Problem: This review is like what?
OPTIONS:
- negative
- positive

Review:This was the first of Panahi's films that I have seen, I saw it at Melbourne film festival. I was totally absorbed by the different characters that he creates and how differently they react and behave compared to Aussie kids and yet on other levels how similarly. I think perhaps if more people could see movies like this, they could see people as individuals and avoid racism that can often be fueled by the fear of the unknown. There are the obvious large political differences between Oz culture and Iranian culture, but I found the more subtle differences between the characters, that this film fleshes out so successfully on screen, extremely fascinating. There are idiosyncrasies in the characters that seem to me, so unique. I found it made the characters compelling viewing.
+++++++++
A: positive

Problem: This review is like what?
OPTIONS:
- negative
- positive

Review:Full House is a great family show. However, after watching some episodes over and over again I've realized that they're incredibly boring and they seem to shelter themselves from the outside world a lot. Yes, there is a lot of comedy, but there are times when it's incredibly cheesy. It's not like I hate it, but just don't watch them over and over again because they get old quick. Probably the best season is the first.

Full House is about widower Danny Tanner(Bob Saget)and his three daughters D.J. (Candace Cameron) Stephanie (Jodie Sweetin) and Michelle (Mary-Kate and Ashley). When Danny's wife dies the he is in need of some help. So, his best friend Joey (Dave Coulier) and the girls' Uncle Jesse (John Stamos) moves in with them. Once they live there together they find they can't live without each other.

Full House reminds you just how important family is and that you can always go home again.
+++++++++
A: positive

Problem: This review is like what?
OPTIONS:
- negative
- positive

Review:Once you pick your jaw up from off the floor from the realization that they... somehow... managed to put this thing together so fast that it was released the same year the case ended, you'll find that it's not half bad. The plot is engaging and interesting, and the pacing is fast, with this covering many situations, and thus often jumping swiftly on to the next one after a line or two has been spoken. Where this really stands out is the acting. The performances are excellent. Neill and Streep are both impeccable. It's also cool to hear so much Australian spoken in a Hollywood film, and even those who don't come naturally to it at least attempt an accent. The cinematography and editing are nice enough, but they don't really go beyond the standard stuff. This movie's story is compelling and the fact that it is authentic just makes it all the more chilling. While I have not read the novel or heard of what happened outside of this picture, I understand that it is quite close to the truth. There is some moderate to strong language and disturbing content in this. It is, at times, a downright great courtroom drama. I recommend this to any fellow fan of such. 7/10
+++++++++
A: positive

Problem: This review is like what?
OPTIONS:
- negative
- positive

Review:I will never be a member of any club that would have me,

especially this one.

Starr Andreeff is a single mom/stripper who gets attacked by a

female vampire and left for dead. She begins to get a hankering for

blood, and meets up with John Savage, looking like he's

wondering where he left Michael Cimino's phone number. Savage

is also a vampire and wants to let Andreef join his little vampire

family, which consists of a British vamp, the blonde vamp who

attacked Starr, and a green haired midget (I am not making this

up).

The family does not want Starr, so they try to kill Savage and Starr

and Starr's kid.

Someone forgot to tell John Savage that this was a drama. He

spends most of his screen time exhibiting more facial tics than

Hugh Grant on a Jolt Cola bender, and he reads all of his lines like

he is making a Farrelly Brothers film. Andreeff tries to make the

most of a badly written role, but screenwriter/director Ruben goes

for all the vampire cliches, like Starr eating her son's pet hamster

and buying a lot of raw meat to fight the craving for blood. The kid

also gets knocked around a lot, for those who think watching

violence against children is really entertaining.

The film is extra gory, but not in a wild, over the top way like "Killer

Tongue." Here, the gore is gross and never justified, it just occurs.

It is just in the budget. Most of the R rating goes to Andreeff's

coworkers, who are put through embarassing strip routines in the

background of conversation scenes. The budget does not include

vampire fangs! All the vampires here must stab their prey to eat.

Nifty idea, unless you have already seen George Romero's

"Martin."

Even at 77 minutes, and once you throw in Ruben's attempts at

arty direction (skewed frames, blurred scenes), this is one

tiresome, dull, and dirty ride. Leave this club and take a shower,

you will need it.

This is rated (R) for strong physical violence, gun violence, sexual

violence, strong gore, strong profanity, female nudity, sexual

references, drug abuse, and adult situations.

+++++++++
A:
negative