Q: What's an example of a movie review?
An example of a movie review is here: This was the most visually stunning, moving, amazing and incredible story I've ever experienced. Quite frankly, even those adjectives just cannot describe it. I can't just choose one scene that stood out for me. I suppose if I had to list a few it would be the reactions of the fireman to the crashing sound of jumping victims; the reaction of people trapped in the elevator, who were unaware of what was going on, as they finally emerge to the horrific scene; the shock and disbelief of the onlookers; and finally the silence.

On that day, and even now, I am reminded of Star Wars (1977). Obi-Wan says, 'I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced.' It is amazing how it is so accurate in its description. There was truly a disturbance in the Force.

This documentary vividly reveals this disturbance. The feelings are so incredibly visual. The anger, the frustration, the shock, the fear, the exhaustion, and the realization of its very magnitude. It's all there. Not a thing is missed.

This is a powerful and most moving documentary and well deserving of the Emmy. Not just because it documents 9/11 but because it is simply everything it should be.

If you plan to watch, be sure to grab a box of tissues. You'll need them. I know that I did.
Problem: Write a negative (OPTIONS:
- negative
- positive) movie review.

Answer: At the name of Pinter, every knee shall bow - especially after his Nobel Literature Prize acceptance speech which did little more than regurgitate canned, by-the-numbers, sixth-form anti-Americanism. But this is even worse; not only is it a tour-de-force of talentlessness, a superb example of how to get away with coasting on your decades-old reputation, but it also represents the butchery of a superb piece. The original Sleuth was a masterpiece of its kind. Yes, it was a theatrical confection, and it is easy to see how it's central plot device would work better on the stage than the screen, but it still worked terrifically well. This is a Michael Caine vanity piece, but let's face it, Caine is no Olivier. Not only can he not fill Larry's shoes, he couldn't even fill his bathroom slippers. The appropriately-named Caine is, after all, a distinctly average actor, whose only real recommendation, like so many British actors, is their longevity in the business. He was a good Harry Palmer, excellent in Get Carter, but that's yer lot, mate! Give this a very wide berth and stick to the superb original. This is more of a half-pinter.
Problem: OPTIONS:
- negative
- positive positive
=++++=
Answer: terribly underrated with matt dillon and tom skerritt, good backdrop for solid story and some memorable lines, well acted and well cast, tommy lee jones and bruce dern make you hate them with passion
An example of a movie review. positive (OPTIONS:
- negative
- positive).

A: If I remember, Ira Gershwin, the lyricist and brother of George, offered the Gershwin catalog for this film and it was snapped up by the producers. In many respects, it was a typical 50's movie musical by the Freed Unit at MGM and directed by Vincente Minelli with a lot of help from Gene Kelly.

The Gershwins were, of course, among the greatest of all Broadway musical teams but, in my opinion, George himself was among the greatest of all American composers, period!!! Gene Kelly was, of course, one of the two greatest male dancers of the movie musical (One guess as to the other?) and I don't imagine his casting was ever in doubt. But, I think the rest of the cast needs some explanation: Oscar Levant was a noted personality in his time and, as an actual friend of George Gershwin, he had to be in this film. He was a talented pianist and even a moderately talented composer as well as a noted neurotic and hypochondriac and here, as always, he plays himself.

Leslie Caron was an unknown at this time and she was of the French "gamin" type. A talented dancer, she was never a real beauty. George Guetary who plays the part of Maurice Chavalier, oops, I mean Henri Baurel, was Greek and not French but he certainly is more than OK as a French boulevardier even if a little too young for the part.

Gene's hoofer's voice is serviceable here but Guetary has much the better vocal equipment. Though Gene was better cast elsewhere as, obviously, in "Singin' in the Rain" where his character is much more calculating, even here he shows himself to be something of a heel at times (He was, not for nothing, cast as the original heel Joey in Pal Joey, the Broadway musical.) I was not so enchanted with his "I Got Rhythm" scene with the children which does not appear as spontaneous as was intended in my opinion.

I also found Nina Foch's character Milo to be rather irritating.

But the highlight of the film is obviously the lengthy ballet at the end of the film based on the title music with sets and costumes in the styles of the great French Impressionist painters.

I found it difficult to believe Gene and Oscar, as struggling artists, and I don't think the musical numbers are as well set up as they might be but, on balance, the Gershwin music is very well served in this film.

The DVD is well-done with fine clear graphics (when they are supposed to be) and the mono sound is good but a trifle shallow.
Q: What's an example of a movie review?
An example of a movie review is here:
I won't claim to be a fan of Ralph Bakshi, because i am not. I have only watched 5 of his animated films so far: Coonskin, Wizards, Fritz the Cat and Lord of the Rings and finally "Fire and Ice". What i CAN claim, is that i found "Fire and Ice" to be the most enjoyable of the lot. It is a straightforward fantasy tale of swords and sorcery along the lines of Conan the Barbarian, but the beautiful artwork, realistic animation and lively film score effectively lends a very classic charm to this movie.

Deserving first mention, is the animation itself. I do not care what people say about rotoscoping but in my opinion Ralph Bakshi used that technique very effectively here. I was amazed at how realistic the movements of the characters were. The style of directing and the photo-realistic character designs made "Fire and Ice" feel more like a big budget fantasy blockbuster than a cartoon. Sadly the level of art detail tends to get a little inconsistent, especially near the end of the movie. Some scenes just look really flat with little to no body contour details or fabric folds and shadows on the characters.

With realistic moving characters, realistic action would naturally follow. Not only was the action well choreographed, but it was really brutal. I would be so bold as to compare the brutality of the action to live action movies like Zack Snyder's 300. I did notice however that though there was blood shed, the blood splatters were kept to a minimum. Again, a great choice by the creative team that only heightens the viewing experience by not taking things too "over the top".

Though i do not recognize any "big names" in the cast, the voice actors manage to deliver a satisfying performance; keeping the delivery of every line realistically subdued and only hamming it up in the case of the bad guys.

Did i say bad guys?? yes i did. Because that is exactly what the story is about, a standard good vs evil tale. Nothing really original about the story which seems to merely be a mix of pre-existing fantasy film cliches that involve scantly clad warriors and maidens. Anyone looking for "depth" would be sorely disappointed. THe characters are not given much development and some of them like Nekron and Darkwolf are one dimensional at best(I did however hear rumor of some deleted scenes that explains Darkwolf's obsession with killing Nekron and his mother. Scenes like that deserved full restoration and should have been included in the final cut to add a level of depth to the show). In fact, i would not be surprised to find out that the whole movie was just a "tech demo" of sorts to showcase the awesome animation and art, with the story cobbled together and thrown in as an afterthought in order to pass it off as a proper "movie".

A true classic of a bygone era, "Fire and Ice" really captures the blazing spirit of adventure and mysticism with its beautiful renderings of fantastic creatures and charming characters. It is a unique vision of a world created by Ralph Bakshi and artist Frank Frazetta with a good measure of action and suspense.

Would it hold up to animated film standards of today? Definitely not. But i urge animation fans in general to "get off your high horse" and give this simple but beautiful film a chance to grow on you. It is Truly a gem of the 80s worth checking out.