Problem: Write a positive (OPTIONS:
- negative
- positive) movie review.

Answer: James J. Corbett, heavyweight champion of the world from 1892 to 1897, turned out to be Errol Flynn's favorite role. Possibly because he didn't have to wield a sword or be in a western. He grew tired of the swashbucklers and he said in his autobiography that he felt he was miscast in westerns and couldn't understand why people liked him in them. It is an enjoyable film, but hardly does tell the real story of James J. Corbett.

As portrayed Corbett was the first scientific boxer to win in the heavyweight division, a man who used brains and speed more than brute strength to win. He defeated John L. Sullivan and lost to Bob Fitzsimmons the heavyweight crown. He was also a compulsive womanizer and in that was a lot like the man portraying him. Of course that was not shown on the screen. The character that Alexis Smith plays, the banker's daughter who falls for him, has no basis in reality. Corbett was in fact married twice and was flagrantly unfaithful with both of his wives.

Also though after he lost his title and after the events of this film are concluded he suffered a great personal tragedy. His father in a moment of depression, probably over finances because he lost heavily betting on his son to beat Bob Fitzsimmons, shot his mother and then turned the gun on himself. The murder/suicide hardly squares with the happy clan that Alan Hale presided over.

One thing though that I did like about Gentleman Jim. Ward Bond got the career role of his life in playing John L. Sullivan. Director Raoul Walsh got a great performance out of Bond as the blustering, but lovable Sullivan. Even given some of Sullivan's bad points that don't make it to the screen like rabid racism, Bond's portrayal is the quintessential John L. and the best thing about Gentleman Jim.

Speaking of racism, one thing that should have been told was the fact that Sullivan while champion refused on grounds of race to meet Peter Jackson who was black and from Australia and probably the best heavyweight of his time. I say probably because as a challenger Corbett met him and fought him for 61 rounds to a draw. That fight more than any other created a demand for a Sullivan-Corbett title match. Of course when Corbett was champion he refused to give Jackson a title shot. Maybe he didn't want another 61 round marathon with someone who may have been better on that particular day.

Gentleman Jim is not Jim Corbett's story, it is a movie of Errol Flynn playing at being James J. Corbett. But Corbett had he been alive in 1942 no doubt would have loved the movie and loved Flynn's portrayal of his life. It's as he would have liked to have been remembered.
Problem: OPTIONS:
- negative
- positive positive
=++++=
Answer: Ever since I heard of the Ralph Bakshi version of "The Lord of the Rings" I wondered: What the hell is 'rotoscope' animation?!!! Well... I finally found out... I saw this movie about three years ago not having any idea who Ralph Bakshi is... And I liked it... a lot... Very good story line... it even has a little character development which is great for a cartoon... See it if you get bored with contemporary animation.... Don't get me wrong... I'm not saying it's just a nice cartoon... It's a pretty good movie too...
An example of a movie review. positive (OPTIONS:
- negative
- positive).

A: As a long time fan of Peter O'Donnell's greatest creation, I watched this film on DVD with no great hopes of enjoyment; indeed I expected to be reaching in disgust for the remote control within fifteen minutes. But instead I thoroughly enjoyed this production, and I especially enjoyed and appreciated how the producers and director succeeded in telling the Modesty Blaise back story. They managed to avoid the trap of making a (bad) film version of the books we are all so familiar with, choosing instead to concentrate on a period in Modesty's life only alluded to in the novels.

As for the production values (and I am no student of cinematography!): yes, the film was filmed on a tight financial and time budget and maybe that shows... but does it spoil the viewer's enjoyment? In this case I think not. Instead we are introduced to one of the world's greatest literary heroines and given a taste of her capabilities.

In regard to the casting: because we in unfamiliar territory the only people who really matter are Modesty and (perhaps) Professor Lob. For me they were totally credible. Alexandra Staden, described by some as wooden, and too thin to be an action heroine, brought to the screen Modesty's poise and coolness; her technique (when martial arts were needed) but most importantly personified the integrity which is at the core of the Modesty Blaise canon.

OK, so we all know this film was produced to stake Miramax's claim to the Modesty Blaise character, it was made quickly and cheaply, BUT... I for one cannot wait to see the next production in this series by these producers - as long as they keep to the core values and characterisations of the original stories!
Q: What's an example of a movie review?
An example of a movie review is here: Outlandish premise that rates low on plausibility and unfortunately also struggles feebly to raise laughs or interest. Only Hawn's well-known charm allows it to skate by on very thin ice. Goldie's gotta be a contender for an actress who's done so much in her career with very little quality material at her disposal...

Problem: Write a positive (OPTIONS:
- negative
- positive) movie review.

Answer: This show probably won't appeal to everyone. Sarah does what she wants; she doesn't ask for permission and she doesn't apologize. This is a sitcom with zombies, robot dinosaurs, flying cars, and a team of wallet-stealing male cheerleaders. The star of the show is not a hero, she is a spoiled, bigoted pervert. If you can't appreciate the offbeat humor it offers, the show probably isn't for you. Everyone should at least give this show a chance. It brings together the comedic styling of Sarah Silverman, Brian Posehn (The Comedians of Comedy), Jay Johnston (Mr. Show), Steve Agee (Bobcat Goldthwait's 'Stay') and the creative energies of Rob Schrab and Dan Harmon (Heat Vision & Jack, Monster House). It also showcases the best talents of the burgeoning online community, channel101.com. (If you're into this show, keep an eye out for "The Department of Acceptable Media" on vh1 this March, it'll be drawing from the same talent pool.)

Watch Sarah Silverman's show. This kind of stuff is the future of entertainment.
Problem: Write a negative (OPTIONS:
- negative
- positive) movie review.

Answer:
Hallam Foe tells us the story about a boy who lost his mother and experiences some sort of Oedepus complex afterward.

It is something like 95 minutes long but would be better in ten. There's like an hour in the middle where he is doing climbing practice on rooftops, and habits in a church tower like Quasimodo (only he is much less sympathetic).

There's a strange love story involved which doesn't have anything to do with anything. She happens to look like his mother, yes so what? We know he misses his mother, that's what the first ten minutes were about. They should just have put the beginning and ending together and it would have been a O.K. short film. Now it's a portrait of a character who doesn't change. He is a guy that stuff happens to. The only active choice he has in the whole middle of the movie is to apply for a job.

There's this whole Oedepus thing going on which is supposed to make us analyze his character. He paints his face, dresses in women's clothing and wears a dead Badger on his head. A Badger! You've got to see the ending! He returns to his home with the badger on his head (and it is shot like a tacky Horror film) to kill his dad's new wife (which he had sex with in the beginning). And somehow they thought this wouldn't be entertaining enough so they put some indie punk music in the background. I've got to admit though, I'm kind of allergic to films that want to write a psychological complex on your nose. It feels like this MacKenzie director/guy/whatever is trying to show us that he also has been studying psychology in school. You are so smart! Thank you for bringing all these forgotten theories back into our memories! You really dug! What a Wallraff! Okay so now I realized this film is based on some random book, but anyway..

Photowise it is boring. A lot of talking heads. Plus the editor has changed the colors from scene to scene, you know cold and warm etc.. why? maybe "Hallam Foe" is both a feature and a test film for color blind people. Or maybe they just thought that the drama wouldn't be enough to tell us that he feels lonely, so they increased blue so that we really get it.

I'm not even gonna comment on the cliche indie-oh-how-how-how-cute drawings they have made in the presentation. And all the "cute" sex stuff going on. This whole film is an independent cliche. But I do recommend it. I laughed more than a few times. Though it is really annoying to be a film student and to see how crap like this gets through the machine.