instruction:
In this task, you must classify if a given review is positive/negative, indicating your answer as P or N.
question:
historical epic as a genre was almost banished from hollywood in early 1990s .
for many critics , scholars and , most importantly , film producers , it was a thing of the past - something that could have attracted crowds only in the era of black - and - white television and non - cgi special effects .
but in 1995 , same as in the case of dances with wolves five years ago , there came the man who decided to use of all his energy and talents of actor , producer and director in order to revitalise that particular genre .
and , same as in the case of dances with wolves , he was awarded for his effort with " oscars " .
the name of the film was braveheart , and the name of its director and main actor was mel gibson .
the plot chronicles the life of scottish warlord and folk hero william wallace ( 1272 - 1305 ) .
in his time , english king edward i " longshanks " (
played by patrick mcgoohan ) has almost completely subdued entire british isles , including scotland , whose proud inhabitants are now subjected by " ius primae noctis " and various other forms of humiliation and oppression by english knights .
although english had killed his father many years ago , young scottish commoner william wallace ( played by mel gibson ) does n't care about politics and wants only to have peaceful life with his new bride murron ( played by catherine maccormack ) .
murron 's death changes that and wallace takes arms and , together with small but dedicated band of followers , begins guerrilla campaign that would systematically destroy almost every english garrison in the country .
through time , more and more people join his ranks and in 1298 wallace 's rag - tag army scores surprising victory against english knights in the battle of stirling bridge .
but the newly won freedom is endangered by the internal squabbles between scots themselves , especially nobles under pretender robert the bruce ( played by angus macfadyen ) , who would n't like to have a simple commoner as a national leader .
braveheart was only the second film in the directorial career by mel gibson , so it would n't be fair to compare it to the better known genre classics directed by david lean or anthony mann .
however , even when we apply such criteria braveheart is more than decent historical epic that takes new and refreshing approach to the genre .
the most noticeable element of this approach is naturalism .
while older hollywood films set in medieval europe used to give fairytale - like vision of picturesque castles , splendid costumes and knights in shining armour , gibson shows us the extremely unpleasant world of poverty and feudal injustice where might made right and life was hard , short and brutish .
this general unpleasantness is especially underlined in the scenes of battle , where hand - to - hand combat is naturalistically displayed in all its gory details , never seen since verhoeven 's ultra - naturalistic flesh & blood .
compared with this naturalistic approach , most of old hollywood epics look like stage plays .
braveheart also employs humour at the right places , not only to make bloody realities of medieval british isles more bearable to sensitive audiences , but also to underline its down - to - earth atmosphere , so different from previous historical epics .
what makes braveheart " larger than life " is his protagonist .
mel gibson obviously invested plenty of his energy and talent in bringing the mythical figure of william wallace and , as a result , character of 15th century poems is transformed into superhuman being that resembles late 20th century comic book hero .
wallace is more than superior to his enemies , both physically and mentally , yet he is able to show his sensitive , more vulnerable side .
naturally , when the character is based on epic poems , most of historical accuracy is going down the drain ( which was the case with almost every historical epic from hollywood in 1990s ) .
however , even those who do n't particularly care about history or are willing to give poetic license to scriptwriter randall wallace might think that he went over the top in idolising wallace , especially in the second part of film when scottish superhero manages to seduce princess isabel ( played by sophie marceau ) and make her a child .
because of that the disbelief is hardly suspended , and final scenes are n't as effective as they should be .
mel gibson as an actor is truly wonderful , and he is also helped by small army of very good british and irish actors .
most memorable of them all is patrick mcgoohan , whose cold , calculated and evil medieval monarch is one of the most effective villains seen in contemporary cinema .
brendan gleeson ( who would later become famous for his role in boorman 's general ) is also very good
as wallace 's trusted companion , as well as ian bannen is effective as leprosy - stricken king john balliol .
david o'harra is very entertaining as wallace 's irish ally , and angus macfadyen brings a lot of anxiety into his conscience - stricken character of robert the bruce .
women in this film have rather thankless roles , especially marceau as one - dimensional french princess .
catherine mccormack as wallace 's wife was more interesting , but she was eliminated from the picture early on .
from the technical point of view , the film is also very good .
photography by john toll brings a lot of scottish natural beauty to the screen .
on the other hand , the musical score by james horner employs too much of modern - day instruments for period piece set in medieval times .
although mostly welcomed by critics and audiences alike , braveheart was often criticised for homophobia and other forms of extreme conservatism .
the main reason for that was the fact that gibson , among many historical facts , chose to be faithful only to those related to sexual orientation of " longshank " 's son prince edward ( played by peter hanly ) .
he is not only presented as a villain , but also as one of the less competent in villain 's camp - and portraying of homosexuals as villains or inferior to heterosexuals is almost unforgivable sin in " politically correct " hollywood . to make things even more obvious , good guys in this film are the total opposite of effeminate and incompetent edward - rugged macho men of mountains who are more practical and efficient because they tend to employ conservatives ' common sense instead of fashionable theories of ivory tower liberals .
however , although the message of this film might look right - wing , it owes more to leftist ideology of various national liberation movements in 20th century .
according to that ideology , oppressed classes ( workers , peasants ) are better suited to fight for national freedom because their members has less to lose in that struggle and , as such , they are more radical , less willing to make compromises and more efficient ; on the other hand , privileged classes ( aristocracy , bourgeoisie ) are more likely to betray the cause of freedom and be in cahoots with foreign oppressors in order to keep their privileges .
this marxist worldview is presented in braveheart without any subtlety .
in the end , whether the audience is patient enough to discover hidden meanings or simply wants to enjoy entertaining historical epic , braveheart is more than adequate choice for all fans of this recently resurrected genre .
answer:
P

question:
there are two things the american film industry should avoid at all costs .
one is letting an ambitious actor convert one of his or her favorite novels into a feature film .
two is never greenlight a sci - fi film starring john travolta .
to wit , we present the disaster that is battlefield earth .
a science - fiction opus starring the barbarino of the actors guild , battlefield earth should be shown only at maximum - security prisons when a prisoner is tossed in solitary for bad behavior .
sci - fi is always a tricky beast : tight script , a good director , an ensemble cast of decent actors , and the ability to suspend even the most difficult of disbeliefs .
battlefield earth
fails at achieving even one of these attributes .
here 's the ' plot . '
the year is 3000 .
mankind has been become an endangered species thanks to the conquest of a race of aliens called the psychlos ( sounds like either the latest clown act from cirque de soleil or a white rap group ) .
a small band of humans dwell in radioactive caves located in the rockies in fear of the ' demons ' who dwell in the cities below .
the psychlos are strip - mining the earth for its resources and terel , played by travolta , is the head of security for the mining / slave base located in denver .
a young rogue named jonnie goodboy tyler , played with dramatic flair by barry pepper , ventures from the safety of the caves into the city to uncover the truth about the ' demons . '
he is promptly captured and taken to the alien base .
after several attempts at escape , johnnie is placed in the middle of an underhanded subplot of terel 's , involving circumventing gold from an exposed vein in the rockies to his own end .
jonnie , assumed leader of the mining slave group , then manages to attain all psychlo and human intelligence through
a learning machine terel forces him to use .
then the story just runs along until jonnie teaches the rest of the humans the basics of trigonometry , the bill of rights , how to use a machine gun , and how to fly a harrier jet .
the whole mess concludes with a big , loud , obnoxious gun - and - plane battle that had me praying for the end credits .
roger christian , the director of this lumbering beast , must have rented dune , blade runner , planet of the apes , independence day , stargate , beastmaster , the airwolf episodes , the ' v ' miniseries , the matrix , and the omega man . . . and decided to steal every scene he could for battlefield earth .
christian even shoots every scene in a weird dutch angle titled left or right for every frame of the movie !
and every scene in the movie ends with a middle wipe -- really .
the psychlos reminded me of a cross between jamaican basketball players with bad teeth and bloated hands and klingon extras working the star trek convention circuit .
travolta 's acting has n't been this bad since the experts or maybe perfect .
jonnie goodboy tyler evolves into william wallace with lines like
' you can have your freedom if you fight ! '
then there 's the script : the film just never convinces you that the plight of jonnie in teaching his fellow humans to fight and ' take back the planet ' would be a difficult task to achieve .
why ?
because terel provides all the necessary tools to incite a revolt -- for no particular reason beside the fact that ' humans are stupid . '
terel may be right , you know .
humans made this movie .
answer:
N

question:
some movies i should just skip .
my daughter and i had a really vile time at my favorite martian a few weeks back , and here comes another disney effects - filled live - action flick based on an old tv program .
true , the probgram is only 15 years old this time , and it 's a cartoon .
but it 's a cartoon i liked , and i was understandably reluctant to see what disney had done to it on the big screen .
but my daughter really wanted to go , and how bad could it be ?
turns out i was right , mostly .
inspector gadget , oddly enough , follows almost exactly the same format as my favorite martian , down to the jive - talking side - kick .
at first i thought it was done by the same people , but imdb informs me that ig was directed by david kellogg and written by dana olsen and kerry ehrin , where mfm was directed by donald petrie and written by sherri stoner and deanna oliver .
this odd similarity between the two movies may best be explained by the studio that produced it , where " formula " is n't just business
, it 's a way of life .
the producers who obviously micromanaged the two projects should get prominant screen credits .
in some parts you can just hear them saying " more zany !
i want more zany here -- and -- here .
"
" let 's have a really painful sexual reference for no reason right here -- make it really painful .
i want the audience squirming in their seats .
"
" ok , that 's fine , but i want you to add bug guts .
"
" what does this scene do ?
character depth ?
but where 's the zaniness ?
i do n't see zany here .
if you ca n't make it zany , cut it !
"
the latter is the only explanation i can come up with for the absence of the thoroughly charming michelle trachtenberg for most of the movie .
michelle ( who plays penny , gadget 's niece ) shines in every scene she 's in , but unfortunately
she only gets about nine minutes of screen time .
my guess is that the rest is on the cutting room floor .
dabney coleman 's comedic talents are utterly wasted as chief quimby .
i kept expecting him to say or do something really funny and somehow save the film , but instead , he does the best he can with some really poor lines in a few unexceptional scenes .
he is thoroughly upstaged by cheri oteri as the " gidget bitch from hell " town mayor .
oteri 's
overly enthusiastic and continually self - congratulatory speech patterns and mannerisms were so much like portland , oregon 's own manic mayor vera katz that i had to wonder if the studio was n't poking fun at our fair town .
or , maybe all career politicians are like that .
i must say , matthew broderick does not stroll through inspector gadget as he did godzilla .
he appears to have some fun with the film , especially as the evil gadget .
rupert everett is entertaining as the maniacle claw .
joely fisher does fine as the zany scientist and even better as the zany carbon copy of herself .
her performance is one of the few things worth watching in the film .
d .
l . hughley plays the shuckin'-and - jivin ' vehicular side - kick , in a role that firmly sets emancipation back 20 years .
the dialog is . . .
let 's face it ,
it 's pretty bad .
the tag - line after a major set - piece battle is a faux pas that makes no sense in context .
a lot of the lines ( especially hughley 's ) appear to be made up as they go along , by people with little gift for ad - lib .
about three - quarters of the film is a somewhat unnecessary origin story for both gadget and claw .
gadget then spends the latter third of the movie trying to locate claw and having various altercations ( not really " battles " ) with the evil gadget .
penny does about a minute and a half of the detective work her character did every week in the cartoon .
let me rage here just for a minute .
michelle trachtenberg was an excellent choice for the penny character .
she 's utterly charming , and has excellent experience ( harriet the spy ) for the part of the pint - size detective .
why she is so underutilized
in this film is a real mystery .
the film loses a star for casting brilliance coupled with scripting ( or editing )
stupidity .
inspector gadget is missing the long , long stretches of potty humor that ( among other things ) made my favorite martian so unbearable , but it 's a very short movie , so perhaps something was cut at the last moment .
probably the best scenes in the film occur during the end credits .
the " evil sidekick support group " is especially worth seeing , and has an amazing number of cameo appearances for the few seconds it 's onscreen .
all in all , another bad live action film from the premere studio for bad live action films .
i wonder if disney uses the revenues for it 's generally money - making cartoons to produce these losers
.
but if true , why ?
if they 're trying for another mary poppins , they need to find a team that can produce one , and then give them a chance to do it .
answer:
N