input question: Select the correct sentiment of the following review: After all, you do not go to an Orson Welles movie to see a nice simple little plot and a burnishing of the image of a happy-ever-after star

You go to see theatrically heightened characters locked in conflict against colorful and unusual settings, lighted and scored imaginatively, photographed bravely, and the whole thing peppered with unexpected details of surprise that a wiser and duller director would either avoid or not think of in the first place

As usual, as well as directing, Welles wrote the script and he also played the hero a young Irish seaman who had knocked about the world and seen its evil, but still retained his clear-eyed trust in the goodness of others Unfortunately for him, he reposed this trust in Rita Hayworth, whose cool good looks concealed a gloomy past and murderous inclinations for the future She was married without love, to an impotent, crippled advocate, acted like a malevolent lizard by the brilliant Everett Sloane

There is a youthful romanticism underlying it all, and this quality came into exuberant play in "The Lady from Shanghai." Before the inevitable happened, Welles escaped to a final triangular showdown in a hall of mirrors, which has become one of the classic scenes of the post-war cinema

Welles did not miss a chance throughout the whole film to counterpoint the words and actions with visual detail which enriched the texture and heightened the atmosphere His camera seemed almost to caress Rita Hayworth as the sun played with her hair and her long limbs while she playfully teased the young seaman into her web
OPTIONS:
- negative
- positive
....
output answer: positive

input question: Select the correct sentiment of the following review: In keeping with Disney's well-known practice of stealing.. I mean.. buying out known properties and bastardizing them, this live-action version of the venerable cartoon classic has got to be one of the worst re-makes in a year of bad re-makes. I grew up on the original cartoon TV series. Any episode of the original cartoon series will give you more laughs than this entire movie. Not present is Penny's cool computer book. Also not present is the gag with the self-destructing orders that always ends up detonating on the Chief. New are a smooth talking Gadget convertible (the original cartoon had a cooler vehicle that could turn into a van or a car) and an element of a typical, unrealistic Hollywood romance. Don't fill the coffers to pay for Disney executives and even their _ex_executives - don't see this movie.

OPTIONS:
- negative
- positive
....
output answer: negative

input question: Select the correct sentiment of the following review: When this movie was first shown on television I had high hopes that we would finally have a decent movie about World War I as experienced by American soldiers. Unfortunately this is not it.

It should have been a good movie about WWI. Even though it was made for television it is obvious that a real effort was made to use appropriate equipment and props. But the writing and directing are badly lacking, even though the makers of this movie obviously borrowed freely from quite a few well made war movies. War movie cliches abound such as the arrogant general who apparently does not care a flip about the lives of his men. When will Hollywood realize that, even though there have been plenty of bad generals, most combat unit generals have seen plenty of combat themselves and are not naive about what the average grunt experiences? The first part of this movie appeared to be "Paths of Glory" with American uniforms. Except that "Paths of Glory" was emotionally gripping. Later on there was Chamberlain's charge (except uphill) from "Gettysburg" and even the capture of the American soldier by a ring of enemy soldiers from "The Thin Red Line". But in "The Thin Red Line" the soldier was alone when captured. In this movie a ring forms around the new prisoner in the middle of a battle.

If this movie used a military adviser they ignored him. Even though the actors (and I never could forget they were actors while watching) mouthed military tactics I didn't see very much of it. The American soldiers would stand up to be shot while the Germans attacked. And the infamous Storm Troopers, who were apparently blind, appeared to use no tactics whatsoever in their attack. In the real war, the tactics were what made storm troopers so effective. But the silliest scene was the attack of the German Flamethrowers. In this scene the German flamethrower operators walked in a broad line towards the defending Americans. If that had been real they would never have gotten close enough to use their flamethrowers before they had all been dropped by the defender's bullets.

Okay, so most war movies are unrealistic when it comes to the tactics shown. But it is still disappointing. But what really turned me off to this flick was the typical anti-war anti-military angle that movie makers seem to think is important. True, war is hell. But most American soldiers, even though they grumble and gripe, tend to believe in what they are doing and can be rather gung-ho about it. My Grandfather served in World War I. And even though he died four years before I was born I have been told how proud he was of his service.
OPTIONS:
- negative
- positive
....
output answer:
negative