Part 1. Definition
In this task, you must classify if a given review is positive/negative, indicating your answer as P or N.
Part 2. Example
plot : two teen couples go to a church party , drink and then drive .
they get into an accident .
one of the guys dies , but his girlfriend continues to see him in her life , and has nightmares .
what 's the deal ?
watch the movie and " sorta " find out . . .
critique : a mind - fuck movie for the teen generation that touches on a very cool idea , but presents it in a very bad package .
which is what makes this review an even harder one to write , since i generally applaud films which attempt to break the mold , mess with your head and such ( lost highway & memento ) , but there are good and bad ways of making all types of films , and these folks just did n't snag this one correctly
.
they seem to have taken this pretty neat concept , but executed it terribly .
so what are the problems with the movie ?
well , its main problem is that it 's simply too jumbled
.
it starts off " normal " but then downshifts into this " fantasy " world in which you , as an audience member ,
have no idea what 's going on
.
there are dreams , there are characters coming back from the dead , there are others who look like the dead , there are strange apparitions , there are disappearances , there are a looooot of chase scenes , there are tons of weird things that happen , and most of it is simply not explained .
now i personally do n't mind trying to unravel a film every now and then , but when all it does is give me the same clue over and over again , i get kind of fed up after a while , which is this film 's biggest problem .
it 's obviously got this big secret to hide , but it seems to want to hide it completely until its final five minutes .
and do they make things entertaining , thrilling or even engaging , in the meantime ?
not really .
the sad part is that the arrow and i both dig on flicks like this , so we actually figured most of it out by the half - way point , so all of the strangeness after that did start to make a little bit of sense , but it still did n't the make the film all that more entertaining .
i guess the bottom line with movies like this is that you should always make sure that the audience is " into it " even before they are given the secret password to enter your world of understanding .
i mean , showing melissa sagemiller running away from visions for about 20 minutes throughout the movie is just plain lazy ! !
okay , we get it .
. .
there are people chasing her and we do n't know who they are .
do we really need to see it over and over again ?
how about giving us different scenes offering further insight into all of the strangeness going down in the movie ?
apparently , the studio took this film away from its director and chopped it up themselves , and it shows .
there might 've been a pretty decent teen mind - fuck movie in here somewhere , but i guess " the suits " decided that turning it into a music video with little edge , would make more sense .
the actors are pretty good for the most part , although wes bentley just seemed to be playing the exact same character that he did in american beauty , only in a new neighborhood .
but my biggest kudos go out to sagemiller , who holds her own throughout the entire film , and actually has you feeling her character 's unraveling .
overall , the film does n't stick
because it does n't entertain , it 's confusing , it rarely excites and
it feels pretty redundant for most of its runtime , despite a pretty cool ending and explanation to all of the craziness that came before it .
oh ,
and by the way , this is not a horror or teen slasher flick . . .
it 's just packaged to look that way because someone is apparently assuming that the genre is still hot with the kids .
it also wrapped production two years ago and has been sitting on the shelves ever since .
whatever . .
. skip it !
where 's joblo coming from ?
a nightmare of elm street 3 ( 7/10 ) - blair witch 2 ( 7/10 ) - the crow ( 9/10 ) - the crow : salvation ( 4/10 )
- lost highway ( 10/10 ) - memento ( 10/10 ) - the others ( 9/10 ) - stir of echoes ( 8/10 )
Answer: N
Explanation: The phrases used in the review convey a negative sentiment (e.g. "presents it in a very bad package").
Part 3. Exercise
" sometimes the ' green mile ' seems sooooo long .
" indeed .
and any filmmaker with a three hour movie who ends it with that gem of dialogue should expect to see it quoted in a review .
on a more positive note , let me add that sometimes the green mile is almost good enough to make us forget its length .
the mile in question ( green due to its faded lime - colored linoleum ) leads from the prison cell to " old sparky , " the electric chair where executions were carried out at louisiana 's cold mountain penitentiary in 1935 .
paul edgecomb ( tom hanks
, you 've got mail ) is the head guard of e - block , otherwise known as death row .
keeping his prisoners calm as they await the carrying out of their sentence is his primary responsibility .
it is a responsibility which he capably delegates to the other guards on his watch by insisting they " talk to " the convicts instead of yelling at them .
this practice leads to an unusual camaraderie between the guards and the men behind their bars .
into his charge comes one john coffey ( michael clarke duncan , armageddon ) , a seven foot tall gentle giant who has been convicted of the rape and murder of two young girls .
immediately , paul senses something different about this prisoner .
perhaps its the way he asked for a night light because he is frightened of the dark .
or perhaps it is the mystical healing powers he demonstrates as he " takes back " paul 's bladder infection thereby restoring him to health .
based on steven king 's 1996 serialized novel , the green mile does offer other characters who have stories to be told : eduard delacroix ( michael jeter , patch adams ) , is a frail cajun convict who befriends and trains a mouse to do circus tricks ; percy wetmore ( doug hutchison , a time to kill ) , is a young and sadistic guard sitting on a transfer to a more lucrative position because he has yet to see a prisoner " fry " up close ; and hal moores ( james cromwell , babe : pig in the city ) is the compassionate warden for whom , despite all the executions he 's witnessed , death never loomed as large as when his own wife was diagnosed with a tumor .
while it is mr .
hanks " everyman " performance at the center of the film which gives it the anchor to hold our interest for 180 minutes , it is the performances of his supporting cast that are most worth noting .
all involved do credible work in their respective roles , most especially mr . duncan , who turns in an impressive , fully realized characterization .
if only the story were more credible .
writer / director frank darabont ( the shawshank redemption ) has crafted a flawed fantasy / allegory of sorts ; one which is more spiritualistic than spiritual , relying on a preternatural mysticism rather than a genuine and godly spiritual power .
mr .
darabont also overplays his hand considerably in the manipulation of our affection towards and association with his characters .
was it an accidental omission that the first two inmates who walked the green mile were being punished for crimes never disclosed ? by not knowing the reason for the condemned convicts ' presence on e - block , the audience never gets the sense of the justice which is being carried out , making the death penalty appear cruel and unwarranted .
this is especially true during the gruesome depiction of the second execution which was horribly botched .
much has also been made of coffey 's christ - like ability to heal but unlike the numerous healings which are recorded in the scriptures , coffey 's powers are shrouded in mystery , taking on the feel of a circus trick , coupled with a voodoo - like " i feel your pain " transference .
in contrast , there is no mystery associated with the healing that is from god .
the genuine " gifts of healing " listed in 1 corinthians 12 is just one of the nine manifestations of holy spirit and can be operated by any spiritually instructed man or woman in accordance with the knowledge and wisdom of god .
true spiritual healing ( with few exceptions ) requires the committed believing of both the healer as well as the one being healed .
such believing comes not from the shrouded secrets of mysticism , but from the revealed word of god .
Answer:
P