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: the obvious reason for producing a sequel to an immensely popular movie is to acquire continued profits .
the rationale is sound , but in many cases of this and recent years , the sequel is a shoddy product that 's exposed for the cash - milking vehicle it really is .
last year 's speed 2 and scream 2 , as well as
this year 's species ii have all been products that have been decisively less than satisfactory .
in some cases , a sequel can even discredit its predecessor , as with the latest neo - slasher flick , i still know what you did last summer .
whatever uniqueness the original might 've had now seems trite and overplayed when paired with this abominable thriller .
julie james ( jennifer love hewitt ) and ray bronson ( freddie prinze jr . ) are back from the original to star in i still know , reprising their roles in typical fashion .
julie and ray experience a rather predictable falling - out at the beginning of the movie , leaving the door wide open for newcomer will benson ( matthew settle ) .
will and julie hit it off , and along with friends karla ( brandy norwood ) and tyrell ( mekhi phifer ) , the foursome heads off to a radio station - giveaway vacation in the tropics .
unfortunately , things are n't so peachy once they arrive , and with a regularity you could set your watch by , the infamous fisherman ( muse watson ) is back with his hook .
it 's another bloody showdown , complete with cliffhanger ending .
there 's not much that 's original
about i still know , and with the market saturated by gen - x thrillers like this one , it 's unlikely that i still know will get any recognition other than that of a bad sequel
.
for die - hard fans of the genre , this will be required viewing material , but the bottom line is that the material here is just recycled from the original
i know what you did last summer .
the aura of thrillerism surrounding the plot is n't heightened by skillful scripting or camera work , but rather a tense , string - based score and manipulative editing .
the man with the hook ends up becoming very belittled this time around when the script gives him too many lines of dialogue
-- he goes from being a scary figure to a nutcase in a few short and painful moments .
much of the mystery is dropped for the sake of getting the point .
the whole reason the plot exists - julie and karla must guess the capital of brazil in order to win the trip from the radio station - is a dead giveaway , lessening suspense and creating a hurry - up - and - wait timing problem .
and , whereas the killer 's identity might 've been a question in the first movie , it 's almost a given here , which changes the dynamic of the movie drastically .
three or four teens run automatically from a man in a rain slicker they nonchalantly refer to as " the killer .
"
they 're almost used to it , and the performances show it - not hewitt , nor prinze , nor brandy , nor phifer give a decent show
.
and so , in the end , it 's left wide open for a third movie and - most likely - a brand new supporting cast .
god help us .
Solution:
N