In this task, you must classify if a given review is positive/negative, indicating your answer as P or N.

warning : spoilers are included in this review . . .
but it does n't really make much of a difference .
deep impact begins the official summer movie season , and it also brings back memories of 1997 .
remember when dante 's peak came out in february ?
a few months later , volcano was released .
the first film was smart , exhilirating , and one of the best disaster films i had ever seen .
the latter film was an incohesive mess that defied logic and wasted talent .
well , it 's deja vu all over again as two disaster films go head to head in competition .
this time , unfortunately , the first comet flick is so bad that people may shy away from armageddon , the upcoming comet - disaster to be released the beginning of july .
of course , the general reaction of the audience was oppposed to mine , and so i am in the minority , as i was when i stood on the side of dante 's peak .
but while watching deep impact , i began to wonder how anyone in their right mind could actually like this film .
apparently many did , and it utterly baffles me . to be completely honest , i have n't had this little fun watching a disaster film in my entire life .
volcano had implausibilities up the wazoo , but it was still rather fun to watch .
deep impact does n't just have implausibilities , it also contains cheap human drama , incredibly horrible special effects , and a poorly constructed plot .
the only thing that gives it a half star above my bottom ranking is a slightly entertaining final fifteen minutes and some good actors making the most of their characters .
deep impact begins in an unnamed year ( the year varies ; advanced technology sets it in the future , but fire in the sky is showing on a local movie theater , pushing it back to 1993 ) .
a line of students is outside at night , peering through telescopes at the dark sky above .
among these are leo biederman ( elijah wood ) and sarah hotchner ( leelee sobieski ) .
leo unknowingly discovers a comet , and his teacher sends a photo of the unknown object to an astronomer , who then is able to determine the correct path of this distant comet in about a few seconds .
he races off to mail the information , but is killed in a reckless car accident .
a year passes , and nothing is heard about it again .
we are then introduced to jenny lerner ( t ? a leoni ) , a reporter for msnbc .
she gets handed a job to investigate a possible cover - up in the government involving senator alan rittenhouse ( james cromwell ) .
she talks to a woman who mentions that rittenhouse was having an affair with a girl named ellie .
after talking with rittenhouse , and unsatisfied with the information she gets , she decides to use the internet for help .
luckily , she knows exactly how to spell the certain " ellie " that she is looking for ( they spell it ele in the film . . .
that girl is pretty darn smart for guessing how it was spelled ) . before she can use the information , the government decides to push her car off the road .
they take her in to meet the president of the united states , president beck ( morgan freeman ) .
beck recommends that jenny keep the information secret for 48 hours so they can confirm it and then hold a press conference .
naturally , she wants to be compensated , and they offer her a front row seat and the chance for the first question .
and so , yada yada yada
, they reveal the comet to the public and their plans : send a massive spacecraft out to destroy it before it can arrive .
they announce a plan called " ark , " which is their only hope for survival .
a computer will select 800 , 000 people at random .
these people are the ones who will go into a large cave underground so that the impact of the comet wo n't kill off the entire human race .
after two years , the dust will settle ( actually , it would take much , much longer -- approximately ninety years , from what i understand ) and the humans could come back to the surface and start over .
the rest of the plot is your standard disaster film procedures , but there is one subplot worth mentioning .
jenny and her father , jason ( maximilian schell ) , have a very touching relationship that forms out of the impending doom .
the final moment involving the two characters is heartfelt and emotional .
it 's a shame that nothing else is heartfelt .
now , of course , we all know that the comet does impact the surface .
the title alone suggests it , and the previews actually show it !
by doing this , absoltuely no tension can be drawn from any attempt to stop the comet because we all know that it wo n't work .
director mimi leder came from her successful tries at direction with episodes of the hit television show " er .
" her major film debut was the peacemaker , a pathetic and heartless action film .
well , this time leder outdid herself , creating a film worse than that one .
suggestion to ms .
leder : please , stay away from the big screen , or at least the action genre .
much of the blame can be placed on leder directly , because the pace is disastrously off
.
throughout the film we are given subtitles that tell us how much time has passed ( it goes from months to weeks to hours ) .
it literally feels like this lapsed time is taking place in real - time --
it 's that boring
.
of course , leder is n't all to blame for it .
screenwriters michael tolkin and bruce joel rubin have crafted a simplistic story that only gets worse with time .
what starts out promising soon turns deadly ( for the audience anyway ) .
chock full of cheesy one liners
( " you know , you are going to have more sex than anyone else in school ! " ) and
stupid characters
, you might think we were back in the 70s again .
only one of the subplots is remotely interesting , while the rest are forgettable and boring
.
and the main plot is so outrageous that you ca n't figure out if this film is supposed to be an action , drama , or sci - fi .
to put it simply : the special effects of this film are a hit and miss situation .
that 's right , 80 % miss , and 20 % hit .
scenes above the earth are well done , and the orbiting ship is majestic .
but the comet is a huge mistake , making it more laughable than frightening .
the concept of even trying to land on a comet is preposterous enough , but that 's forgiveable .
what is n't forgiveable is actually having humans walk on the surface .
give me a break , will ya ?
and of course , the much hyped collision of comet and earth .
well , it is far from spectacular , and it makes independence day look brilliant .
the water rushing towards the land is effective , but once it hits the continent , the effects turn ridiculous .
cgi water is used , and it looks so bad that i heard more laughs from the audience than shrieks
.
in fact , i may even recommend the film for those who want to see how bad effects can actually get these days .
just when we think visual effects ca n't be improved , along comes a film to show that they really can and should be .
one thing has struck a wrong note with me concerning mimi leder 's direction , which also influences the actors .
leder loves to show the actors ' faces before and during moments of terror .
this reminded me of another action director , renny harlin ( die hard 2 , cliffhanger ) .
but harlin succeeds because he shows the faces of the victims in realistic situations .
leder likes to flaunt people 's fears via their faces , but instead of coming off as sympathetic , leder seems more of a sadist .
one moment has an astronaut flying off into space .
this should be enough to warrant a response from the audience , but leder wants to go farther and shows us the person 's face while drifting into space .
this is one of the cheapest ways to ellicit an emotional response from an audience , and i , for one , am not going to be fooled .
on another note , leder 's film only picks up its pace during the last fifteen minutes when the comet actually impacts .
the pace does pick up , and some very emotional moments are shown .
then again , when you watch people cry for their loved ones , it 's obvious it will be emotional .
it 's mostly just a big trick to rope viewers into " feeling " for the characters , but it did n't work for me .
but anyway , the actors do as much as they can with what they are given .
t ?
a leoni ( bad boys , tv 's " the naked truth " ) is the best of the film , and she is given the meatiest role .
her character is made stronger by leoni 's presence , and we grow to care for her .
robert duvall is energetic and fun to watch , but his character is turned into shreds by the plot .
elijah wood also comes off rather successfully , but he still has n't had many good roles ( wood , stick to drama !
you are too talented for this stuff ) .
vanessa redgrave is barely acknowledgeable , and her performance is only enhanced by her strong presence on screen .
maximilian schell is distracting , but he does provide some nice humor .
morgan freeman has been infinitely better than this , and gives one of his most shallow performances to date ( which is quite remarkable for him ) .
leelee sobieski could have been better , but i think she just suffered from a poorly written character .
a special note should go to ron eldard and denise crosby .
eldard is good in his role , but is limited by the plot .
crosby is special to me personally because she was tasha yar from tv 's " star trek : the next generation .
" seeing her was one of the highlights of the film .
overall , a very talented cast virtually wasted .
deep impact is rated pg-13 for disaster related elements and brief language .
this is one of the worst films of the year , and if it is any omen of things to come , this summer could be one of the worst ever .
luckily , the x - files movie is coming up , and hopefully armageddon will be more successful .
it 's a shame that this film will do so successfully because it just is n't worth much .
costing nearly $ 75 million , with special effects done by the illustrious ilm ( which is a huge shocker ) , and with a score composed by oscar - winner james horner ( titanic ) , one might have expected this to be more fun to witness and experience .
well , it 's not .
when the comet does hit the earth , you almost wish it could just take this film along with it .
N

tomb raider .
fun ?
exciting ?
challenging ?
given the unprecedented popularity ( especially among teenage boys ) of the video game that sports an uber - buff , pistol packin ' babe who raids , well .
. .
tombs , you have to believe it 's these three things and more !
"
lara croft : tomb raider , " the big screen variant of said video game , which features a pumped - up angelina jolie ( the oscar ? winner for " girl , interrupted " no less ) in the title role is , however , none of these things .
it is n't fun , it is n't exciting , and the only challenge is seeing how long you can stay in your seat
( i suffered through to the bitter , bitter end ; the wife opted for barnes & noble at the 45-minute mark ) .
directed by simon west with the same subtlety he brought to " con air , " " tomb raider " is an empty - headed , big budget bore .
the story borrows unintelligently from that mother of all turkeys " hudson hawk " ( the same hokum about planetary alignments and sacred stones that , when brought together , well . . . who the heck cares ? ) and it makes " super mario bros .
"
( bob hoskins ' ill - advised career move ) look like " rocco and his brothers " ( that classic of italian neo - realism ) .
i 'll go out on a limb here and say i suspect there 's actually more character development in the video game than the movie proper .
this is where the jolie defenders / video game nuts jump in and say this movie is n't about character development
it 's about kicking serious butt ( or bum , since ms .
croft hails from england 's green and pleasant ) .
with lips , breasts , and biceps all inflated to the max , lara croft is all about posturing , and jolie has a hard time simply standing still without trying to look tough .
ok , let 's forget challenging .
should n't " tomb raider " be , at the very least , fun and exciting ?
should n't our butt - kicking heroine also encompass the sophistication of , say , james bond with the wit of indiana jones ?
there 's no humor to be found anywhere in " tomb raider , " even though it tries hard from time to time .
even " the mummy returns " did n't take itself too seriously .
the villain here is noticeably lacking , the special effects are ridiculously overblown and unnecessarily complicated , and the script is non - existent .
to liven things up ( perhaps ) , jolie 's live father jon voight puts in a few minutes as lara 's dead father lord croft ; talk about a stretch .
one thing i had n't expected from the film is that jolie affects a slightly better english accent than her pa ( although i suspect that thin - looking moustache he 's forced to wear gets in the way some ) .
unsuccessful ?
not entirely .
if anything , " lara croft : tomb raider " makes you want to check out the video game itself to figure out exactly what all the fuss was about .
N

i do n't know how many other people have had the idea cross their mind that their life could be an ongoing television show watched by another world of people , but it 's something i used to wonder about when i was younger .
i ca n't decide if i first thought it because i watched a lot of tv or because my brother hit me in the head with a baseball bat , but i 'm pretty sure andrew niccol , screenwriter for the truman show , has had the same curious thought .
the truman show is about a man ( jim carrey ) whose entire life has been engineered by a corporation and marketed to the public .
since birth , he 's been living in the fictional island town of seahaven , fla . , which actually exists as a giant domed set just beyond the hollywood sign .
all the people in truman burbank 's life are actors , and the anonymous townfolk paid extras .
people watch truman 's life 24 hours a day , live , with no commercial interruptions .
revenue comes instead from product placement , a staple of contemporary hollywood , with truman 's friends and relatives describing their consumer items in cheerful and optimistic tones .
the sun rises and sets on cue and everyone likes everyone else .
even if you have n't seen the truman show , you 've probably learned most of the crucial details from the commercials , the trailer and other promotion blitzes .
if anything i 've written so far is a surprise to you , then i pity you for making me a primary source for your entertainment news .
either way , you should probably know the premise of the truman show going into it , because otherwise you 'll probably think it sucks .
it begins with jim carrey looking into a mirror , reciting the crucial " eat me " scene from alive , wishing his neighbors a good day , afternoon and evening , and living in domestic bliss with his wife ( laura linney ) .
but weird things start happening .
a stage light comes falling out of the sky , truman hears people tracking his movements on the radio and he swears he sees his dead father .
we learn through a flashback that his father drowned when truman was a child , sailing through a rainstorm .
the death was staged by director christof ( ed harris ) , who wanted to put a fear of water into truman to keep him from leaving the island .
similar cruel manipulations keep him from stumbling upon the truth , not the least of them truman 's best friend marlon ( noah emmerich ) , who assures him he 's not in on any conspiracy because the last thing he 'd ever do is hurt him .
as truman 's trusting eyes tear over , christof fades up emotional synthesizer music for a worldwide audience of people who apparently never watch anything else .
there 's even a daily behind - the - scenes update from harry shearer that captures the highlights of truman 's existence .
the key to a movie like this is in finding the right balance between humor and drama , because a premise like this has its obvious implications in both directions .
and it all hinges on carrey , who has to balance comic naivet with a real sense of longing and drive to find out what the hell is going on .
he 's come a long way from talking butt cheeks in ace ventura .
most fundamentally , it 's just plain interesting to follow along as director peter weir shows us just how they can capture a person 's life without the person realizing it -- how they coordinate extras , hide cameras and feed automatic lines to actors .
the most interesting thing about the truman show is that most of us can probably imagine some ambitious director pitching a show like this .
sure , the most interesting tv genre of the ' 90s has been reality programming and jerry springer 's popularity is through the roof , but those people deserve to be humiliated for turning their intimate details over to the airwaves . and when news shows use hidden cameras , it 's done in the name of the greater good , not entertainment . but merge the two and you 've got the truman show .
right now , it 's implausible -- i mean , the fcc wo n't let you say the s - word on the air ; do you think they 'd let you broadcast every detail of a man 's life to the entire world without his consent ?
one day , though , it could happen .
and , even though it would mean the end of privacy , people would eat it up .
you know they would .
P