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

Answer: I am glad to see most other people here don't think much of this movie, either. It has some big names in the cast, but that's it. There is nothing else to recommend, save ogling a few pretty women which you can do in a thousand films.

The story involves nothing but unlikable, self-centered, chain-smoking, "hip" characters that national film critics all seem to like....and most of the public can't stand.

The Oklahoma accents are so fake they are laughable, the southern racist stereotypes are right from Liberal Hollywood 101 and the story is depressing.

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

Answer: It was obvious that this movie is designed to appeal to the Chick Flick audience, to which i have sat through quite a few and enjoyed most. However, this was a very irritating attempt by Heather Graham to become the next Meg Ryan ( who became annoying as hell in her own right ). Her acting was overdone and it appeared that she was overanxious compared to her colleagues who were relaxed in their roles. This film might have been more, as there was suitable budget for settings, actors and a decent story line. My wife and I both agreed that this was 'Muck' at the end, as the film ended on a painful embarrassing high! Better luck next time, hope Miss Graham sticks to the type of films that she belongs in like From Hell.

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

Answer: I was curious to know how critics responded to this rousing, inspiring film, so I went to Rotten Tomatoes and was dismayed to discover that the pompous peanut gallery that is our nation's film critics had given the film an average 43% (or "Rotten") rating.

All I can say is, if this movie doesn't move you, you have no heart. (It's interesting to note that the same film on the same website got a 74% rating from viewers).

Not that the opinion of critics is all THAT important to me. After all, I can't think of a more useless, overpaid profession. Some schmo gets paid to go to the movies (what a tough life) and does the same thing everyone else on the planet does: forms an opinion. But these chumps have a way of coming across like their opinion somehow matters more than yours, and even worse, they love to hate.

I'll grant you that this movie is old fashioned (well, except for the f-bombs), syrupy, and a little predictable... after all, you know right from the beginning that Cuba Gooding Jr., portraying real-life Navy hero Carl Brashear, is going to triumph (eventually) at every turn simply by the way he comes across: determined and plucky; strong-willed and optimistic.

But his performance and that of De Niro (as Billy Sunday, a composite character of several real-life people) are so strong, so inspiring, that you'll be on your feet cheering many of the film's scenes, especially the courtroom climax. You'd have to be a real stick in the mud not to be moved by these scenes. Like our nation's film critics. Michael Rappaport is excellent as well as a sweet-natured, stuttering diving student that befriends Gooding's Brashear. If anyone has seen "Higher Learning", this character totally redeems that character.

Anyway, this confirms what I've always felt: don't listen to critics. See this movie and get inspired.

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

Answer:
A family traveling for their daughter's softball league decide to take the 'scenic route' and end up in the middle of nowhere. The father is an avid photographer, and when he hears of an old abandoned side show in the town, he decides to take another detour to take some photographs.

Of course, the side show is filled with inbred freaks, who promptly kidnap the women and leave the young son and father to fend for themselves.

The only cool thing about this film is how the family actually fights back against their inbred captors. Other than that, there's nothing worthwhile about the film.