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

Answer: the government that he fought to establish to recognize his loyalty with a promised and much needed pension. Ripstein's lyrical work is a sweet ode to all those who, like the Colonel, suffer under the abuses of a cynical and hardened society that strengthens itself by denying its citizens the means to live with dignity and purpose. Unlike the absurdity of WAITING FOR GODOT, the Colonel's wait for the arrival of his pension gives hope and significance to his otherwise miserable life. Two things in the film drive the Colonel who is masterfully played by Fernando Lujan; the hope that his military pension will one day arrive and the knowledge that his son, Agustin, died for a noble cause, a reason other than a drunken fracas at a rigged cockfight. Unable to realize the former, and forced to prove to the world the latter, the Colonel does the only thing he can do, set about training his son's fighting cock. The cock is now the warrior who can bring fortune and justice to the Colonel and his asthmatic wife, but his fighting ring is that of the killer of his former owner, Agustin. In a tense scene of confrontation between the Colonel and Nogales, his son's killer, the Colonel is offered by Nogales, a paid government agent, money enough to equal the Colonel's full pension. But, this is blood money; hush money designed to hide the fact that those in power have turned their backs on one who fought for their political ideals, and to conceal to the world that the warrior colonel's son was assassinated because he wrote for an underground paper that favored the rights of labor unions and the common man. With maximum dignity, the Colonel rejects Nogales' offer, picks up his fighting rooster and walks away as nobly as his old legs can carry him. Once he is at home, Dona Lola, his scolding wife, wants to know why the Colonel refused the money when both of them are starving. In response to her continued question, "What are we going to eat until November (when the cockfighting season begins)", the Colonel responds, "Shit." Excrement is what the poor and disenfranchised have been eating all of their lives, and excrement is a meal that the Colonel willingly chooses to eat with dignity, knowing that he could never sell his soul to those who oppress him. The Colonel waits as the only man of honor and valor in a world without principles.

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

Answer: I entered my first comment on this film almost five years ago. Then, the ideas presented in the movie still seemed mostly fictional, if indeed they could ever transpire at all. Not any longer. Now, the politics, society, and media in The Running Man seem very close to home indeed.

Consider the following factors, which were mostly absent in 1987 (the year The Running Man came out) that are present today:

Concern with, as Richard Dawson's character Damon Killian puts it, "traditional morality." CHECK

Entertainment in the form of extreme reality, including pain, fear, and discomfort on the part of contestants. CHECK

Cameras everywhere. CHECK

Restricted travel for citizens at the whim of the government, controlled by a centralized computer system complete with barcoded passports ("travel passes" in the movie) and sanctioned under the guise of national security. CHECK

An increased intermingling, bordering on incestuous, of government and media. CHECK

Computer-generated graphics that are advanced enough to manipulate real film footage (such as the "digital matting" of Ben Richards' image onto the stunt double). CHECK

Jailing of conscientious objectors or detractors of the current administration. CHECK

Flagging economy further widening the gulf between the wealthy and not-so-wealthy; increasing numbers of fringe groups reacting to the tightening noose of big government; civil unrest brewing just under or at the surface of nearly every sizable public event regardless of its origin or intent. CHECK, CHECK, CHECK

Then again, maybe it's just a movie based on a Stephen King novella. But just to be safe, I'm moving to Switzerland.

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

Answer: As a teenager, I was pretty into the whole Bigfoot thing - I read the books and followed the reported sightings. As a more jaded adult, I've largely given up on the big guy now, but don't mind watching the odd movie when I come across one. This one had a few strong points to it - mainly, the recreations of two of the more famous Bigfoot encounters - the Ape Canyon incident of 1924 and the Bauman incident of c.1850 as related to and by Teddy Roosevelt, both of which I'm somewhat familiar with from that youthful reading I did. The movie takes for granted that both incidents involved a sasquatch, whereas both incidents have more plausible explanations, but the recreations were well done. There's also homage paid at the beginning of the movie to the famous Patterson video, again taking for granted its authenticity. The sasquatch encounter at the end of the movie was also very well done and had a very creepy feel to it as the sasquatch were portrayed mainly in the shadows or as hairy feet running past the terrified men. Unfortunately, in total those four things might have composed about 20 minutes, whereas the movie as a whole is slightly over an hour and a half.

It's the fictional story (done in a documentary style) of an expedition to a remote area of northern British Columbia, to the suspected home range of the sasquatch. A computer had targeted this area based on sightings and - in one of the more amusing scenes in the movie - the computer also used "eyewitness sightings" to draw a picture of a sasquatch that looked exactly like the "creature" of the Patterson video! Aside from those 20 minutes I mentioned, we basically watch this expedition travel, which means we get to watch a bunch of guys go on a long camping trip. I've been on camping trips with the guys. Let me tell you - they've never been worthy of a movie. Interspersed among the long stretches of boredom are some nice wildlife shots (although one suspects that canned footage was used, or perhaps even captive animals performing as wild animals) and there are some spectacular scenery shots, except that the scenery isn't of northern British Columbia, it's from national parks in Oregon.

I did appreciate that we were never given a real picture of the sasquatch, so we didn't have to deal with the bad makeup that would have been part of this. 3/10

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

Answer:
The often misunderstood Zabriskie Point is Antonioni's political film, Antonioni's American film. Stylistically, it follows suit after "Blow-Up", meaning that the pace is faster than the previous epics, though certainly no less idiosyncratic.

Basically the common mistake is that the film glorifies the hippie generation. Not so.

The two protagonists come from vastly different environments. Mark from the "rebel" youths, Daria from an estate agency corporation. But in true Antonioni fashion, they are both alienated, both trying to escape their surroundings. Mark leaves a meeting of rebel students and Black Panthers disappointed with the verbose empty rhetoric, while Daria keeps uneasily being on the move with her car.

Antionioni, the master director, after portraying the rebelling youth as confused and shallow, then moves to the city. An environment saturated by corporatism, billboard advertisements, meaninglessness, that has to keep expanding to accommodate the similar expansion of the population, generating a profit at the same time. It is this environment that the two protagonists escape from, though it seems mostly out of coincidence.

Indeed, when Daria stops by a small village in the outskirts of the desert, the environment is just as suffocating, and the people just as lost cases, best exemplified by an old boxing champion, now reduced to a shadow of himself, sitting around drinking and smoking and talking nonsense. A stunning melancholy sequence, made even more powerful with the inclusion of some half wild children living around, brought in by some "benefactor" but "destroying a genuine piece of American history". In a not-so-obscure symbolism, there is Antonioni's opinion on the hippies. Just a half-positive glimpse in the canvas of human alienation.

And then there is the desert, the landscape used to devastating effect, by turns pure and terrifying, primeval, wild and dead. The sequence where the two protagonists make love, "joined" in fantasy by the "flower" generation reflects the similar sequence in "Red Desert", where Giuliana tells her son a story. It is a colourful intermission in a colourless landscape. A vivid half-fantasy in a suffocating reality.

The ending probably belongs to the pantheon of great endings in cinema, the Western civilization blown to pieces. A catharsis, an exorcism.

Antionioni's two "international" films (the British "Blow-Up" and the American "Zabriskie Point") are lesser efforts than the previous masterpieces, but that is largely because of the faster pace and the inevitably contrived settings (swinging London, flower-power America). But when it comes down to it, it's clear he hasn't lost the edge.