Problem: OPTIONS:
- negative
- positive positive
=++++=
Answer: From the mind of Robert Bloch, of "Psycho" fame, come four tales of twisty terror in this Amicus anthology film, which, while not quite as much fun, or scary, as I would have liked, still provides for some decent genre entertainment.

It's linked by the wrap-around story of a highly skeptical Scotland Yard detective (John Bennett) who is investigating the disappearance of a prominent actor; he's advised that this case is linked to a few others by the house in which they all took place, and our film is off and running.

"Method for Murder" has author Charles Hillyer (always delightful Denholm Elliott) haunted by his latest fictional creation, who has seemingly come to life. This sequence has some good surreal and fairly suspenseful moments, and is capped by a reasonably amusing revelation and denouement.

"Waxworks" stars horror icon Peter Cushing as retired stockbroker Philip Grayson, who, along with old friend Neville Rogers (Joss Ackland) becomes obsessed with the image of a beautiful woman found in a macabre wax museum. Most effective in this episode is the dream sequence, although it's great as always to watch Cushing. The final images presented to us in this story are pretty shocking.

"Sweets to the Sweet" features another well-loved horror star, Christopher Lee, as John Reid, who doesn't treat adorable moppet child Jane (Chloe Franks) with too much kindness, and it's up to new companion / tutor Ann Norton (Nyree Dawn Porter) to find out why. The mystery of this particular episode is handled excellently; the film-makers wisely don't tip their hand so it comes as more of a genuine shock as we get the full truth of this unhappy family. The "dying" moments are particularly horrific.

"The Cloak" has the most outright comedy of the four; Jon Pertwee, one of many actors to have played the role of Dr. Who over the years, is a lot of fun as a vain, temperamental horror movie star (in fact, he's the highlight of this story) who, infuriated with the lack of quality in his latest low-budget film, goes out and buys his own cloak. Said cloak has strange powers, which I dare not reveal here. Sexy Ingrid Pitt is a welcome presence as Pertwees' companion; one wonderful example of the humor here is a knowing jab taken at none other than Christopher Lee!

The wrap-up story then concludes in a predictable but still effective way as Detective Inspector Holloway learns that he should have taken all of the warnings given him more seriously.

Underscored by Michael Dress's unusual, striking, and eerie score, "The House That Dripped Blood" is an entertaining mix of stories; while I don't enjoy it quite as much as, say, "Tales from the Crypt", it's still good fun. Capably directed by Peter Duffell, it moves slowly but surely towards each of its chilling conclusions, and is certainly a good film of its type.

7/10
An example of a movie review. positive (OPTIONS:
- negative
- positive).

A: Not having read Nabokov, and knowing nothing about chess, I could only view "The Luzhin Defence" as a movie.

It works really well as one of my favorite genres "sports romances." The chess comes alive as a tough competition much more than in, say "Searching for Bobby Fischer," in showing just how much hard mental work the game can be, requiring thought, preparation, stamina and planning. I particularly liked the special effects on the chess board as alternative plays are anticipated.

Through the feminist director Maureen Gorris (of "Antonia"), Emily Watson with her big blue eyes gradually strengthens via her transformative relationship with John Turturro's fairly one-note absent-minded intense chess genius.

The settings in Italy and Hungary are beautiful.

(originally written 5/27/2001)
Q: What's an example of a movie review?
An example of a movie review is here: I read John Everingham's story years ago in Reader's Digest, and I remember thinking what a great movie it would make. And it probably would have been had Michael Landon never got his hands on it. As far as I'm concerned, Landon was one of the worst actors on earth, and his artistic license went way over the top, similar to his massacre of the "Little House" book series is proof. The acting, for lack of a better word, is atrocious, the screenplay sloppy, and there are more close-ups of Landon's puss than should be allowed.

This movie reflects Everingham's story as much as "Little House On The Prairie" reflects the books is was "based" on. It's just another vehicle to show off Landons horrendous hair.
Problem: Write a negative (OPTIONS:
- negative
- positive) movie review.

Answer: I firstly and completely and confidently disagree with the user who calls this a "spoof". Crispin Glover is very serious about his film. He personally introduced the film at the screening I saw in Chicago. He had worked on the film for years and it is the first in an intended trilogy. "What is it?" is Crispin Glover's attempt at an art film in the vein of those he idolizes by Herzog, Lynch etc.

I had heard rumor of this film years ago "epic porno movie with all down-syndrome cast directed by crispin glover". When it finally came out i watched the trailer on-line and read the synopsis and i was foaming at the mouth with anticipation. ...I went to chicago to see it and it was a major disappointment. If he took out the goofy sh*t, such as the pot-smoking grandma, and the dancing dolls, he would be left with something much better, but only about 10 minutes long.

In other words just watch the trailer, be entertained, and leave it at that. There are some striking images and fantastic juxtapositions and phrases, but its lack of focus amounts to disappointment.
Problem: OPTIONS:
- negative
- positive positive
=++++=
Answer: Sequels hardly ever live up to the original. This definitely proves true in this case. However, if you're a big fan of the original than definitely give this a watch. Although the camera work is lacking, Brian Krause's character is annoying, and the plot is clique, it's much more funnier than the first and that is what I find entertaining about it.

Don't see this movie expecting the same performance as in the first film. Quite frankly it's a bit different. Rather than sitting in his cabin writing screenplays, Stanley is off in Hollywood trying to direct his dream project, Cabin by the Lake. This movie has a much different feel but it's still great to see Stanley back in action.

I'm giving it a 6 out of 10.
Problem: OPTIONS:
- negative
- positive negative
=++++=
Answer:
Shamefull as it may be, this movie actually made it to the videomarket, bringing shame on my proud country - any attempt to watch this movie without stopping or pausing, will be a fruitless attempt. one cannot bear to see more than one hour of this, then having either fallen asleep, or visited the bathroom for puking.

Note: if you haven't seen anything else from Denmark, please remember this:

some things were never meant to be - but still some idiot goes ahead and makes it anyway!