In this task, you must classify if a given review is positive/negative, indicating your answer as P or N.
One example: 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 )
Solution is here: N
Explanation: The phrases used in the review convey a negative sentiment (e.g. "presents it in a very bad package").

Now, solve this: at one point during brian de palma 's crime epic scarface , the radiant michelle pfeiffer turns to a ranting al pacino and pops a question that the audience has no doubt been wanting to ask for themselves :
" ca n't you stop saying ' fuck ' all the time ?
" fucking good question , that .
it may not be an honour that instills the filmmakers with pride , but as far as i can tell oliver stone 's script contains the said expletitive more times than any other film in cinema history .
yet it would be a shame if bad language is all de palma 's scarface is remembered for , because this is a damn fine gangstar flick .
the overall structure is similar to howard hawks ' 1932 original , but this time the scene has switched to miami , florida and our anti - hero 's chosen vice is cocaine traffiking .
pacino , sporting a thick cuban accent , gives one the best performances of his career ( golden globe nominated ) as tony montana , a cuban refugee with a criminal past who flees castro and comes to america to live the american dream .
and live it out he does , with lashings of violence , abuse , murder and the funny white powder .
from his earliest jobs as a drug runner for various middlemen , tony montana makes it clear to everyone he meets that he 's not a man to be fucked ( sorry ) .
soon he 's the king of the cocaine heap , but his hot head and an increasingly out of control drug addiction prove his undoing .
" never do your own stash " , warns one character early in the film .
as sure as night follows day , the emperor of miami eventually falls .
writer oliver stone and director brian de palma
make an explosive combination here .
stone 's script offers solid storytelling and some fine character development .
montana is fascinating ; uneducated but calculating , a straight shooter who speaks from the heart ; an ambitious , violent man yet one with a conscience .
a man fiercely protective of his beautiful 20 year old sister , not wanting her to be sucked into the glitzy , dangerous world which he inhabits .
pacino is dynamite , taking to the role with a brooding , bristling energy which in his more recent films has often degenerated into just simple overracting .
pfeiffer also registers strongly as the gangstar mole with no inner life .
only once does tony express real affection for her and his desire to have children , and even then you sense all he really wants is a regular screw and a beautiful object to show off to his friends , and she 's happy to oblige .
this is n't as meaty a role for pfieffer as sharon stone 's was in casino , but its an effective one nonetheless
and she aquits herself well .
as director , de palma sets up a number of dramatic scenes with his typical stylistic brauva .
the escalating tension he creates in various mob situations - a drug deal gone wrong , an assination attempt - is often thrilling , and in this respect he is every bit the equal of scorese and coppola .
where he differs from , say , coppola 's godfather trilogy is in his overall treatment .
coppola gives his crime sagas an operatic sweep , whereas in scarface de palma opts for a grittier feel .
and it perfectly suits the material .
the only major botch is giorgio moroder 's mostly crap synthesier score .
it 's just not right , and unfortunately compromises the impact of some otherwise good scenes .
as expected , scarface is very violent at times , but you should n't be watching gangster movies if that upsets you .
at over two and a half hours in length it 's a true epic ,
and if you 're a fan of the genre you 'll love f
* * k - filled minute of it .
Solution:
P