instruction:
In this task, you must classify if a given review is positive/negative, indicating your answer as P or N.
question:
when the film features richard lynch in the role of chief villain , you know that you can expect nothing more than a b grade action movie .
however , since this film also featured michael madsen , more than capable character actor , this time in the role of protagonist , the author of this review decided to give the film some benefit of the doubt .
however , the very first scenes show
clear b grade action credentials
- madsen plays richard montana , tough policeman who raids a drug warehouse and make life miserable for local crime lord mario gio ( played by lynch ) .
however , the raid was only partially successful , and montana is getting the rap .
so , he begins his own private war against gio , trying to penetrate his organisation pretending to be corrupt .
in the process , he meets gio 's mistress gina zamora ( played by rosie vela ) and starts relationship with her too .
although it does n't stink like many of the similar films can , inside edge is mostly forgettable b grade action routine .
nobody in this film actually puts much effort , including madsen or lynch , and this is especially case with uninspired screenwriter william tannen or director warren clarke .
the only not so forgettable element in this film is presence of former supermodel rosie vela , who , apart from showing her more than impressive looks , shows some of the singing talent too .
however , this is n't reason enough for viewers to spend hour and half watching a film that they would , in most likelihood , forget the next day .
answer:
N

question:
paul verhoeven , the dutch auteur who dragged his violent , sexually aggressive aesthetic into american film , has never been what i 'd consider a thoughtful director ( though some of his films , notably starship troopers , have been lauded as artistic achievements ) , but he is the kind of hollywood film maker who 's managed to , no matter what the budget , make his films distinctive and even sometimes smuggle stimulating themes into the lavish high concepts on which he toils .
starship troopers was essentially a b - monster movie remake of his enthralling dutch war film soldier of orange ( a great film that 's nearly impossible to find on video , yet showgirls is everywhere ) , in which he cast a troop of stunningly attractive mannequins ; the square jawed casper van dien and denise richards ( who may actually be 45 % silicone ) , in what feels like an american propaganda picture set to monotonous scenes of graphic carnage .
it 's not a completely successful film , but
as a failure
it 's certainly an interesting ( and mostly entertaining ) one .
my favorite verhoeven films were the ones he made before he hit our shores ; spetters , a dark near pornographic coming of age film set within the sub - culture of drag racing and the aforementioned soldier of orange ( have n't yet gotten around to seeing the 4th man or turkish delight ) .
i believe his best hollywood film to be robocop , a bleak super - hero satire with a robotic hero that 's as touching as schwarzenegger 's in t2 .
that movie was violent but not in the overdone cartoonish manner of more recent verhoeven pics .
its violence seemed to be there for a purpose , namely to create an atmosphere of unpredictable dread , not to simply titillate an attention deprived audience .
there 's a jaw - dropping scene within the first ten minutes of robocop wherein the lead villain toys with a cop before snuffing him .
he tortures the officer by taking glee in his victim 's every fearful tic .
it 's a startling moment of barbaric , maddening violence that effectively sets the tone for the film that could be designated as splatter punk - noir .
in hollow man kevin bacon brutally slays a dog because it just wo n't shut up , he impales a co - worker , drowns another and so on .
but why ?
his character is introduced as a smug genius , the kind who 's always impeccably dressed and races a sports car while generic rock tunes blare from his stereo for the world to hear , sort of like a scheming uber villain from dallas or melrose place , though once the character becomes invisible , this film has him pull a 180 shift into a psychotic movie monster .
the kind who just wo n't die .
hollow man 's protagonists are the completely bland but beautiful scientist linda ( elizabeth shue , acting as if she were rebecca of sunnybrook farm ) and her lover , a hunk of beef scientist played by josh brolin who 's saddled with the film 's worst lines
( " i 've lost cohesion again ! " ) .
they 're a typical aaron spelling couple , good - looking but as vacant as george
w .
bush 's republican national convention speech ( i .
e .
bush referring to clinton ; " ? ?
?
so much promise ? ? ?
but to what end ?
to what end ?
"
-- this actually got applause !
suddenly warren beatty does n't look so absurd ) .
the rest of the film 's characters are all well past thirty , though act like annoying high school party animals insulting one and other with a series of strained one - liners
; is it just me or have
labored insults become big budget hollywood 's new character developing technique ?
ahh , what a cynical time we live in ? ? ?
as the picture opens we meet cain ( kevin bacon ) , an egocentric scientist working with the crew of aforementioned irritating scientists on a top secret ( so top secret the government has only provided them with a dilapidated warehouse in which to perform their extensive experimentation 's ) project with the goal to make invisibility a possibility ( for what purpose is never hinted at ) .
they 've performed several experiments on animals and have nearly solved the quandary causing caine , in a twist worthy of the film 's 1950 's late show origins , to impulsively experiment on himself .
caine neglects to let the pentagon in on his plans and somehow gets two of his co - workers to lie for him
so the rest of the crew will think the pentagon gave the go ahead .
our mad scientist is turned invisible ( after several fx - heavy complications ) , then he inexplicably
( it 's hinted that the process of invisibility has made the animals into more savage creatures , but this is never explored , and if that was the case why the hell would anyone be stupid enough to test this out on a human ? ) begins raping , assaulting and murdering anyone he pleases , always with a lame wisecrack ready a la freddy krueger .
it grows abundantly clear with each new release that it 's verhoeven 's films that have become hollow .
like the rest , this one is cold , heartless , and full of contempt for humanity , but in addition to all that it lacks any trace of wit , insight and makes no statement other than " audiences will pay for anything these days " .
it 's an affront to anyone looking for something stimulating on an intellectual level , or even those hoping to spend a saturday night with a fun , thrill - a - minute ride .
verhoeven has instead served up an utterly routine mad slasher flick with nobody to root for and no reason to care .
the previews make hollow man look like an irresistible flick .
how can one not have a good time at a film that utilizes state of the art fx to illustrate an invisible man getting down and dirty with his bad self ?
a couple weeks ago , after seeing the trailer , a bunch of friends and i got into a long discussion of how invisible man flicks never go so far as to have the invisible individual indulging in their newfound ability .
hollow man looked like the first film to do so and whoa , in a serious manner to boot .
but oh yeah , it is directed by paul verhoven not atom egoyan or peter greenway .
verhoeven delivers the sleazy " goods " , but not in a watchable or thrillingly disturbing manner , here
it just feels icky and uncomfortable .
the director keeps his camera trained at his nubile actresses , caressing their breasts with his lens all while faux - psycho music strains in the background .
it 's plainly obvious that verhoeven is n't exploring voyeurism ( like in the classic peeping tom ) but exploiting it and not even doing that very well .
it 's funny that with all the technology $ 90 million can get you verhoven is stuck at trying to figure out how to show a woman 's naked breast manipulated by an invisible hand .
most vexing is that the invisibility aspect is used simply as gimmick in yet another slasher movie wherein characters do stupid things just so the villain can pop up for more attacks .
in fact it 's largely irrelevant that bacon is invisible since , by the end , most of his potential victims don infer - red glasses that track his body heat .
as in every mad slasher film we get the killers pov ( a scene where he spies on his neighbor while she undresses triggered unpleasant memories of slumber party massacre ) , and lots of scenes where people are unknowingly stalked .
the film only provides one moment that i found genuinely creepy .
it happens when a lab assistant ( kim dickens , who looks like she stepped out of playboy ) in the middle of a chit chat with an invisible bacon , suddenly pauses .
"
are you looking at me ? " , she queries , obviously haunted .
it 's a little moment in a big film with nothing to offer but
ground breaking special effects set to a plot that should have run its course by 1982 ( the apex of the mad slasher craze ) .
those special effects are so stunning they alone keep this from being as bad as urban legend or i still know what you did last summer .
and they 're the only reason to check out hollow man , preferably as a mid - week bargain rental .
you 've been warned .
but you probably wo n't listen , will you ?
tis ' a pity ? ? ?
answer:
N

question:
and i thought " stigmata " would be the worst religiously - oriented thriller released this year .
turns out i was wrong , because while " stigmata " was merely boring and self - important , " end of days " is completely inept on all fronts .
it 's a silly , incomprehensible , endlessly stupid mess .
for a guy like me who grew up watching arnold schwarzenegger at his best , it 's extremely disconcerting to see where the big man has ended up .
for the first time in recent memory , an arnold action movie ( and " batman & robin " does n't count ) is no fun at all .
" end of days " is a major stinker .
the movie opens in vatican city , 1979 .
some catholic priests have observed an ancient prophecy , which says that a girl will be born on that night that satan will have targeted for impregnation .
if he impregnates her between 11 and midnight on december 31 , 1999 , the world will be destroyed .
the pope orders protection of this girl , though some priests believe she ought to be killed .
in new york , that very night , a girl is born to fulfill the prophecy .
twenty years later , we meet jericho cane ( schwarzenegger ) , a suicidal ex - cop with a drinking problem .
now working as a security guard for hire , he is protecting a local businessman ( gabriel byrne ) , who is actually possessed by the devil .
an assassination attempt on the businessman by a crazed former priest leads him to the girl satan is after , christine york ( robin tunney ) .
recognizing elements of his own murdered daughter in christine ( including ownership of the same music box , apparently ) , jericho swears to protect her against the devil and the faction of priests looking to kill her .
there are so many problems with this film
it 's hard to know where to begin , but how about starting with the concept ?
casting arnold in a role like this was a mistake to begin with .
schwarzenegger is a persona , not an actor , so putting him in a role that contradicts his usual strong personality is a bad idea .
arnold has neither the dramatic range nor the speaking ability to pull off a character tormented by conflicting emotions .
in other words , trying to give him dimension was a mistake .
harrison ford , mel gibson , or even bruce willis could have played this role ( they 've all played noble and flawed heroes ) , but not schwarzenegger .
there are several scenes that attempt to establish jericho 's character ; one has him contemplating suicide , another crying over the loss of his wife and daughter , and even one in which the devil tries to tempt him into revealing christine 's location by offering him his old life back .
none of these scenes really work , because arnie is n't up to the task .
the filmmakers would have been better off making jericho a strong , confident character ( like the terminator , for example ) , the likes of which schwarzenegger has excelled in before .
this one is n't at all believable the way arnold plays him .
the supporting cast tries their hardest , and only gabriel byrne makes any impact at all .
as the prince of darkness , he 's suave and confident .
he acts like one would expect the devil to act .
the problem is that the script has him doing things that make no sense ( more on that later ) and that undermines him as a powerful villain .
byrne out - performs arnold in every scene they have together ( including the aforementioned temptation bit ) , but this is problematic when it causes the audience to start doing the unthinkable : root for the devil .
byrne 's speech about the bible being " overrated
" actually starts to make sense , mainly because arnold 's attempts at refuting it ( mostly of the " ' tis not !
" variety ) are feeble at best .
the only problem is , arnold has to win , so in the end , nobody really cares .
kevin pollack
plays jericho 's security guard sidekick and tries to liven things up with some comic asides , but
like most bad action movie sidekicks , he disappears after about an hour .
robin tunney is n't given much to do except look scared .
in fact , all of the supporting players are good actors , but none , save for byrne , is given anything interesting to do .
performances aside , it would be really hard to enjoy this film
no matter who starred in it .
this being an action blockbuster
, it 's no surprise that the worst thing about it is the script , which starts off totally confusing , and when some of it is explained ( and not much of it is ) ,
it 's utterly ridiculous .
why is the devil coming on new year 's eve , 1999 ?
because it 's exactly 1000 years after the year of the devil , which is n't 666 , it turns out .
some nutty priest accidentally read it upside down , so the real year is 999 , so just add a 1 to the beginning , and you 've got 1999 ! if you do n't buy this explanation , you 're not alone .
it 's convoluted and silly at the same time .
the method by which jericho locates christine york is equally ludicrous
( she 's christine , see , and she lives in new york , see . . . )
, and if that were n't bad enough , there 's plenty of bothersome stuff in this film that is n't explained at all .
why can satan kill everyone he passes on the street , but when it comes to snuffing out one drunk ex - cop , he 's powerless ?
is he impervious to only one kind of bullet ?
how come
he ca n't control jericho or christine ?
and how did those gregorian monks deal with time zones in their prophecies ?
a clumsy attempt at a joke is made about this , but it 's never actually explained .
usually , this sort of thing would n't matter in a schwarzenegger flick ( i mean , do n't get me started on the time paradoxes offered up by the terminator movies ) , but this time the plot inconsistencies stand out even more than usual because the action is rarely exciting .
there are several predictable horror film clich ?
s present in " end of days , " complete with the old " black cat hiding in a cabinet " bit ,
not that we ever find out what the cat was doing in there .
it gets so formulaic
that it 's possible for those uninterested in being scared to close their eyes at the precise moment a " boo " will come .
their predictions will rarely be wrong .
the more grandiose action sequences are utterly charmless , partially because we do n't care about these characters ( due to the script 's pathetic attempts at characterization and setup ) , and also because they , too , do n't make any sense
.
there 's a scene where schwarzenegger gets thrown around a room by a little old lady .
it 's good for a few chuckles , but not much else .
supposedly we 're to believe she now has super strength by virtue of being controlled by satan , but the script never sets that up , so the scene is merely silly .
none of this is terribly exciting , because all the action sequences are so badly framed that it 's often hard to tell why it 's happening in the first place , not to mention that they 're edited in full - on incomprehensible mtv quick - cut style .
most of them had me scratching my head , rather than saying , " wow , cool ! "
" end of days " is not only silly and confusing , but it 's also distinctly unpleasant to watch .
the devil apparently does n't operate in the more subtle , i'll - convince - people - to - kill - each - other fashion outlined in the bible , but instead enjoys killing people gruesomely in broad daylight .
this does n't only make him an awfully predictable sort , but it also means that not a single scene in " end of days " goes by without unnecessarily graphic violence , or the odd kinky sexual encounter ( yet another bit that had me scratching my head ) .
if violence is supposed to be shocking , it 's not a good idea to throw so much of it into a movie that the audience goes numb .
scenes are n't connected through any reasonable means , so a lot of the time , stuff gets blown up , or people get killed , and i had no idea why .
reasons ?
to hell with reasons !
let 's just blow stuff up !
is n't it cool ?
nope , not by a long shot .
this film is thoroughly unwatchable .
it 's dull , interminable , and unrelenting in its stupidity .
perhaps arnold needs to make some movies with james cameron to revive his career , because it 's not happening with hack peter hyams here .
" end of days " might have had camp value , if only it did n't top itself off with an overly pious ending that nobody 's going to buy .
if the movie is going to be serious , the filmmakers should have come up with a decent script .
if it 's going to be campy , arnold should n't be taking himself so damn seriously
( i did n't actually see him put up on a cross , did i ? ) , and his character should n't be such a sad sack .
as it stands , " end of days " is just a bad movie , and an awfully gloomy one at that .
answer:
N