In this task, you must classify if a given review is positive/negative, indicating your answer as P or N.
One example: 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 is here: N
Explanation: The phrases used in the review convey a negative sentiment (e.g. "presents it in a very bad package").

Now, solve this: originally entitled dancing about architecture ( i .
e .
" talking about love is like dancing about architecture " ) , but changed because it sounded too much like the recent box - office dud dancing at lughnasa , this film slaps together a stunning cast of hollywood names , playing interesting and well - written characters , within a vignettes - styled plot arrangement a la robert altman .
plot : follow the lives of several couples falling in and out of love , finding themselves , regaining a clearer understanding of the people that they are , and who they want , and appreciating the fine emotional art of love .
critique : charmingly effective romantic drama , this film offers insight into various types of relationships , presents us with interesting characters and excellent performances from the cast , and scratches beneath the surface of love and its many complex subtleties .
how do people fall in love ?
why do people fall out of love ?
how do people fall back into love , once they 've been hurt and left to join the lonely hearts club ?
all of these questions and more , are touched upon in this film , within several types of variant relationships .
meet a hip , young couple going through their first date .
a divorcee attempting to date again after her many failed relationships .
a married woman " finding herself " while cheating on her husband .
a husband letting go of his inhibitions .
an older couple dealing with a past " love " of the man , a secret recently uncovered .
a son dying from aids , joined by his mother at the hospital .
there are many nuances to this picture , and many ideas and quotes to which we could all relate , but more importantly , there is diversity .
diversity of relationships helped me and my gang of friends enjoy this film on many levels .
some related to the younger couples ' issues .
others with the married .
there 's a little bit of everything for everyone in here .
and i would bet dollars to donuts that if i were to watch this film again in a year , i would relate myself to yet another predicament .
just like love itself , this movie is distinct and appreciated by all on many different levels .
the actors in this film are all also very , very good .
sean connery is solid as the older man with some issues to resolve , as is gena rowlands , as the aging wife with trepidations .
jolie comes out of this film a star with a great performance , while philippe is as pretty - boy as ever .
anderson leaves scully far behind with her wonderful portrayal of a damaged woman trying to re - ignite her love life , opposite a surprisingly admirable performance
by former talk - show host , jon stewart .
even dennis quaid manages to step outside of his overacting shoes in this film , and offers a convincing show of a man lost within his own imagination .
the only piece of this puzzle which left me somewhat detached , was the part surrounding jay mohr , the man dying from aids , and his mother , ellen burstyn .
the actors were fine , but somehow , the piece seemed out of place within the realm of everything else .
the ending of this film was also a little too saccharine for me , but i guess that 's just hollywood .
this film is actually a lot like your friends and neigbors ( 5 . 5/10 ) and happiness ( 4 . 5/10 ) in concept and style , but its complete anthesis in regards to character relatibility and likeness .
the characters in those films were too unique and inhuman for anyone to care , as opposed to this film , which offers rich and believable characters , living real lives and talking about real issues in today 's relationships .
all in all , this movie offers many interesting characters , talking and living genuine and engaging love lives , wonderful performances by its solid cast , too sweet of an ending , but an enjoyable and rewatchable movie nonetheless .
little known facts about this film and its stars : according to a story in the london sunday mirror , sean connery asked for only $ 60 , 000 for his role in this movie , as compared to his usual fee of $ 14 million , because he liked the script so much .
on top of that , he convinced his co - stars ( including gena rowlands , gillian anderson , ellen burstyn ,
et al . ) to do the same .
this is director / writer willard carroll second real foray into the world of " adult films " .
before this , he had written and produced many children 's movies .
gillian anderson stands 5'2 .
angelina jolie 's full name is angelina jolie voight .
she is actor jon voight 's daughter .
she has trained and performed at the lee strasberg theatre institute .
she divorced actor jonny lee miller of trainspotting ( 8 . 5/10 ) fame in 1997 .
they were married in 1995 .
actor ryan phillippe 's full name is matthew ryan phillippe .
he stands 5'9 , and spent his childhood in new castle , delaware .
his acting career started on tv 's " one life to live " .
he portrayed daytime television 's first gay teenager .
jon stewart 's full name is jonathan stewart leibowitz .
this film was originally entitled if they only knew and dancing about architecture .
watch for movie posters from swingers ( 8 . 5/10 ) , chasing amy ( 7/10 ) and the texas chainsaw massacre ( 8/10 ) at the movie theatre where the characters of joan and keenan go on their first date .
Solution:
P