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

Q: some of my friends who went to live in usa complain about one thing - that country is very different from the one depicted in hollywood movies .
that is especially true for those who end up somewhere in that unexplored land between los angeles and new york where they find , to their big surprise , that the majority of people vote republican , go to church every sunday and usually do n't tolerate liberal attitudes that are taken for granted in an average american film .
such rude awakening , however , can happen in another direction - conservative people are sometimes forced to discover unpleasant truths about world they live in .
something like that happens to jake van dorn ( george c . scott ) , successful grand rapids businessman who shares strong calvinist convictions with the rest of his community .
one day his daughter kristen ( ilah davis )
disappears from calvinist youth convention in california .
van dorn is worried because he does n't believe that his daughter would run from home .
however , the truth delivered by private investigator andy mast ( peter boyle ) is
even harder - kristen is spotted in cheap pornographic film .
infuriated van dorn is unsatisfied with the way mast 's investigation is going , so he goes to los angeles to search for kristen himself .
unfortunately , he lacks experience and the quest , that brought him to the utter depths of sex underworld , is fruitless .
things change when he devises cunning plan and , while doing it , stumbles on sympathetic prostitute and part time porno actress nicky ( season hubley ) .
almost two decades after its release , hardcore is mostly forgotten by critics and film scholars .
it is a real shame , because very few movies in today 's hollywood would dare tackle controversial issues that writer and director paul schrader explored in his second directorial attempt .
in late 1970s , it was totally different situation - films were expected to have mature , serious themes for the mature audience .
for schrader this film was nice opportunity to expand the subplot of his previous work , taxi driver - one that deals with the great generational divide that tormented the american society in 1970s .
on one side we have an old america that sticks to the puritan ideals of hard work and strict morals that made that country great .
but that america is obviously unable to cope with the new challenges brought by the social turmoil in 1960s and , instead of facing them , prefers to live in rural , conservative cocoons .
the new america , on the other hand , fares no better - ideals of the so - called " sexual revolution " , same as all other " revolutions " of the swinging sixties , degraded into exploitation and depravity .
instead of being " liberated " , baby boomers are stuck with their own inability to cope with the newly discovered freedoms .
schrader very cleverly brings the idea that those two americas , actually , are n't so far away - nice example is a brilliant scene in which van dorn , already described as an authoritarian and paternalistic capitalist , meets sleazy porno producer ; the latter one also turns out to be authoritarian , paternalistic and very dedicated to this job .
the difference between the two is simply in the line of work .
many contemporary critics actually accused schrader of promoting conservative agenda .
on the surface , it may look that way - audience is forced to sympathise with van dorn and his quest .
in the first scenes , he is portrayed as nice family man who actually does n't deserve to experience parent 's worst nightmare .
the scene in the porno cinema that reveals kristen 's fate is extremely cruel ; pain and humiliation , brought by oscar - winning actor george c . scott , is of such intensity , that the audience feels sorry for him and simply must support his agenda .
van dorn is perhaps flawed , and the subtle hints lead to the unflattering truth at the end ; but the viewers simply know that his cause is just , and that prodigal daughter must be better off with her loving father than with the sleazy pornographers that only want to exploit her body .
on the other hand , schrader , who grew up in an environment very much like van dorn 's ( his own parents would n't allow him to watch movies until he was 18 ) , knows better and tries to bring another side of coin .
even the people connected with sex underworld can show redeeming qualities - like nicky , who actually tries to improve her life , and sleazy detective who develops something like a conscience at the end .
unfortunately , schrader fails to erase the impact of the shocking scene at the beginning , and his attempt to reconcile the opposing sides of america seems lost in somewhat clich ?
d finale .
the script is slightly flawed , and schrader as director does n't show too much originality - his style seems too influenced by techniques that scorsese used in taxi driver .
apart from the scenes in grand rapids , those two films even look alike .
but the content might be more than interesting for today 's viewer , especially those inspired by the current 70s revival . until boogie nights , no hollywood mainstream movie ever dared to explore the phenomenon of pornography in 1970s .
hardcore , on the other hand , might serve as precious document , because it depicts sex film industry in the period often regarded as the golden age by connoisseurs - before the advent of video , when many of the porno filmmakers could afford to think of themselves as artists .
the view of such age and the industry is very unflattering , though , but for the film whose main character takes time to explain calvinist doctrines to the audience , that should n't be too surprising .
anyway , despite some flaws , hardcore remains very interesting and powerful piece of cinema .

A: P
****
Q: the army comedy genre has never turned out a truly good movie ( if you do n't count neil simon 's biloxi blues ) .
year after year , more predictably cliched military movies come out -- most recently sgt .
bilko -- and none of them ever manage to be anything more than a rehash of the last .
i thought stripes would be different .
with ivan reitman as director , bill murray as star and harold ramis as co - star and co - screenwriter , it seemed like it would be ghostbusters in the army .
instead , it was a bunch of unfunny crap in the army .
murray , about as funny and sophisticated here as he was in meatballs , plays a loser cab driver who sees the army as his only chance for success , and convinces his friend ramis to enlist with him .
so he does , and we get the obligatory drill sergeant from hell , head - shaving and marching / singing sequences ,
more mind - numbingly stale here than ever .
the characters are even less original , ranging from underachieving slob john candy to incompetent captain john larroquette .
all the big name stars in stripes ( and even larroquette ) fall victim to the lame , rehashed material and are never really likeable , murray in particular .
he only gets a few decent lines in , although those barely - funny one liners pale in comparison to the hilarious peter venkman character he played three years later in ghostbusters .
he was even better in caddyshack , for crying out loud .
as with a lot of the late 70 's / early 80 's comedies , stripes is a completely juvenile movie only a child would like
but is so sex-
obsessed no child should be able to watch it .
i 'm sure it seems funny on paper to have candy pay over $ 400 to mud
wrestle five beautiful women , but while watching it all that was coming out of my mouth was the admonition " dear god !
"
every few seconds .
stripes is n't the playful kind of sex comedy , either .
most of the time
it seems downright misogynistic , as when larroquette uses his telescope to peer into the women 's showers or murray lifts a female m .
p .
onto the stove and , with an i
- know - what - you - like look on his face , says he 's going to give her the " aunt jemima treatment , " which means shoving a spatula under her butt repeatedly .
you do n't want to stick around as the scene progresses and he uses an ice cream scoop on her genital region .
"
i 'm not enjoying this , " the woman protests .
my sentiments exactly .

A: N
****
Q: i find most of television so intensely boring that i simply never turn on my set , unless i 'm watching a movie .
i do n't even have cable , so i went to radio shack to buy an antenna specifically for the purpose of watching " the x - files " every sunday night .
it 's the only show that 's worth an hour of my time each week ( though , since i do n't watch reruns , i 'm glad that i have six months of the year to avoid television altogether ) .
i am an avid fan of the show , and have been for about three years now .
and i love gillian anderson .
the x - files is the film that continues the story where the season finale left off .
the film is like a two - hour episode , except that there are a lot more special effects , the plot is thicker , and the resolution is more satisfying .
this is a terrific film , both for fans of the series and for those who have never seen it ( i imagine that viewers unfamiliar with the show will find the film to be solid and riveting entertainment ) .
i expected to like it more than any episode i 've seen , and my expectations were met .
actually , the film takes a few risks in its story and plot devices , but ,
thankfully , the makers managed to do it right .
when the finale ended , the fbi branch known as the x - files had been destroyed , and our heroes , mulder ( david duchovny ) and scully ( gillian anderson ) were left stripped of five years of hard work .
the film picks up soon after ; and mulder and scully have been reduced to field agents investigating a bomb threat in a federal building .
but wait , i 'm getting ahead of myself .
the film actually opens in the ice age , about 32 , 000 years prior , during which a couple of prehistoric guys get attacked by a vicious alien .
the alien 's blood infects them ( fans of the show will certainly remember the black cancer ) , and the story jumps into modern times , during which a young boy is also infected with the cancer .
it turns out that the bomb was planted to kill the boy , and mulder and scully uncover the cover - up despite the fact that scully has resigned from her position in the fbi .
soon , they find out that the whole thing has to do with aliens .
as i 've written before , it 's not easy to write plot summaries for films like this , because everything needs to be a surprise .
fans of the show will know what to expect , and i seriously doubt any of them being disappointed with the film .
director rob bowman has done a great job expanding the eerie feeling of the show to the big screen , making small adjustments and minor changes to utilize the possibilities that film allows over television .
there are some truly suspenseful and well - created scenes here ( late in the film , when they 're in the alien spacecraft , you 'll see one of the better action sequences in recent cinema ) .
the special effects are very good , and the production design by christopher nowak is fantastic .
what i find interesting is that the x - files is actually a great way for series neophytes to get into the story .
our heroes are given subtle introductions ( we 're not expected to know them on the outset ) , and the film explains enough of the story that prior knowledge of the series is n't required to understand the film .
there are , of course , little elements that the makers have included as payoff to the fans , but i 'll keep those as surprises .
it takes a lot of thought and understanding of the series to create a film using roots as complicated as the ones that the series provides , and then create a coherent film that anyone can understand clearly .
the series is strong for a lot of reasons .
it 's original ( though it has many ties to " the twilight zone " and owes some homage to hitchcock ) , and impressively eerie for a television show .
what really makes the series shine , however , are the actors .
duchovny has so much presence , and is just a fun guy to watch .
he has that confidence that will someday make him into a bankable leading man .
anderson is equally good , and paralyzingly beautiful ; she 's also a strong actress .
both performers have acted in little more than their series , however , though i think they 'll both get their chances to prove themselves very soon .
i enthusiastically recommend the x - files , both for fans and non - fans .
1998 is a summer filled with disappointing blockbusters , and
this film should satisfy where most of the others leave you completely dry .
it 's an intelligent film , and takes you places that you might not have been
( or , at least , might not have seen so many times that they feel familiar ) .
the x - files is impressive in concept , as well : fans of the series are likely to be highly critical , and to take the premise beyond the series is a risky move .
it 's nice to see a risk pay off for a change .
actually , it 's nice to see a risk at all .

A:
P
****