You will be given a review about a book, an item, a place or a movie. After that, a question is given that you should answer using a certain span of the review. Your answer should be from the review itself and should not contain extra words, and should not be a combination of different spans. If there's no direct answer to the question, answer with a part of the text that is the most relevant to the question. See the examples for clarification.

[EX Q]: review: I thought the movie had an interesting look and feel to it right from the beginning and it involved me right away. The acting of Anne Hathaway and Hugh Jackman was absolutely amazing. They both gave powerful performances and looked sincere and genuine at every moment. I think the live singing made the film much better than most musicals and (hopefully) set a new standard. I loved the quality and naturalness of the sound.I'm generally not a big fan of this sort of epic-level drama, but the actors pulled off the dramatic ending well, and I found it very moving. I think this movie, overall, is precedent setting and an artistic success.
question: Is the performance of the actor good in the movie ?
[EX A]: the actors pulled off the dramatic ending well

[EX Q]: review: Good solid granola that has more flavor than you would initially think. Upon first bite it just tastes like normal granola-but the flavor jumps in as an aftertaste and is use right. For the granola fan, tough to go wrong here as long as pricing is in line with other quality brands.
question: Is a delicious taste?
[EX A]: the flavor jumps in as an aftertaste and is use right

[EX Q]: review: I found this movie to be very well-acted and well-directed.The sexual scenes didn't bother me not one bit, like some of the other reviewers.I mean, COME ON!!---This is life in the 21st Century!--Grow up already!People get naked and they interact, okay?---Thank goodness that computers and gadgetshaven't spoiled that for us (yet!), as it has with basic conversational skills and other formsof by-gone or slowly dying human interaction.I actually know both a lesbian couple, as well as a gay male couple whoare living similar circumstances as in the premise of this movie.I found it very modern, refreshing, and mature in it's approach to the subject matter.I have long been a fan of Mark Ruffalo, Julianne Moore and Annette Benning's work,and I also thought "the kids" themselves did an excellent job at portraying their roles.My problem was in that I felt like the Mark Ruffalo character kind of had his once happyand balanced, (for him), life just upheaved and torn apart when he gets contacted by these "kids",who of course, have every right to know who their father / donor was, and also what his background is.Ruffalo's character had a great attitude (I thought) about the whole thing...He was naturally pensive and cautious at first, though not in a malicious way, but soon warmed to theidea that he had these "kids" in his life now, and was more than open to getting to know them, and allowthem to get to know him. I felt that Annette Benning's character, who felt threatened, in addition to justbeing an anal-retentive, controlling witch with a capital B, was very mean and cold towards Ruffalo's character.Julianne Moore's character was a bit of a messy, confused, psychological user.Moore's character is that kind of person who is filled with inner turmoil or frustration, but makes it everybodyelse's problem around her. I hated how she treated the latino gardener too, just because she felt guiltyabout all of the drama and calamity that she was causing in her affair with Ruffalo's character!I always say: "Don't jump in the river, if you're not a strong swimmer, babe!" (-:Ruffalo's character was the perfect outlet for her pent up sexual confusion / tension,and the two (again) enter into a very complicated and torrid affair, which of course, couldonly end in heartache for all concerned. As soon as Moore's character quenches her sexual thirst/curiosity,she just basically returns back to her life relationship Benning's character and the "kids",after she and Ruffalo's character are found out, and they all seem to throw Ruffalo's character under the bus...As if to say, "Okay babe, we've all uprooted you from your life, and now we're done with ya!--So ummmm---kay, bye!"This kind of left a bad taste in my mouth, as Ruffalo's character is literally lefton the outside looking in, as Benning & Moore & the kids reunion-reconnection happens without him.He is locked out of their lives...Lives that he really never knew exsisted in the first place,until they invaded his, satiated their curiosity, and sent him packing.Not cool, I felt. )-:Not saying that Ruffalo's character was a saint or anything, but the man had his own businessand his own life...as unorthodox as it was...but then again, wasn't Benning, Moore and the kids' livesjust as unorthodox? I guess I just wished that a balance could've been reached between all parties,and it could've ended on that note, instead of Ruffalo's character, who btw, he played with a great spirit& optimism, being dejected and disregarded. Just my humble opinion of course. (-:I still enjoyed this movie though, despite its (what I considered to be) plot flaws. **4 Stars**
question: How can I control the tension so that it is not high?
[EX A]:
-:Ruffalo 's character was the perfect outlet for her pent up sexual confusion / tension