An example of a movie review. negative.

A: This is an art film that was either made in 1969 or 1972 (the National Film Preservation Foundation says 1969 and IMDb says 1972). Regardless of the exact date, the film definitely appears to be very indicative of this general time period--with some camera-work and pop art stylings that are pure late 60s-early 70s.

The film consists of three simple images that are distorted using different weird camera tricks. These distorted images are accompanied by music and there is absolutely no dialog or plot of any sort. This was obviously intended as almost like a form of performance art, and like most performance art, it's interesting at first but quickly becomes tiresome. The film, to put it even more bluntly, is a total bore and would appeal to no one but perhaps those who made the film, their family and friends and perhaps a few people just too hip and "with it" to be understood by us mortals.

An example of a movie review. positive.

A: "Cinema is dead, long live the cinema!" said Peter Greenaway, one of the most innovative and productive contemporary directors, at the last year's Romanian film festival Anonimul, which got to the third edition and takes place in the Danube Delta. This year the direction prize went to Jafar Panahi's "Offside". I got to see it this evening in Bucharest at the festival's retrospective. Cinema is dead but still very lively. Panahi's film tells in a compelling manner how Iranian society looks. Digitally filmed, "Offside" is a story inspired by a real-life event happened to Panahi's daughter: the trouble and risk took when decided to attend a football match. This is forbidden in Iran as we are informed. What Panahi manages to do is to render with few means, but with, probably, a lot of work, intelligence and humor the cultural patterns in a society that places women at a distinct level. The absurdity of the laws becomes comical. The film has a happy end, after all because Iran's team goes to the World Cup. What I appreciated most was the concept, the idea behind this film. I would be very interested to see Panahi's other films that were forbidden in Iran as well. I guess that he can be thought as an activist director.

An example of a movie review. negative.

A:
Mr Perlman gives a standout performance (as usual). Sadly, he has to struggle with an underwritten script and some nonsensical set pieces.

Larsen is in "Die Hard" mode complete with singlet and bulging muscles, I'm sure he could do better but seems satisfied to grimace and snarl through his part.

The lovely Erika is very decorative (even though fully clothed!) and shows some signs of "getting" acting at last.

SFX are mainly poor CGI and steals from other movies.

The shootouts are pitiful - worthy of the A-Team

Not even worth seeing for Perlman - AVOID