TASK DEFINITION: In this task, you must classify if a given review is positive/negative, indicating your answer as P or N.
PROBLEM: the new austin powers film continues a movie tradition begun in the eighties .
produce something , anything , that will get the high school and junior high kids in the theater because they buy more soda and popcorn than senior citizens .
the usual hallmarks of this filmmaking tradition are all here .
gross humor , sex jokes , silly sight gags , more sex jokes .
and the film is a strong contender in the current race to be cruder , grosser and more outrageous than that last film .
what the film is not , however , is funny .
the plot centers around the return of dr .
evil , who goes back in time to steal austin powers ' mojo ( a liquid with red stuff in it extracted from austin 's pelvis ) which gives austin his sexual prowess and the charisma to defeat his enemies .
austin must go after him , and returns to the swinging sixties where free love and sexy secret agents had their heyday .
i almost avoided this film because i did not like the original .
but the films premise sounded like an excellent comic vehicle and the film received many good reviews .
i wish i had stuck to my first impression .
myers is trying to be the jerry lewis of this generation .
and he has the talent to do it , at least as an actor .
but the material he is working with here , much of it his own , falls short of anything resembling comic genius .
this movie tries to carry the day with sight gags about drinking distilled feces , a five - hundred - pound fat man 's butt crack , and a barrage of sex jokes aimed at the level of the average 15 year old .
after some of these scenes , one has to wonder how gross the next generation of films will have to go to get an audiences attention .
the direction also helps the film achieve a new low point in cinematic humor .
for the most part , i felt as if i was watching a saturday morning chalderns live action tv show .
there is no sense of comic timing or subtlety .
the director just throws the material at us , giving us nothing except the hope that anyone with a camera could be a film director .
i am sure the film will have appeal to many of the under 22 crowd , at least the one 's who have yet to discover literacy .
certainly the movie is directed towards the generation that prefers everything described as ' in your face , kick you in the teeth , take no prisoners ,
( action - verb + blah blah blah ) .
' if you see the film and you find you 're not laughing , there is nothing wrong with you .
it just means you grew up since seventh grade .

SOLUTION: N

PROBLEM: i am starting to write this review before going to see strawberry and chocolate , cuba 's oscar nominee for best foreign film , directed by tomas gutierrez alea ( who also directed the sometimes and in some circles critically acclaimed memorias del subdesarrollo-- " memories of underdevelopment " .
i saw memorias as part of a cuban cinema class back in the late ' 70s ; it merged the politics of the cuban revolution with mundane elements of the human condition .
i knew then that memorias was probably a state - sanctioned political missive , and now expect strawberry will follow suit .
fellow internetters , primarily in the newsgroup dedicated to cuba ( soc . culture .
cuba ) , have mentioned that strawberry is a harsh criticism of the revolution and its current state of affairs .
i have jumped to the conclusion that strawberry is nothing more than a veiled attempt at espousing the party line -- it probably looks like political criticism , but it ai n't so .
having some first hand and extensive anecdotal knowledge of castro 's repressiveness , i ca n't conceive of his tolerating honest and adversarial criticism of the revolution , and i ca n't imagine his letting anyone even suggest his failure as a leader of a failed movement .
as kids say these days , duh ! , the revolution 's current state needs no criticism ; its physical and spiritual crumbling is self evident .
the proper questions to put relate to castro 's legitimacy .
i bet the film takes castro 's power for granted , and that this or any other movie , produced under cuba 's state control , can not question his right to run cuba 's political show ( ongoing now for more than 36 years ) .
that 's why i just ca n't believe strawberry is an honest criticism of the regime .
let 's see what happens after the room goes dark and the screen lights up .
i saw the film -- twice .
i was right ; castro remained intact .
strawberry negotiates the relationship between a young " dialectic materialist , " as he describes himself , and a homosexual photographer ( diego ) in 1979 cuba .
the young man ( david ) is the son of peasants ; a symbol of the revolution 's reason for being .
grateful to the revolution for the opportunity to receive a university education , he studies political science instead of literature , his avocation , because he perceives it is his duty .
therein lies a likely unintended irony , since cuba has no need for political theoreticians .
cuba 's government is castro .
diego 's lifestyle is the antithesis of revolutionary life .
he enjoys the finer things -- tea , opera , art .
he does not do " voluntary work " for the revolution .
his small apartment is a sensual oasis .
the moniker " bourgeois " figuratively hangs over his head during the early parts of the movie .
however , he is a " revolucionario " in his own way .
the supporting roles are filled by : an aging busybody with a heart of gold and a troubled psyche ; david 's roommate , who rally takes the communist party line to its expected extreme ;
david 's ex - girlfriend , who dumped him for another guy , yet wants to bed him before she leaves for italy with her husband ; german , a gay sculptor whose work diego is attempting to exhibit , and who strikes a faustian pact with the government .
gutierrez alea and co - director
juan carlos tabio
do a fine job at almost showing that homosexuals can be revolutionaries too .
heck , towards the end of the film you begin to think the guy deserves a medal for his patriotic fervor .
he really loves the revolution ( as supposedly does everybody else in cuba ) and wants to make it better by exposing and correcting some of its flaws .
real criticism is missing though .
this movie is political window dressing .
luis aguilar leon 's op .
ed .
piece on fresa in the miami herald ( 10 march 1995 , at 21a ) did not color my judgment ; it presaged my intuition .
aguilar leon expressed my sentiment about this film 's political angle best : like many artistic manifestations in cuba , strawberry and chocolate sprang from a totally manipulated environment .
as art critic ivan de la nuez well states in the latest issue of the magazine postmodern notes , the silenced artists are those who refuse to accept " the charade in which artists can provoke up to a point , while the institutions legitimize themselves by forbidding them to go beyond that point .
" although terrible propaganda , this is otherwise a fine film .

SOLUTION: P

PROBLEM: it 's a curious thing - i 've found that when willis is not called on to carry the whole movie , he 's much better and so is the movie .
even though , in the sixth sense he is the " name " , he does n't have the pivotal role .
that honour goes to haley osment who plays cole sear ( cute pun , seer ) a 9 year old boy who can see ghosts .
if osment was cute or precious , the director going for the maudlin , this would be nothing more than a movie - of - the - week , thankfully , osment is not only better than that , but in some instances , blows everyone else off the screen in a bravura performance .
we get to see his fears , vulnerabilities , strengths and intelligence which makes the sixth sense one of the best movies i 've seen this year .
the whole cast matches him in quality , with willis giving a fairly low key performance that matches the subject matter .
one thing about this movie , its target .
this is n't a sfxfest like the haunting or a gorefest , this is more what i 'd call a supernatural drama , more interested in characters than in dazzling you with makeup .
one caveat :
there 's a lovely twist in the movie , something like the usual suspects , where you end up replaying the movie in your head rethinking what you have just seen .
i was extremely lucky to see it as a sneak preview in toronto , before any hype or critical reviews were out , so i went in with no biases .
if anyone want to talk to about the movie before you see it , do n't let them .
let the director explain on his own pace and you 'll enjoy the movie vastly more .

SOLUTION:
P