Problem: Write a positive (OPTIONS:
- negative
- positive) movie review.

Answer: After the glories of The Snare, it was unlikely that a further outing for Hanzo would be able to do any better, and this doesn't breach that expectation, but it is a fine film and sits neatly in between the fun but messy first chapter and the terrific second in terms of quality and general entertainment. The screenplay comes from Yasuzo Masumura and has some parallels with The Snare, as well as the expected hi-jinks of a Hanzo film, but the film rings nice little changes on the formula by amping up the character driven humour as well as giving the film a quieter, reflective edge. The film opens with Hanzos assistants scared by a ghost, and typically he decides straight away that he needs to have carnal knowledge of this ghost. It turns out that the ghost is serving as a guard for a stash of stolen coins and from this set-up unfolds a story of theft, corruption and usury, with expected violent and sleazy results. Shintaro Katsu is terrific as expected as Hanzo, coming across effortlessly as a deadly fighter and sexual force of nature, he is equally good in the moments of knowing humour and likable, almost an ordinary gentleman in moments of drama, it is a beautifully rounded performance filled with social conscience and a touching edge of personal feeling. The expected comedy comes off fine as well, his moments with "Snake" Magobei are perhaps the most amusing of the series whilst his interactions with his servants are kookily entertaining as ever. Though neatly laden throughout with nice moments, a fair amount of action and a little sleaze, the film does lose a little from a relatively restrained approach. There are shades of both prior films, the plotting, pace and smarts recall The Snare and when the film aims for sleaze it does very well, with a potently handled and impactful early interrogation sequence. Equally though, director Yoshio Inoue presents potentially sleazy scenes in a more experimental way as per Kenji Misumi's less well handled work in Sword Of Justice, with consequences sometimes very nice, as with a man playing a tune on the koto, with close ups of his fingers plucking at the strings as unbeknownest to him Hanzo ploughs his wife, and sometimes a bit weak, as with an orgy that is reduced to a nudity free psychedelic whirl of limbs in motion that just looks confusing. The nudity and bloodshed is generally downplayed which is a pity, though there is a little of both a stronger approach would have worked better, it is definitely the sort of film where trashy and unrestrained nudity and violence are most appropriate. But even with less in the way of exploitative goods this is still thoroughly entertaining stuff, the predictable moments are wrought with aplomb and there is more than enough intrigue and excitement, even some effective surprises to go around. Its a film for the fans really, playing off the work laid down in the previous instalments and working sweetly if not spectacularly with it. Altogether a near wholly pleasurable if mildly flawed end to a delightful trilogy, the second best of them and well worth a watch for enthusiasts of such things.
Problem: OPTIONS:
- negative
- positive positive
=++++=
Answer: I've seen tons of HK actioners, and this one is right at the top of the genre. The action scenes are as exciting and kinetic as anything you've ever seen in any action movie. The kung fu is spectacular, the pyrotechnics eye-popping, the stunt work heartstopping. The editing is perfectly paced, heightening the tension and complimenting the fluid camera work. This film is directed by old pro Corey Yuen, whose resume is stuffed with some of the best work of the genre, including the Jet Li vehicle The Legend of Fong Sai-Yuk. If there is one thing lacking in this film it is the presence of a three-dimensional character, though Martin, the male lead, comes closest to it. This movie is full of archetypes rather than characters--the sexy killer, the goofy thief and his bitchy girlfriend, the cackling villains. That said, Shannon Lee has a terrific screen presence; she's great with the fighting, the stunts, and the guns. When she's onscreen it's hard to take your eyes off her. She's that good. Why isn't this woman a major star?
An example of a movie review. negative (OPTIONS:
- negative
- positive).

A: Considering the potential this move had, the reality was disappointing. While it's always nice to see Jennifer Aniston in a movie, even that couldn't turn this around. Most of the action was predictable. The jokes were flat to mildly amusing. And the characters were not very interesting. I wanted to like this film, but it just never happened. Ben Stiller was hilarious in "There's Something about Mary". Here it looks like he's just going thru the motions. If they have to lift plot points from "Friends", they should have known something was wrong. The toilet humor should have stayed in the closet :-).

Watch "50 First Dates" instead.
Q: What's an example of a movie review?
An example of a movie review is here: The above seemed a much more appropriate title when me and my suicidal underlings decided to watch this masterpiece of modern bullshit

Erotic,Scary, Suspenseful, Well thought out, these are all the things this film fails to be.

It is however incredibly funny, the slow sound effects and bad dubbing add to this to make one of the greatest comedies I have seen in recent years. And yet this film doesn't even try to be funny and that is one of the movies grand achievements, it becomes a comedy without even attempting to amuse.

Throughout the film an old guy who looks amazingly like Santa Claus goes around ploughing over zombies and smashing vampires into the ground. This made me fail to believe the films title, if this was vampires vs zombies why were the vampires and zombies not fighting? Oh well whatever, besides there were more flaws to this rental than the title. Such as this one; there has been a virus sweeping through America creating zombie like beings who go around acting a lot like your average tourist. And yet there's only four zombies in the entire film. Another problem is besides one shop everywhere is deserted. Surely you'd see zombies roaming about in the woods or in the background a bit. In fact I believe they just drove around in a circle of forest over and over again since they didn't have a high enough budget to film in a wider location, that or the director didn't want to waste his precious time filming in different areas of wood he was to busy sitting in a trailer jerking off to be bothered with such trivial matters.

In fact the director had so much fun doing this that he didn't have enough time to hire a big enough cast or even an editor. And so he told the eight members of the cast to dress up as different people and try not to act inconspicuous, whilst I assume he changed his name and began randomly snipping at the film reels "editing isn't a hard job anyway right?" The only reason this "movie" found it's way into our bag was because somehow we got it confused with Freddy vs Jason, strange how these things happen isn't it. And the only way we made it though the night was by strapping gas masks on and bolting them to our skulls to avoid the stink of this nauseating mess.

Oh yes we did laugh at the end, but I'm sure one does that a lot when he has lost his sanity...................
Problem: Write a negative (OPTIONS:
- negative
- positive) movie review.

Answer:
The premise and subject about making a criminal realize what his victims went through by capturing his family hostage sounds promising and interesting. But this is the only interesting part which was also dealt 20 years ago with quite finesse by director Ravi Tandon in his film "Jawab'(1985) too. The problem here is Ace Director Rajkumar Santoshi found himself in some sort of confusion as to whether to make it a fast paced action-thriller (viz. Khakee) or an emotions-rich heavy duty drama (Viz. Damini) and this confusion is quite evident in the final outcome. If we ignore two of his-Pukar (2000) and Lajja(2001), this brilliant director has always given us fairly engrossing films with high entertainment value. Therefore this film comes as a surprise, as to what made this script sensitive director going for half-baked characterization of both of his protagonists-Amitabh Bachchan and Aryeman. As the film is getting over, audience didn't know whom to hate and whom to sympathize with and this factor is the major limiting force in the complete narration. Therefore what starts as a war between a common man and an underworld don ends on a strange note of self-realization and regret by the Don about what went wrong with his own family. The revelation of Don's son as a real baddie does not come as a surprise element in the climax which if compared to similar situation in 'Khakee" worked so effectively with Aishwarya's character. That is not all, there is more to it. The whole dramatization of life of an Underworld Don, operating from abroad looks quite illogical. His openly landing up at Mumbai from where he is suppose to be absconding as well as running after his enemies and shooting them himself does not look believable. Pitching a mediocre, newcomer actor like Aryeman opposite Mr. Bachchan is again not a good idea. But nonetheless film has some plus points. Ashok Mehta's fine camera-work, two good fight sequences (co-ordinator Abbas Ali Moughal), some light well-acted scenes of Akshay Kumar in the Ist half, Santoshi's fast-paced slick treatment and of course Mr. Bachchan as usual trying hard to put some life into his lifeless character. But all these put together does not make this viewing an exciting experience for you and your Family!