instruction:
In this task, you must classify if a given review is positive/negative, indicating your answer as P or N.
question:
ugh .
that about sums this movie up .
just , ugh .
the original godzilla movies are somewhat of a cult classic , and when reviewing the previous films , each film had a certain degree of intelligence .
and that was the reason they found such an enviable cult following ; in spite of bad special effects , horrible dubbing , and a man in a lizard suit , they maintained a certain degree of . . .
how to put this ? . . .
dignity ?
not quite the word i 'm looking for .
you understand , right ?
and in 50 years , godzilla has maintained that degree of ' whatever ' . leave it to america to screw the whole thing up .
> from the ' geniuses ' that brought us " independece day " , arguably the worst sci - fi movie of all time , to ruin whatever reputation godzilla had .
while they do bring us eye - popping special effects that will amaze you ,
they lost what was at the center of all the original godzilla movies -- a storyline .
summing up the movie is simple .
heck , i can do it in one sentence : giant lizard attacks a giant city and a bunch of nobodies stop it .
simple as that .
matthew broderick
stumbles over his lines , and it 's hard to picture hank azaria in any role besides his classic dog - walking character on the television show " mad about you " .
the dialogue seems to be improvized , almost as if there was no rehearsel done at all .
i can see the scene on the set right now .
"
all right !
we spent all of this money making big special effects , and we 've got ta get this movie out by summer
or it 's going to bomb in our faces .
so , you actors just say what ever comes to the top of your head , all right ?
make up something , m'kay ?
good .
roll film ! !
"
the special effects are enough to keep you interested through one viewing , and some of the cinemtography is well - done ( the scene with the black umbrellas comes to mind ) .
still , an hour into it , you will become antsy , wondering how long they can drag it out . and drag it out they do ! !
i have to laugh .
the slogan for the film is , " size does matter " .
i think they cut this too short .
it should read , " size does matter .
acting does not .
"
answer:
N

question:
with the opening scene of a young couple in a van pulling up , loading their guns , kissing each other and uttering what sounds like " rock and roll !
"
( actually , it 's " lock and load " ) , you ca n't help thinking tarantino .
and of course with its storyline of a crazy girl and boy in love who turn to violent bank robbery , the film unapologetically takes its place alongside all those other films from bonnie & clyde to natural born killers .
but if most of those movies have their roots in pulp fiction , exploring a modern myth of the doomed rebels on the run , normal life takes a much more psychologically realistic look at the phenomenon .
" inspired by true events " -- we 've heard that one before , and yet in no other tale of violent couples has it seemed so solidly demonstrated . . .
or so strangely poignant .
for this is a story of real people whose lives take on a steadily unreal quality , who in their search for a normal life find themselves increasingly unhinged .
beginning with their final arrest , the film goes back to trace the relationship between chris ( luke perry ) , a policeman , and pam ( ashley judd ) , a factory worker .
they fall in love and marry , but pam 's increasingly erratic behaviour ( going on spending sprees , slashing herself with a knife after an argument ) begin to trouble the solid and stable chris .
when chris gets sacked , they find themselves heavily in debt and near breaking up .
then , chris begins to rob banks . . .
luke perry accomplishes the not - inconsiderable feat of making us nearly forget that he was ever in beverly hills 90210 or buffy the vampire slayer .
moustached , with a tough paternal look and yet a voice and eyes that suggest sadness verging on exasperation , he is perfectly cast as the long - suffering husband .
( it 's another of john mcnaughton 's coups of casting - against - type , after transforming robert de niro into nerd and bill murray into gangster in mad dog and glory ) .
but it is the character of pam who commands centrestage , and ashley judd rises to the challenge with great alternating currents of ferocity and tenderness , making pam into a fascinating yet often infuriating person .
if the performance falls short of greatness , however , it is perhaps because the role of the mad woman has been done so often before it is virtually a staple of cinema , whether it 's in betty blue , tom & viv or georgia .
as in those movies , there 's the danger that the performance seems mannered , a collection of screwy tics and tantrums designed for the oscar presentation piece .
judd does n't entirely avoid this pitfall , but pam 's ' craziness ' is best and most movingly presented in counterpoint to the more ' normal ' chris .
when pam reacts to her father - in - law 's death by showing up at the funeral in rollerblades and blaring headphones , chris ' face is the picture of pained restraint .
of course , it 's the question of what is ' normal ' that is asked in normal life .
mcnaughton constantly offers up the ironies of the aspirations for the average domestic life and its kinship with insanity .
it is the rational chris that loves guns ( " shooting is about precision , control " ) and the ' crazy ' pam that loves astronomy and yearns for a dog ( who is then called chaos -- " chaos and you and me . . .
we 're a real family " , she notes wryly ) .
it is chris ' methodical mind and his knowledge of police procedure that allows him to be such a successful bank robber ( his well - planned disguise as a bearded , roaring man of terror is another piece of method in madness ) .
in the carpark where he sets out for his first robbery , a huge sign on a shopping mall stands out in the background : " buy - more " -- the perfectly respectable consumption - crazy american dream that has driven pam to her extravagant purchases , and both of them into desperate situations .
it 's not a perfect film .
some of the dialogue is a touch too banal ( perhaps intentionally ? ) .
the use of the punk hardcore soundtrack in pam 's crazed scenes comes rather too close to making emotional disturbance seem glamourous and sexy an image which only detracts from the rest of the film .
indeed , as in mcnaughton 's seminal film henry : portrait of a serial killer , it is the avoidance of glamour or sensationalism , the denial of some of the standard thrills of the outlaw film genre
, that gives this determinedly unflashy , moving film its great strengths .
mcnaughton has filmed this story with a quiet , coolly ' realistic ' method that works far better than any nbk theatrics at unsettling the viewer .
the suburbs , with their miles of white - fenced houses and identikit malls , take on a sense of claustrophobic blankness .
in its very different way , this makes for as haunting a backdrop as the wide open spaces in terence malick 's badlands .
while pam shares the yearnings of malick 's heroes to escape from ordinary life , chris takes up crime precisely so that they can lead a ' normal life ' - their little house on the suburbs is financed by his violent robberies .
but these are dreams defined by , constrained by , and even doomed by , the limitations of the ' normal ' , conventional world .
pam 's final scene takes place at the edge of the suburbs , where wild bushes grow -- symbolically the frontier , the outer limits of her society , but also quite literally the end of the road , where there is nowhere left to go but to the final tragic denouement .
the flying inkpot 's rating system :
* wait for the video .
*
* a little creaky , but still better than staying at home with gotcha !
*
* * pretty good , bring a friend .
*
*
* * amazing , potent stuff .
*
*
*
* * perfection . see it twice .
answer:
P

question:
' bats ' is an insulting slap across the face for any dedicated horror movie fan .
to pull something like this off , you need to have a sense of wit and style , with a heavy dosage of humor to back up the process if the fright factor ever declines .
something like the underground worm thriller ' tremors '
had just the perfect mixture of these elements , and in return , the film was tremendous fun .
with the notable exception of a wisecracking supporting player , ' bats ' mainly plays it 's premise for straight - arrow horror .
judging
by the ridiculous premise
, this was not exactly a wise move .
the movie attempts to capture the essence of alfred hitchcock 's ' the birds ' , but fails miserably .
done right , it could have been adequately amusing halloween cinema .
unfortunately , ' bats ' is a prime example of a formula movie done terribly , terribly wrong .
the only thing amusing about this festering pile of guano is in how intelligible the filmmakers anticipate their core audience to be .
i will recite the following paragraph in a manner that will reach the audience of individuals to whom ' bats ' is aimed toward .
those guys in hollywood have made a movie about bats .
these bats are not very nice , because they eat a lot of people .
boy , are these bats ugly .
they are infected with this bogus virus that makes them super - duper smart .
they 've got big claws and red eyes and they are not very friendly at all .
a whole bunch of people in texas get killed , so a sheriff guy and a scientist lady are brought in to kill the bats .
they have big guns and other cool things to fight them with , but the bats are pretty smart , so it 's sorta hard to do .
the bats swoop down and they shoot at them to make they go away for good .
but no , ' bats ' is probably too violent for pre - schoolers .
the film , directed by louis morneau , should have ventured straight into video stores .
on the small screen , perhaps more fun could have been derived with lower expectations . but sitting through this crapper on the big screen is almost awkward ; although at a few moments it becomes a guilty pleasure , the film is poorly written , poorly acted and executed with glaring ineptitude .
even the bats themselves are cheesy , and the attack sequences too rushed and jittery
to be properly enjoyed .
the sheriff in the story is emmett kimsey ( lou diamond phillips ) , who embodies every pathetic stereotype a small - town authority figure
usually portrays ( he chomps on a cigar , struts contentedly in his boots , etc . .. ) .
the scientist is dr .
sheila casper ( dina meyer ) , who specializes in flying mammals and is classified as ' the best in her field ' .
meyer uses a lot of technical terms designed to make the movie seem more intellectually capable , but everything about dr .
casper is recycled beyond recognition .
her memories of how she became hooked on the topic of bats sounds suspiciously like oceanographic student matt hooper 's tale of how he became infatuated with sharks in ' jaws ' .
everything revolving around ' bats ' is tired drivel , which desperately requires some directorial style or acting capabilities to spruce it up .
the supporting cast could have been constructed out of straw , with voices dubbed in later .
in fact , that may have worked out better in the end .
take one glance at casper 's bat - loathing sidekick jimmy ( leon ) , and you 'll have immediate deja vu
- he 's the exact same humorous buddy caricature from every other movie , constructed specifically for timed comic relief .
unfortunately , none of his comic interludes are funny .
in the role of deranged mad scientist dr .
mccabe , the reliable bob gunton gets cornered with the most hideously idiotic character in the bunch .
mccabe ' accidentally ' released two experimental test subjects , and the virus spread to other bats .
the entire town of gallup , texas is under attack from an enormous swarm of the creatures , but gunton appears to be inconspicuously contemplating something else .
something like : ' when is the damn movie going to be over
? ?
i just want my money . '
the bats are ugly , i must say .
there 's the occasional moment where they look moderately convincing , but mainly , the swarm is represented in cheesy digital imagery .
only bits of the bloody action even hint at the campy fun the film could have been , but by the absurdly stupid climax , it 's way too late in the game for a decent recovery .
characters experiment in slaughtering the bats with gunfire .
let 's explore the logic there : is this really a very efficient way to decrease the bat population ? ?
you could empty an entire clip at the flying winged serpents and not even wound one , and after that there are only 18 , 000 more of them .
this kind of behavior represents the regular level of intelligence behind ' bats ' .
answer:
N