Detailed Instructions: In this task, you must classify if a given review is positive/negative, indicating your answer as P or N.
Problem:look !
the new version of " psycho " came out and the world did n't end !
i guess gus van sant really is n't the bringer of the apocalypse !
unfortunately , though , that " psycho " did n't end the world as we know is the best thing that can be said for it .
van sant 's controversial " re - telling " of alfred hitchcock 's classic 1960 film has polarized filmgoers everywhere ( even before it premiered . ) without benefit of an actual viewing , many have said that the film will , at best , suck .
being an ( almost ) good critic , i waited until i actually saw it to decide that the film , at best , sucked ( and that concludes the use of the word " suck " and , hopefully , the thoughts that i am a brain - dead orangutan . )
director gus van sant took the original hitchcock film and refilmed it , shot - for - shot , using the same , exact script ( with a few minor alterations . )
the inherent challenge was in making the film suspenseful and scary , even though a large group of the audience will know exactly what will happen at the exact time .
suspense probably could have been attained if the actors had been able to create something new or different than the original .
sadly , that did not occur .
it is hard to be overshadowed by vera miles and john gavin ( from the original " psycho ) , but that is what exactly happened to julianne moore and viggo mortensen .
in moore 's case , the film would have been helped if " the x- files " gillian anderson had been cast instead ; especially since moore goes through the entire film doing a scully impression !
from the cold demeanor and expressions to her rigid way of forming a sentence , moore is scully !
mortensen ( who i liked in " g .
i .
jane " )
opts to play sam loomis as a cowboy / hick , which would have been nice if he had gone past that starting point .
sam has a twang and a cowboy hat , but that 's about it .
mortensen turns in one of the most uptight performance in recent memory .
anne heche , in the janet leigh role , does a few good things in her brief time on screen .
at least her marion crane has a little life in her , which ca n't be said for most of the rest of the cast .
the best work , though , comes from vince vaughn , as the demented mama 's boy , norman bates .
he 's not going to make anyone forget anthony perkins , but he is effective both in being naughty and nice .
the best part of the film is the dinner scene heche and vaughn , where they simply talk .
there is some solid acting there , something that is not carried through the rest of the film .
van sant has made a boring film .
all the camera tricks that hitchcock so eloquently used in 1960 are n't as eye - catching now .
what passed for brilliance then has been copied so many times by so many directors that they do n't impress or excite .
van sant , in what i assume is a grasp at originality , decided to put some stream - of - consciousness images into a few famous scenes ( was that a lamb in the middle of the road ? )
these images , included with some questionable editing choices , took away from the scenes themselves and caused , at first , bewilderment and , later , laughter .
definitely not hitchcock 's intention !
at least danny elfman had the good sense to not mess with bernard herrmann 's original famous and terrific score .
if a film like " psycho " does not frighten , then what 's the point . aside from norman ,
the characters are thinly drawn people who leave no connection with the audience .
there are things van sant and company could have done to at least make their recreation interesting .
in the end , however , the new " psycho " is a noble attempt , but , alas , a dismal failure .
Solution:
N