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

Answer: Time and time again, it seems that the comedic actors of Hollywood are surprising me with their talents as dramatic performers: first it was Robin Williams {'One Hour Photo (2002)'}, then it was Jim Carrey {'Eternal Sunshine (2004)' being one example}, then Will Ferrell {'Stranger than Fiction (2006)'} and now Adam Sandler. Yes, that's absolutely right: the guy who has based an entire career on making brainless, goofball comedies {I'm not complaining; I've always been a fan} has finally given me a performance of which he can be proud. Of course, some readers may be wondering whatever happened to 'Punch-Drunk Love (2002),' but I can only assure you that it's a film I'm currently taking measures to see as soon as possible, since I've heard it's terrific. My first film from director Mike Binder, 'Reign Over Me,' is an intelligent and respectful exploration of grief and friendship. Though it does occasionally stray into all-too-familiar territory, the somewhat predictable storyline proves surprisingly deep and moving, with both Sandler and Don Cheadle giving memorable performances.

Alan Johnson (Cheadle) is a successful dentist with a good family, though he finds himself unable to communicate adequately with his wife (Jada Pinkett Smith) and so his marriage is a little shaky. Charlie Fineman (Adam Sandler) is Alan's ex-college roommate, a man who lost his entire family in the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, and who is still confronting his overwhelming feelings of grief. A disheveled figure with messy hair and downcast eyes {often likened in appearance to Bob Dylan}, Charlie has abandoned his career in dentistry, and spends his time in solitude: listening to music with headphones that cut out all sound from the outside world, driving around Manhattan in his motorised scooter, immersing himself in fantastical video games and repeatedly redecorating his apartment kitchen in accordance with his deceased wife's final wishes. When Alan and Charlie meet for the first time in years, the latter doesn't even recognise an old friend, having completely abandoned any memories prior to his life-crippling experience. Indeed, at first he doesn't even acknowledge the existence of his family, and abruptly loses his temper whenever anybody suggests that he seek counselling.

Initially, it may seem a bit exploitative for the filmmakers to be using the September 11 attacks as a storytelling device. Afterall, wouldn't it be just as devastating if Charlie's family had died in an ordinary, everyday car accident? However, if you consider that the director's intention was to demonstrate the enormous pain caused to ordinary citizens by the tragedy, then 'Reign Over Me' does a very good job. It's easy to get so caught up in meaningless statistics that you neglect the emotional costs of the terrorist attacks; this is the first 9/11-orientated film I've seen that truly dealt with the suffering of those who weren't even involved, whose only anguish was caused through losing those whom they loved. Adam Sandler shows surprising range in a difficult role, one which would have crumbled to pieces had he not been up to the task. Snapping instantly between cheerfulness, anger and depression, Charlie Fineman is a man with whom we can deeply sympathise, a hollow soul who, thanks to the companionship of an old friend, can finally glimpse light at the end of a dark, bleak tunnel.
Problem: OPTIONS:
- negative
- positive negative
=++++=
Answer: Steven what have you done you have hit an all new low. It is weird since Steven's last film shadow man was directed by the same director who did this trash. Shadow man was good this was diabolically bad so bad it wasn't even funny Steven is hardly in the movie and feels like he is in a cameo appearance and when he is in the film he is dubbed half the time anyway. As for the action well let's just say the wizard of oz had more action than this trash there is hardly any action in the film and when it does finally arrive it is boring depressing badly shot so called action scenes. Seagal hardly kills anyone unlike his over films where he goes one man army ie under siege 1 and 2 and exit wounds. the plot is so confusing with so many plot holes that it doesn't make scenes sometimes. flight of fury better be good what a shame i wasted 5 pounds on this garbage 0 out of ten better luck next time
An example of a movie review. positive (OPTIONS:
- negative
- positive).

A: I agree that Capital City should be on DVD. I watched this show only by accident in 1994 and fell in love with Rolf Saxon as Hudson Talbot. It was nice to see Americans who work abroad in London in the financial industry for a change. I loved Rolf in this role and loved every other role that he has been in. I can't believe the show only lasted 13 episodes. I liked William Armstrong as Hudson's flamboyant charming friend in the series. When they aired this show in the New York City area, it was always late at night or at off times. The show is less than an hour long. I felt this show should have gone on longer but the casting changes in the second season really made the show a little less interesting. I didn't care for Sylvia but missed the actress, Julia Phillips-Lane in the previous season. I felt this show took chances and often it worked. It showed Americans who loved and chose to live in London. The American characters were not arrogant or tried to outdo their British counterparts. I also liked the fact that they had tried to internationalize the cast rather than make them all British. I liked watching Julia Ormond in an early role. I felt this show should have lasted longer. I felt at times that the previews lasted as long as the show in less than an hour. They could have transferred the cast to New York City and it would have been a hit in America.
Q: What's an example of a movie review?
An example of a movie review is here: This really is one of the worst movies ever made. I consider myself a HUGE zombie film fan and usually tolerate bad acting, lame "special effects" a dumb story and whatever you may encounter in second rate movies, AS LONG as the film has a good atmosphere/story/suspension or whatever to offer. This one has basically no positive aspect to it and is third or fourth rate, maybe worse. Some friends of mine and myself made a small movie during a week's holiday and definitely did a better job (no zombie film though).

This flick is not even funny, not speaking of anything else. Really bad and redundant special effects, zombies that look like normal people (except for a white additional skin pulled over their faces), WAY TO MUCH fake blood (I like realism a lot, the combination of realism and Zombie films being debatable, but the presented gore is just plain silly). The camera stays quite long with feedings scenes, it gets boring and you cannot help but wonder, why the zombies use WEAPONS (!) to kill their prey. I will not go into the details of the dubbing (others have done so). Although I am from Germany myself and am at least a bit curious about the original version, I will NOT waste more of my time with this movie.

Keep away from it, as far as you can.
Problem: Write a positive (OPTIONS:
- negative
- positive) movie review.

Answer:
I found it hard to like anyone in this film. The central characters, Lindy and Michael Chamberlain, whose daughter disappears during a night out in the Australian outback, are not bad people, but then surely not all, or even most, of the scores of people we see throughout this movie would be bad if we knew them better. But though we are as sure as the film wants us to be of the guilt or innocence of the Chamberlains from the start of their life's tragic disarray, the film takes on a more or less sociological perspective pertaining to gossip, news media, crowds, mobs and assumptions. It's not a movie about the degenerate society of Australia in particular; it's merely an account of a true story that happened there. Society en masse is much less evolved than the individual feels ensured that we are.

When a warden insists upon killing all of an aborigine's dogs because of the unverified action of a single wild dog, when a randomly ruined life spins even further out of control owing to the majority of magazines, newspapers and TV programs distorts the tragic truth to a level of drama that provokes its consumers into a frenzy, there is no sign of empathy or even any kind of looking outside of one's own unaware perceptions, influenced left and right by the vigorous hearsay and vibes of those who surround one's life. The reason I appreciate the film is because it turns the focus inside out, from the victims to the masses.

The evidence against Lindy Chamberlain aside, suspicion was jet-fueled mostly by a virtue of hers. To the public eye, she did not seem sufficiently distraught by the death of her baby daughter. Why was she able to keep her cool, even a sort of aloofness let alone holding her head up, for TV and the press? How much of the downward spiral could've been prevented had she behaved more to the public's liking in the media? Meryl Streep, one of, if not the, greatest actress working today, may not give a performance that particularly stands out, and frankly neither does any other actor, or department of film-making. But she, and the screenwriters, do understand Lindy. What is infuriating is that it's not that difficult. Apparently, she was not naturally prone to showing emotion in public in any case. Whether or not she is approachable as a lovable character in the immediate sense, we are naturally prone to sympathize with her situation.

Whether or not her performance is as immediately gratifying as Sophie's Choice, The Devil Wears Prada, Angels In America or other such work, it is a triumph. It is difficult enrapture an audience when you purposely deny them insights into yourself. She frustrates us because we don't know what she's thinking or feeling. It took me awhile to feel endeared toward her, but this is the movie's way of suggesting the reaction of the public's attention.

She is married to a pastor, and they both practice a religion that is in a small minority and thus misinterpreted by most. Initially, they react to their loss as if to be reconciling themselves to God's will, kick-starting a rumor mill generating the notion that their daughter's death was some sort of ritual killing on their part. Whatever happened to the little girl, her parents were part of a margin with whom most of the media's intake didn't immediately identify, so the first inclination was to go after them like a pack of hungry...well...

Meryl Streep and Sam Neill are constantly on screen, but the Australian public plays the real leads here. Like punctuation for each plot advance, director Fred Schepisi cuts away from restaurant to tennis court to dinner party to saloon to office, where the public tries Lindy and gets carried away into their own passionate projections.

This Golan-Globus docudrama is not particularly memorable. The setting's atmosphere doesn't give a pleasurable enough compensation for the fact that no performance or facet of production stands out. But it is very successful as an indictment of the collective conscious of the public.