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

Q: if you 're into watching near on two hours of bored , foul - mouthed florida teens having sex , doing drugs , having sex , listening to eminem , having sex , playing video games , having sex , and killing one of their peers , then " bully " 's for you .
based on jim schutze 's novelization of a true - life event , " bully " charts the story of a handful of disenchanted teenagers who , in 1993 , murdered their high school bully in cold , calculated blood .
the film could have provided fascinating insights into what turned these aimless kids into premeditated killers .
in the hands of controversial director larry clark ( " kids " ) , however , it has less to say about its subject matter and more to say about the filmmaker 's pornographic proclivities .
in terms of the incident and what provoked it , " bully " stirs up nothing new .
the high schoolers are presented as a uniformly screwed up lot -- bored with life , not much ambition , promiscuous , profane .
the bully in question , bobby kent ( nick stahl ) , is certainly an unpleasant piece of work
but he does n't exactly tower over his colleagues in the pathological department .
he hounds and harries and humiliates his " best friend " marty ( played by brad renfro ) and marty 's girlfriend lisa ( rachel miner ) does n't care for it at all and comes up with the idea of killing bobby .
simply remove him from the equation .
marty and lisa and a handful of their promiscuous , profane , and stoner friends , plus a recruited hit man ( ? ) , lure bobby to a swamp one night , stab him , beat him over the head with a baseball bat , and dump him into the canal where the sand crabs and the gators , presumably , finish him off .
there 's no remorse --
the next day they 're talking about it as openly as a homework assignment .
they did it because they wanted to , and because they could .
what 's most troubling about the film , however , is n't the unsettling subject matter and the matter - of - fact way these young people go about eliminating one of their own but the way in which clark is constantly distracted by his own material
.
not only is the nudity plentiful and graphic in " bully
" but there 's also an uneasy , exploitative feel to it .
gratuitous crotch shots abound ( one of which makes the zipper cut - away in " there 's something about
mary " look like the height of subtlety ! ) .
clark is so pre - occupied with his female ( predominantly ) leads that
you forget , at times , what this movie is supposed to be about .
the stripping bare , literally and figuratively , of these actors ( who are , after all , playing underage teenagers ) becomes harder to watch over time , as you begin to feel for them and question the motives of the man behind the camera .
the conclusion of " bully " offers up literal snapshots of information about the sentences imposed on each of the protagonists for their involvement in the crime .
it 's a short sequence of stills -- heather : 7 years ; ali : 40 years ; lisa : life imprisonment , for example -- but it 's infinitely more telling than the 110 minutes of rampant unpleasantness that precedes it .
"
bully " aims for truth , exploits it shamelessly , then bludgeons it to death .

A: N
****
Q: ingredients : london gal , fate , true love , running joke about monty python 's spanish inquisition synopsis : american actress gwyneth paltrow with dark hair , playing a londoner ? believe it .
sliding doors is a love ' what if ' story .
the gimmick is that it 's really two stories : the film follows the life of helen ( gwyneth paltrow ) down two directions .
in the beginning , likeable gal ' helen ' ( gwyneth paltrow ) gets unexpectedly fired from her advertising job .
so she goes into the subway train station meaning to return home early to her apartment and
her sleeping live - in lover gerry ( john lynch )
.
helen does n't know it , but she is at a fateful junction in life :
1 ) if she enters through the sliding door of a london subway train her life takes one path with one future 2 ) if she stays on the platform her life takes another path with a different future .
the film shows what happens in both paths , switching back and forth between intertwined , parallel stories .
in story one , helen meets a charming and talkative monty python fan named james ( john hannah ) on the train .
arriving home early , she discovers that her live - in , gerry ( john lynch ) , is having sex with his former lover lydia ( jeanne tripplehorn ) .
this leads to a life where helen moves out .
helen 's winsome new friend james helps her recover from a broken heart , and encourages her to start her own business .
in story two , helen experiences a different fate .
she misses the train , never meets james , and does n't get home early enough to discover gerry 's infidelity .
in this new life , helen takes up odd menial jobs , and faces the constant sneaking suspicion that all is not right with her relationship with gerry .
will the truth of the heart finally work its way through a number of problems and setbacks in both scenarios ?
opinion : rejoice all ye monty python fans , gwyneth paltrow fans , and watchers of quirky romance flicks .
at last here 's proof that there 's still creativity in 1990s filmmaking .
sliding doors is refreshingly different from anything this year .
not only is it a well - acted , heartwarming film , but it 's also easily gwyneth paltrow 's best recent performance .
when helen ( paltrow ) screams that her unfaithful boyfriend is a ' shagging wanker , ' ( a british phrase better left untranslated ) she sounds like she knows what she 's talking about ! nor does sliding doors go overboard with formulaic true love or other stereotypes .
nobody scrambles around in danger , screaming , " i will find you no matter what , my darling ! " when helen finds herself on a boat in the starlight with james , she does n't take the easy way out and leap into his arms , since she 's supposed to be recovering from heartache . and handsome live - in boyfriend gerry is n't the stereotypical screen hunk ( either a stud or a snob ) .
instead he 's a nervous and indecisive , almost helpless hunk .
another example : when one of the protagonists lies wounded in a hospital , sliding doors gives us neither the ' hospital miracle ' nor a maudlin tragedy but surprises us with a third variation .
in other words , all of the characters seem non - stereotyped , human , and local .
there are minor inconveniences .
since sliding doors switches back and forth between two possible fates , it 's occasionally difficult to distinguish between the two .
distinguishing between the two stories is n't a problem in the scenes containing paltrow , who sports two different hairstyles .
but in scenes containing only lydia and gerry , who look the same in both stories , it 's slightly confusing .
also , quite a few snappy comebacks referring to american pop culture ( seinfeld , woody allen , etc . ) are spoken by the british characters .
but these seem slightly forced , given that the remaining dialogue is predominantly british slang .
possibly an attempt by the screenwriter to balance the british so that american audiences can feel more comfortable ?
sliding doors is a charming , quirky , original , happy romance with a little ' philosophy of fate ' thrown in .
monty python and the meaning of fate , anybody ?

A: P
****
Q: the promotion for fear and loathing in las vegas ? has made the film out to be a comedy , and for about the first hour
or so it seems like it might be one .
it 's 1971 , and the hippie movement has left behind quite a few wash - outs , among them journalist raoul duke ( johnny depp ) and his " attorney " dr .
gonzo ( benito del toro ) .
these two spend most of the film in a drug - induced stupor , having strange hallucinations , trashing their hotel rooms , and either annoying or scaring almost everyone that crosses their path .
duke is first assigned to cover an outdoor desert motorcycle race in las vegas , but gets lost in a blur of drugs , beer , and flying dust , and ends up wandering around with no clue who won .
he leaves vegas briefly before he is sent back , in what can only be described as a strangely appropriate twist of fate , to cover a drug enforcement conference .
fear and loathing has been misinterpreted by some as glorifying the use of drugs .
it does n't , even in the beginning -- while the pair 's antics are sometimes amusing and relatively harmless at first , the humor here is still fairly dark .
director terry gilliam views them with a rather satirical eye , and even when we 're laughing , we 're laughing at them rather than with them .
they spend most of their time paranoid , angry , or just plain befuddled , which is probably an understandable reaction to seeing the entire room suddenly fill up with giant reptiles .
the black comedy may be entertaining to watch onscreen , but it 's probably not something most other audience members would want to experience first - hand .
all this aside , i was starting to grow a bit restless as the film drew near its one - hour mark , thinking to myself that i wanted something more out of this than just an off - kilter satire of drug culture .
thankfully , the script delivers it before too long , as duke , in a rare moment of lucidity , stops to recall how he was once an enthusiastic hippie , " riding the wave " of something that seemed special and important .
now it 's six years later and the wave has finally broken , as he puts it .
materialistic culture is still alive and well and , for most of this film , right in his face in las vegas ; the " american dream " of which duke occasionally speaks is still just as shallow and phony as ever .
the social protesters have lost , and the more questionable aspects of the movement have turned ugly and left casualties such as duke to drift in a sea of drugs and disillusionment .
in many ways , fear and loathing is gilliam 's most reality - based film ; all of his others , with the exception of the fisher king , have made use of some sort of fantasy or science - fiction plot elements .
yet it is his off - the - wall masterpiece brazil ?
to which this film bears the most visual resemblance .
the protagonist of brazil found himself alternately surrounded by a plastic , soulless society and the constant chaos of totalitarian police inspections and terrorist attacks , and similarly duke 's world is composed of the artificial , empty glam of las vegas and the bizarre anarchy of his drug hallucinations .
unlike the protagonist of brazil , however , duke is not a particularly admirable figure , and neither is gonzo .
during the latter half of the film , their trips turn nastier and the consequences worse , eventually building up to an incident an a diner in which gonzo crudely frightens and humiliates a waitress , while duke , though he does n't seem to approve , does n't do anything to stop it either .
by the time this scene takes place , they do n't seem like hippies or peaceniks or protesters or anything of the sort any more ; they just seem like a couple of stoned jerks in a diner .
duke seems to realize at some level that he 's become something he does n't like , but he 's either too apathetic or too defeated to do anything to change .
this film has taken a critical drubbing from many who view it as an essentially pointless film that simply throws one trip scene after another at the audience .
while gilliam may have overdone it in a few places , i think he and his co - writers deserve more credit than that .
there 's plenty of substance here , particularly in the second half ; its observations about the broken and defeated rebels from the ' 60s and the objects of their rebellion just are n't usually very pleasant .
unlike , say , brazil ? or the fisher king , both of which feature a character who dares to let himself dream in a repressive environment , fear and loathing in las vegas ?
shows us someone who 's given up on his dreams and resorts to the quick fix of drugs .
in its own psychedelic , whacked - out way , it 's sad and regretful , but i think it 's also a bit of a kick in the pants , a challenge to find an alternative between chemically - induced withdrawal and the equally addictive drug of vegas - style materialism .
indeed , duke himself admits at one point that he 's never learned to accept that you can get higher without drugs than with them .
i 'm not sure if he 's any closer to accepting it by the end or not , but i suspect the audience will get the idea .

A:
P
****