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

[Q]: while watching " shallow grave , " i found myself periodically noticing thematic similarities to the coens ' " blood simple .
"
both are good films in which several characters , none of whom are the most conscientious to have walked the earth but still are not really evil , indulge in an act of deception that soon necessitates more serious crimes .
the body count rises , and before long seemingly normal people have blood on their hands .
both films are also flawed , but for different reasons .
"
blood simple " is unrelentingly dark and moody , but its characterizations were a little hollow .
" shallow grave , " on the other hand , is nearly flawless for an hour and twenty minutes , and then the filmmakers throw away much of what they 'd accomplished for a more standard , audience - pleasing ending .
the events of the film were sufficiently intense and disturbing that i honestly felt quite troubled by what i was witnessing on screen most of the time , yet there was a slight grin on my face at the end .
as the film begins , we are introduced to alex ( ewan mcgregor ) , juliet ( kerry fox ) , and david ( christopher eccleston ) , a scottish trio living in an apartment in glasgow .
they are all sarcastic and occasionally obnoxious , but other than that they seem like a fairly normal bunch .
a man named hugo moves into the apartment 's remaining vacancy , and the next morning he is found dead of a drug overdose .
juliet is about to call the police when alex discovers that hugo had brought with him a suitcase filled to the brim with cash ( presumably from criminal activities ) .
the three eventually decide to keep the money and cover up the death ; after a drawing of straws , the particularly unenviable task of mutilating the body so as to make it unidentifiable and burying it falls to david , who had been the most reluctant to partake in the scheme from the beginning .
all of this transpires in the first twenty minutes or so of the film , and part of what makes " shallow grave " so brilliant for a while is that i honestly had no idea what was coming next .
other than the obvious question of why they do n't report the death and simply hide the cash , which is not addressed , the plotting and characterization , while sometimes predictable , worked in a way that kept my attention and , on more than one occasion , gave me chills .
i will , therefore , attempt to continue this review in a way that does n't give away too much of the plot .
broadly , the trio are in danger due to hugo 's underworld connections , as two goons search for the money and kill several people in the process .
a police inspector ( ken stott ) is clearly suspicious and visits the apartment , asking pointed questions and trying to unnerve the three suspects by exchanging banal and weirdly humorous bits of dialogue with a junior detective .
david , meanwhile , becomes increasingly paranoid , moves into the attic , and develops an affinity for sharp objects .
director danny boyle effectively creates an atmosphere of mounting tension and suspicion in the apartment , and finally the three seem ready to turn against each other .
while i do not consider myself the " happy endings are automatically stupid " type , i thought that " shallow grave " really should have ended in tragedy - a realistic analysis of the story up to the last ten minutes of the film would indicate that all three characters were probably about to end up in prison , in the mental hospital , or in the morgue .
this could have been accomplished , quite credibly , but then boyle and screenwriter john hodge seem to flinch and opt for a more conventional " caper " ending in which we get a kick out of seeing who outsmarted whom , and nothing more .
granted , this is n't really a " happy " ending , but it 's still pretty light - hearted compared to what preceded it .
i really should n't say anything more about the ending as far as details go , but let me add that it seemed not only shallow and lazy but also inconsistent with the rest of the film and not very believable .
yes , this ending made me crack a smile for a couple of minutes , but ultimately it left me feeling as if i 'd been cheated .
still , " shallow grave " was brilliant
most of the way through , and it does at least meet the minimum requirements for an entertaining thriller , and i am therefore awarding it three stars .
i guess i just ca n't help but think about that fourth star that boyle and hodge let slip away .
[A]: P

[Q]: one never quite knows what one is going to get with a mamet film .
his american buffalo is a set - bound piece that has very little plot .
sometimes he will tell a story that really moves .
heist is mamet
doing his most entertaining work .
unlike his the spanish prisoner , there are no lapses in credibility .
heist is probably the best mamet thriller since house of games .
it is the kind of plot with which you are never sure who will double - cross whom , and frequently it is mamet double - crossing the viewer .
watching the film 's team getting around security the viewer is frequently asking himself either " what the heck are they doing ?
"
or " why did n't anybody think of that before ? " appropriately enough heist opens with a very clever jewelry store job .
it is so clever that one wonders if mamet really thinks up all these ideas himself or if he has help from professional magician and con expert ricky jay , now a regular actor in mamet films .
this is a robbery that works like a well - oiled machine .
there is just one problem and it is enough to get joe moore ( played by gene hackman ) filmed on a security camera .
now joe has to get out of the business .
it was coming time anyway .
joe 's team including bobby blane ( delroy lindo ) , fran moor ( rebecca pidgeon ) , and pinky pincus ( ricky jay ) is going to split up and go separate ways .
but crime boss bergman ( danny devito ) is pulling the strings
and he says that joe and his people have to manage one more robbery .
and he has to take along a young kid , the short- fused jimmy silk ( sam rockwell ) .
immediately it is obvious that there is more going on than meets the eye .
much of what distinguishes heist is mamet 's dialog .
remarkably it serves a double purpose .
the robbery team sounds at once very professional and at the same time it has mamet 's special feel for dialog
.
hackman has lines like " everybody needs money .
that 's why they call it money .
"
mamet 's timing is perfect in the direction but terrible in the production .
the plot is coincidentally a lot like the plot of the recent the score , which is , in fact , a very similar story .
both are good films , perhaps for some of the same reasons .
but at least on a high level they are much the same story .
the other problem with the timing of heist is that it involves airport security and clever ways to get around them .
i saw the film at the toronto international film festival on september 12 , 2001 .
that made the subject matter just a little too timely .
my understanding is that the release will be delayed .
my biggest problem with the film is that rebecca pidgeon 's acting at times seems very poor .
it is some kind of mamet trademark i do not understand to have women talk without inflection , as if they are just reading the words for the first time .
it is an irritation and distracts us from what is
otherwise a very good thriller .
it is one i rate an 8 on the 0 to 10 scale and a high +2 on the -4 to +4 scale .
[A]: P

[Q]: plot : a rich guy who does n't believe in love , orders a mail - order bride for himself .
that very evening , the couple is married and fall madly in love soon thereafter .
but what 's this ?
one of them might not be the person they are pretending to be ?
wow . . .
a sin , indeed .
critique : easily
one of the worst movies that i 've seen all year .
too long , too boring , too predictable and too ridiculous for anyone interested in watching a good movie .
what the hell were they thinking when they made this thing ?
( it 's no wonder that the film has been sitting on the racks for about a year ) this felt like a really bad tv movie of the week , with some nudity stuffed in from time to time , just to wake up the audience .
have you ever switched channels and fallen upon one of those ridiculously melodramatic tv movies , one that you just could n't help but switch back to from time to time , just to make sure that it was n't part of some sick joke ?
well , this movie is exactly like that , only it is n't a joke , it is n't on tv
and you are asked to pay money to see it ! !
i say again . . .
what the shite were they thinking ?
okay , so where do i start ?
first of all , the trailer of this film gives away the movie 's main plot twist , the betrayal .
so for the first half hour of the film , you 're basically just sitting there , watching these two " lovers " go through the motions until the " betrayal " occurs .
whoopee , big surprise .
second of all , angelina jolie is horribly miscast in this part .
why ?
well , it 's like this : not for one second
do you ever believe that she is not a nasty backstabbing woman !
i mean , it 's like all of those people who complained about jack nicholson being psycho from the start of the shining , well , the same goes here .
every look in jolie 's eyes screams " psycho " !
then of course , you have the case of the " patsy " husband , a man who just ca n't seem to figure out anything in time .
i mean . . .
how boring is that for the audience ?
you 're watching this guy screw up time after time after time , and somehow , we 're supposed to feel sorry or care about this dude .
no , thanks !
and if we do n't care about him , and we really do n't care about her ( she 's a beeyatch and as confused as we are about her actual motivations in the film ) , who the hell are we supposed to care about in this film ?
well , i 'll tell you .
the only thing that i was worrying about the whole way through this picture was whether or not i 'd actually fall asleep before the end credits rolled .
no suspense , no chemistry between the leads , no real love or passion , no sense of surprise , plenty of plot holes for everyone and an extra moronic ending
.
so why am i even giving this film a rating of three points ?
well , it 's actually pretty simple .
i liked the locations in the movie and the groovy score , but my primary reason for slipping three notches onto this bedpost is for the gratuitous shots of jolie 's boobies ( that 's two points right there ! )
and another one for antonio 's ass ( hairless , just for the record ) .
everything else in this movie was pointless , boring and just plain stupid .
try imagining a soft - porn movie .
. .
but without the plot !
that 's pretty much what you 've got here .
a low point in the careers of both stars .
oops , i almost forgot to mention the crappy dialogue . .
.
god
oh mighty . .
. make it stop ! !
where 's joblo coming from ?
american psycho ( 9/10 ) - cruel intentions ( 8/10 ) - eyes wide shut ( 6/10 ) - fatal attraction ( 8/10 ) -
playing by heart ( 7/10 ) - under suspicion ( 7/10 ) - what lies beneath ( 8/10 ) - what women want ( 4/10 ) - whipped ( 7/10 )
[A]:
N