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

Example input: plot : two teen couples go to a church party , drink and then drive .
they get into an accident .
one of the guys dies , but his girlfriend continues to see him in her life , and has nightmares .
what 's the deal ?
watch the movie and " sorta " find out . . .
critique : a mind - fuck movie for the teen generation that touches on a very cool idea , but presents it in a very bad package .
which is what makes this review an even harder one to write , since i generally applaud films which attempt to break the mold , mess with your head and such ( lost highway & memento ) , but there are good and bad ways of making all types of films , and these folks just did n't snag this one correctly
.
they seem to have taken this pretty neat concept , but executed it terribly .
so what are the problems with the movie ?
well , its main problem is that it 's simply too jumbled
.
it starts off " normal " but then downshifts into this " fantasy " world in which you , as an audience member ,
have no idea what 's going on
.
there are dreams , there are characters coming back from the dead , there are others who look like the dead , there are strange apparitions , there are disappearances , there are a looooot of chase scenes , there are tons of weird things that happen , and most of it is simply not explained .
now i personally do n't mind trying to unravel a film every now and then , but when all it does is give me the same clue over and over again , i get kind of fed up after a while , which is this film 's biggest problem .
it 's obviously got this big secret to hide , but it seems to want to hide it completely until its final five minutes .
and do they make things entertaining , thrilling or even engaging , in the meantime ?
not really .
the sad part is that the arrow and i both dig on flicks like this , so we actually figured most of it out by the half - way point , so all of the strangeness after that did start to make a little bit of sense , but it still did n't the make the film all that more entertaining .
i guess the bottom line with movies like this is that you should always make sure that the audience is " into it " even before they are given the secret password to enter your world of understanding .
i mean , showing melissa sagemiller running away from visions for about 20 minutes throughout the movie is just plain lazy ! !
okay , we get it .
. .
there are people chasing her and we do n't know who they are .
do we really need to see it over and over again ?
how about giving us different scenes offering further insight into all of the strangeness going down in the movie ?
apparently , the studio took this film away from its director and chopped it up themselves , and it shows .
there might 've been a pretty decent teen mind - fuck movie in here somewhere , but i guess " the suits " decided that turning it into a music video with little edge , would make more sense .
the actors are pretty good for the most part , although wes bentley just seemed to be playing the exact same character that he did in american beauty , only in a new neighborhood .
but my biggest kudos go out to sagemiller , who holds her own throughout the entire film , and actually has you feeling her character 's unraveling .
overall , the film does n't stick
because it does n't entertain , it 's confusing , it rarely excites and
it feels pretty redundant for most of its runtime , despite a pretty cool ending and explanation to all of the craziness that came before it .
oh ,
and by the way , this is not a horror or teen slasher flick . . .
it 's just packaged to look that way because someone is apparently assuming that the genre is still hot with the kids .
it also wrapped production two years ago and has been sitting on the shelves ever since .
whatever . .
. skip it !
where 's joblo coming from ?
a nightmare of elm street 3 ( 7/10 ) - blair witch 2 ( 7/10 ) - the crow ( 9/10 ) - the crow : salvation ( 4/10 )
- lost highway ( 10/10 ) - memento ( 10/10 ) - the others ( 9/10 ) - stir of echoes ( 8/10 )
Example output: N
Example explanation: The phrases used in the review convey a negative sentiment (e.g. "presents it in a very bad package").
Q: ' contact ' shows why jodie foster is one of our best actresses .
see contact with your family .
it is a movie for all ages .
--a review by stuart cracraft contact starring : jodie foster , matthew mcconaughey , john hurt director : robert zemeckis star after a predictable mit phillip morrison powers - of-10 zoom - out start ( which can be surprising to those not familiar with prof .
morrison 's work ) , contact picks up steam , gradually , building , by - the - end , an irresistable juggernaut and a very good movie that does not as is so often the case fall out - of - balance in terms of too much pandering to the technological " geek " side .
by the end , the audience is left with what good science fiction is supposed to do : evoke a sense of wonder about the universe and evoke questions in your mind about what 's out there .
this movie does not let technology overshadow characterization and in this sense it is unusual amongst high - tech movies .
however , except for jodie foster ( elie arroway ) and john hurt ( s .
r .
hadden ) , who are both actors of exceptional caliber , the supporting cast are not especially impressive .
hurt certainly has had better roles ( stephen ward in scandal ) .
this one , as the multi - billionare hadden , does not do his acting skills justice .
this is clearly a foster movie by one of the great hollywood lights of our generation .
foster 's radiance has never been more strong
than in the scene where she finally meets the vegans on their terms .
early scenes take a long , long time to build up to this .
the movie 's pacing is very good and subtle .
the panoramas of the radio dishes at arecibo and ceti in new mexico and puerto rico are beautiful .
the politics of foster 's character attempting to obtain funding for research at these places are trite and predictable however .
one of the most entertaining , but very short scenes , is when foster is confronted by rob lowe , during a cabinet - level presidential meeting to discuss the alien invitation .
there were real sparks in this scene between foster and lowe
and it would behoove them to consider other vehicles in which this dynamism could be explored .
it is the only scene in the movie in which there were tremendous dynamics between two characters .
everything else was very one - sided ( e . g . foster ) .
lowe can stand up to foster and it showed in that scene at the cabinet table .
the core scene of the movie is set on a surrealistic beach on a far - away world in the starsystem of vega .
it feels a lot like science fiction writer john varley 's scenes in his book steel beach , where the female protagonists encounters an immensely superior intelligence , in one case a computer manufactured by mankind itself , and in foster 's case , an illusion drawn from her memory .
in another sense , this immensely moving scene evokes gene roddenberry 's star trek pilot the cage ,
later the menagerie , when jeffrey hunter and susan oliver have their memories manipulated to create new worlds in which they live and encounter aliens .
the concept is not new , by any sense , in the world of science fiction .
but the beach scene , which is the centerpiece of the film , as is the whole film , is driven by foster .
freed from her needs to direct by director zemecki , foster is able to let it all hang out in the characterization and the lead she provides to her supporting cast
.
as the movie gains speed , foster 's acting intensifies and the audience really does experience it with her .
it is certainly oscar - caliber acting , unquestionably .
the supporting cast does well and zemeckis throws in some humor with some president clinton cameos , cleverly manipulated , george stephanopolus - style , to seem very forrest gump .
in fact , zemeckis et .
al . got in trouble for the usage of some of the footage seen in the movie , vis a vis clinton .
but the audience i attended this movie with
just had some good chuckles at clinton 's walk - ons .
the much - discussed tension between science and religion in this movie is not particularly insightful to those who have already gone through this course though it is helpful to those in the audience who have not .
also , the near - final scene , in a senate judiciary hearing room is disappointing .
contact is a fitting memorial to the memory of carl sagan , science popularizer , and sometime pedantic gadfly of the halls of academe .
perhaps now , sagan can be said to be with his dragons of eden .
A:
P