Detailed Instructions: In this task, you must classify if a given review is positive/negative, indicating your answer as P or N.
See one example below:
Problem: plot : two teen couples go to a church party , drink and then drive .
they get into an accident .
one of the guys dies , but his girlfriend continues to see him in her life , and has nightmares .
what 's the deal ?
watch the movie and " sorta " find out . . .
critique : a mind - fuck movie for the teen generation that touches on a very cool idea , but presents it in a very bad package .
which is what makes this review an even harder one to write , since i generally applaud films which attempt to break the mold , mess with your head and such ( lost highway & memento ) , but there are good and bad ways of making all types of films , and these folks just did n't snag this one correctly
.
they seem to have taken this pretty neat concept , but executed it terribly .
so what are the problems with the movie ?
well , its main problem is that it 's simply too jumbled
.
it starts off " normal " but then downshifts into this " fantasy " world in which you , as an audience member ,
have no idea what 's going on
.
there are dreams , there are characters coming back from the dead , there are others who look like the dead , there are strange apparitions , there are disappearances , there are a looooot of chase scenes , there are tons of weird things that happen , and most of it is simply not explained .
now i personally do n't mind trying to unravel a film every now and then , but when all it does is give me the same clue over and over again , i get kind of fed up after a while , which is this film 's biggest problem .
it 's obviously got this big secret to hide , but it seems to want to hide it completely until its final five minutes .
and do they make things entertaining , thrilling or even engaging , in the meantime ?
not really .
the sad part is that the arrow and i both dig on flicks like this , so we actually figured most of it out by the half - way point , so all of the strangeness after that did start to make a little bit of sense , but it still did n't the make the film all that more entertaining .
i guess the bottom line with movies like this is that you should always make sure that the audience is " into it " even before they are given the secret password to enter your world of understanding .
i mean , showing melissa sagemiller running away from visions for about 20 minutes throughout the movie is just plain lazy ! !
okay , we get it .
. .
there are people chasing her and we do n't know who they are .
do we really need to see it over and over again ?
how about giving us different scenes offering further insight into all of the strangeness going down in the movie ?
apparently , the studio took this film away from its director and chopped it up themselves , and it shows .
there might 've been a pretty decent teen mind - fuck movie in here somewhere , but i guess " the suits " decided that turning it into a music video with little edge , would make more sense .
the actors are pretty good for the most part , although wes bentley just seemed to be playing the exact same character that he did in american beauty , only in a new neighborhood .
but my biggest kudos go out to sagemiller , who holds her own throughout the entire film , and actually has you feeling her character 's unraveling .
overall , the film does n't stick
because it does n't entertain , it 's confusing , it rarely excites and
it feels pretty redundant for most of its runtime , despite a pretty cool ending and explanation to all of the craziness that came before it .
oh ,
and by the way , this is not a horror or teen slasher flick . . .
it 's just packaged to look that way because someone is apparently assuming that the genre is still hot with the kids .
it also wrapped production two years ago and has been sitting on the shelves ever since .
whatever . .
. skip it !
where 's joblo coming from ?
a nightmare of elm street 3 ( 7/10 ) - blair witch 2 ( 7/10 ) - the crow ( 9/10 ) - the crow : salvation ( 4/10 )
- lost highway ( 10/10 ) - memento ( 10/10 ) - the others ( 9/10 ) - stir of echoes ( 8/10 )
Solution: N
Explanation: The phrases used in the review convey a negative sentiment (e.g. "presents it in a very bad package").

Problem: in roger michell 's romantic comedy notting hill , william thacker ( hugh grant ) leads a rather dreary life maintaining his flagging travel bookshop in the quaint section of london which lends it 's name to the film 's title .
one day , american movie superstar anna scott ( julia roberts ) walks in to purchase a book on turkey .
quickly enamored of each other , the two embark upon an on - again , off - again love affair replete with romance , humor , and the occasional lump in the throat .
the film opens with a non - verbal cue to anna 's stardom as the title credits appear over a montage of slow motion sequences featuring the actress 's appearances in films and at premieres - coming out of limousines , walking the red carpets and such . without words , this sequence gives us a background to her character .
following , however , is a set - up narration by william indicating what he does and where he lives .
i do n't know why the filmmakers chose to go with a narration which tells us nothing we could n't have figured out by watching the first ten minutes of film , and which never resurfaces after the movie 's beginning , but there it is .
if there were ever a clear case for " less is more , " this would be it .
the film is told nearly first person from william 's point of view , as he is in every scene .
by nature of this arrangement , we get a very definite sense of what he is all about , and his nice guy personality wins us over easily .
in fact , much of notting hill 's strength lies in the great dialog written for this character by richard curtis .
a scene where william is still in shock over the fact that he 's even talking to a silver screen goddess is made golden by the way bumbles through his attempt to offer her some honey - soaked apricots from his refrigerator . or take an instance where anna kisses william and asks him never to tell anyone for fear of the incident hurting her image .
william assures her he would n't say a word , then
adds , " well , i 'll probably tell myself now and then , but i 'd never believe it .
" great stuff .
the downside to spending so much time with william is that we do n't get to see enough of anna to make their relationship whole and plausible .
we 're constantly exposed to william 's thoughts , feelings , actions and desires , but do n't actually get the sense of how much anna really feels for him .
there are a couple of instances where she declares her obvious interest , but they nearly come out of nowhere due to the fact that we 're not sure what she 's been thinking all the times in between .
this , combined with the sheer iniquity of screen time between the two , makes this hugh grant 's film hands down .
he gets the great scenes ( look for one in which he has to portray an interviewer from horse and hound magazine in order to speak with anna ) , the great lines , and gives an overall wonderful performance .
julia roberts fans will probably be disappointed by the actress 's top billing and subsequent lack of involvement in the film ( ala sandra bullock in a time to kill ) along with her detached performance which is only worsened by her character 's unpredictable behavior .
anna does n't get a lot of our compassion .
this romantic comedy leans a little more toward the comedy than the romance , much of it supplied by grant himself , but with considerable help from the supporting cast .
most notable is rhys ifans as spike , william 's eccentric roommate , who is in the film for no other purpose than to make us laugh .
hugh bonneville , emma chambers , james dreyfus , and gina mckee bring up the guard as william 's friends and family , particularly shining in a scene where william brings anna to his sister 's birthday dinner , and we get to see how these common folks react to the presence of a movie star in their midst .
it 's a scene most of us will probably think would play out in our own living rooms were we faced with a similar situation .
roger michell 's use of visuals does n't sweep us off our feet , but does give us more than your typical movie of this type .
for example , there are a couple of instances in this film where large amounts of time pass .
whereas some films are content to simply put in a caption saying " eight months later , " michell presents us with more interesting cues , such as william 's walk though his neighborhood while the seasons change around him .
another memorable shot occurs in a park where the camera is lifted from ground level to a couple of hundred feet in the air .
we 're generally used to scenes where our point of view is lifted from the earth to treetop level or so , but in this case , the camera just keeps going up and up until we have a bird 's eye view of the ground below .
music is used rather glaringly as an enhancement to many of the film 's scenes , and some of this might have been better toned down , but in other areas it works to full effect .
it 's kind of a mixed bag , but still fares better than many of today 's lighthearted movies which are so influenced by the mtv fare that the film becomes one long music video .
at least this film has some pretty good music that for the most part remains relevant and appropriate .
notting hill 's grant and roberts will not go down in history as one of the all - time greatest film pairings , but the chemistry is decent and the comedic aspects of the movie more than make up for it .
for a couple of hours , you should expect to laugh more than cry , and that 's not so bad , now is it ?
Solution:
P