taught the animals of the homo erectus species how to become homo sapiens. The general idea is that the space-visitors are the Predators, that the aliens are prisoners in a pyramid two thousand feet under the ice of the Antarctica and that every one hundred years some young predators are sent on earth to hunt these aliens in the pyramid. Of course some human beings have to accept to be the sacrificial victims from whom the aliens are going to be born, for the hunt. Easy since these human beings of old are not yet homo sapiens but only homo erectus. That's what we are told happened on October 10, 1904 and is going to happen again on October 10, 2004. Unluckily some crazy human beings get in the way of the hunt. In a way that was lucky since these human beings set the whole machinery of the pyramid to work and they become the sacrificial victims who will carry the aliens to life. Of course things are not going to go exactly the way it was planned by the predators. The result is absolutely perfect. The human beings are going to be reluctant and resisting victims and one will manage to go beyond simple hostility and disgust and help the predators, hence saving the world and the human race. The details are to be discovered in the film itself which is spectacular. It reveals the vanity of human beings who get into an adventure without even knowing what it is all about and without any proper preparation. All those vain people who believe in money, guns, science or whatever will get to the end of their vanity and the only survivor will be the one who was best prepared and also least vain, so little vain that for her the enemy of my enemy is my friend. This is a dangerous principle that led many people into unbearably absurd situations with incalculably lethal and uncontrollable consequences. But at times it is safe to believe it and it is safe to practice it. Though when the first round is finished my enemy who is the enemy of my enemy and has been my friend in an alliance to defeat this common enemy goes back to his basic definition and becomes my enemy again and the war goes on for one more round. The film-makers decided not to go in that direction but to genetically cross the alien and the predator for a sequel some day in a few years that will be tried and tested first as a comic book, I guess. The DVD has numerous and very interesting extra resources which are quite welcome. Dr Jacques COULARDEAU, University of Paris Dauphine & University of Paris 1 Pantheon Sorbonn

Answer: POS

Question: deep focus . I've taught this film in colleges for thirty-plus years. Even back at the earliest screenings, traditional-aged freshmen had trouble with it (a) because it was in b&w, and (b) because the dimensional characters didn't telegraph plot advancement but instead used irony, wit, or assumptions that would later be proven wrong by subsequent events. The first of these objections stunned me when they couldn't appreciate Gene Tierney descending the stairs to seduce "Larry" in a gown relegated to grays. The second objection (young auduence confusion) just made me sad about the impact of television ... but you already know that story. As with Hollywood's THE PICTURE OF DORIAN GRAY, released in during the same general period, I personally appreciate the "epic scope" of the narrative, enhanced by remarkable set direction detail. And I appreciate even more the depth-of-focus photography in both of these films, which enriches viewing by sharp images at several planes of action within the frame. It's a story well-told at the visual level. I've read complaints about Tyrone Power's "dated" acting in this performance, NIGHTMARE ALLEY, etc. But again, I suspect this is from a generation more comfortable with MTV editing than with theatre as an entertainment criterion. Power is given a series of difficult monologues to recite about uncinematic spiritual/ philosophical themes, and he pulls each off brilliantly. As with Olivier's opening scene in RICHARD III, it's interesting to watch how these monologues have been directed to use a pacing movement of the actor within the frame as a "paragraphing" punctuation. The lengthy, uninterrupted takes and consequent fluidity of camera movement within these shots not only enhances the impact of the monologues but also makes sly commentary on characters/ themes as continuous camera includes other characters in medium close-ups. Herbert Marshall's Maugham is interesting and underplayed almost as masterfully as Cedrick Hardwicke's performance of "goodness personified" in ROPE. The close-ups of "Maugham's" eyes to communicate ironic plot points may seem obtrusive, but they're true to Maugham's voice in the novel. Further, they emphasize the ill-advised decision to omit this narrator's perspective in Murray's hapless remake. That later film fails in no small part because the female characters are virtually indistinguishable visually, and because the studio (which only made the film to entice Murray to make GHOSTBUSTERS II) invested no interest in producing a good movie script. Pity, since Murray could have done okay. Two less successful scenes in the 40s version are the "Baby!" hospital melodrama and the ashram Jehovah sequences (not including the remarkably visual spiritual moment in the mountains). But the supporting cast remains superb throughout--especially the bracing comedy of Webb and Lancaster, and the moving subtlety of John Payne and Lucille Watson. Tierney's richest moments are linked to the plot: "That's all right, Larry. It might be less than a year"; the wedding announcement over the phone; the camera-narrated scene where Isabel "seduces" Larry's fiancee; and, of course, the climax with Larry at the end. And, by the way, she's as gorgeous as Tyrone Power! How much more value can one expect from an entertainment that succeeds so well with complex, mature themes of spiritual redemption in a society of capitalist myopia?

Answer: POS

Question: What people refused to see then and now . I saw this movie also and loved it. Questions: Why do people feel the need to tell the entire story when giving reviews? Just say what you liked about the movie give your critiques ONLY Some of you folks told the whole d....movie. Also to Acorn "jcorn59483" Blalock is described as "Genius and Unbridled Ambition and Taylor is described as "loyal and dedication" ??? Did you see the same movie as the rest of us. Or are you unaware of your own unconscious prejudices?? Also to another reviewer Did not Taylor have a Major contribution to the valve that saved the life of blue babies ??? Maybe I should see the movie again. You gave the credit to Blalock and some other Caucasian Doctor Only ?? Racism and Prejudices are such complexities of the "American Life" Some of us live it every day and say "What!... Not Me! While others live and deal with it every day! How obsurd to call the genius of Vivien Taylor "loyal and dedicated" This man had No formal medical training yet he went toe to toe with a Doctor who was at the top of his field. Who was the real genius here !

Answer:
POS