george sluizer original version of the vanishing aka the man who wanted to know offers one of european cinema most quietly disturbing sociopaths and one of the most memorable finales of all time (shamelessly stolen by tarantino for kill bill volume two) and but it has plenty more to offer than that. playing around with chronology and inverting the usual clichés of standard lady vanishes plots and it also offers superb characterisation and strong and underplayed but convincing performances. unfortunately and i can only assume that when it came to the remake and sluizer was so determined that no one else was going to get the chance to ruin his film when he was perfectly capable of doing it himself and but few people could have anticipated how comprehensively he trashes his own work. his career never recovered from this disastrous misstep. chief culprit is an astonishing performance by jeff bridges that has been over thought through in every detail to a truly disastrous level. a friend who produced one of his earliest movies noted that bridges was a great instinctive actor as long as you stopped him thinking about what he was doing and and this film is the proof of the pudding. every movement is overly mechanical in its precision and making him look like a rusty clockwork toy and while his voice is a bizarre mixture of tootsie and latka gravas from taxi and a dalek who have all been taking elocution lessons from dok tah e ville. no banality of evil here and just a looney walking around with an invisible sign over his head saying please. let. me. kill. you. thank you. for your. consideration. but the blame really needs to be shared out here. none of the performances are good represent often and they do not even look good  keifer sutherland looks more like a baby hamster than a distraught man at his wits end in the hurried scenes at the gas station and nancy travis flounders badly and sandra bullock makes no impression at all as the object of his obsession. not that theyre given any help by either director or writer todd graff. the script is particularly weak. the chronology has been altered to put the focus firmly on bridges at the expense of the couple at the opening of the film. worse is the rush the film is in and draining the life and character from each scene in its race to get to the next. rather than the high or low mood shifts in the couple relationship or the apparently casual but careful establishing of the feel of the location and we just get a couple of arguments that give you the impression that he probably better off without her. as for the new and improved happy ending  standard woman chased by nutter in the woods jeopardy stuff complete with lame let end on a joke like a tv cop show moment  best not go there which is advice that holds for this entire trainwreck of a movie. even a shockingly bland and uninspired jerry goldsmith score can not do anything for this one. 
george sluizer original version of the vanishing aka the man who wanted to know offers one of european cinema most quietly disturbing sociopaths and one of the most memorable finales of all time (shamelessly stolen by tarantino for kill bill volume two) and but it has plenty more to offer than that. playing around with chronology and inverting the usual clichés of standard lady vanishes plots and it also offers superb characterisation and strong and underplayed but convincing performances. unfortunately and i can only assume that when it came to the remake and sluizer was so determined that no one else was going to get the chance to ruin his film when he was perfectly capable of doing it himself and but few people could have anticipated how comprehensively he trashes his own work. his career never recovered from this disastrous misstep. chief culprit is an astonishing performance by jeff bridges that has been over thought through in every detail to a truly disastrous level. a friend who produced one of his earliest movies noted that bridges was a great instinctive actor as long as you stopped him thinking about what he was doing and and this film is the proof of the pudding. every movement is overly mechanical in its precision and making him look like a rusty clockwork toy and while his voice is a bizarre mixture of tootsie and latka gravas from taxi and a dalek who have all been taking elocution lessons from dok tah e ville. no banality of evil here and just a looney walking around with an invisible sign over his head saying please. let. me. kill. you. thank you. for your. consideration. but the blame really needs to be shared out here. none of the performances are good represent often and they do not even look good  keifer sutherland looks more like a baby hamster than a distraught man at his wits end in the hurried scenes at the gas station and nancy travis flounders badly and sandra bullock makes no impression at all as the object of his obsession. not that theyre given any help by either director or writer todd graff. the script is particularly weak. the chronology has been altered to put the focus firmly on bridges at the expense of the couple at the opening of the film. worse is the rush the film is in and draining the life and character from each scene in its race to get to the next. rather than the high or low mood shifts in the couple relationship or the apparently casual but careful establishing of the feel of the location and we just get a couple of arguments that give you the impression that he probably better off without her. as for the new and improved happy ending  standard woman chased by nutter in the woods jeopardy stuff complete with lame let end on a joke like a tv cop show moment  best not go there which is advice that holds for this entire trainwreck of a movie. even a shockingly bland and uninspired jerry goldsmith score can not do anything for this one. ---------------------------------Answer Question Below----------------------------------

Judge the movie review above, you need to make a function call:
    If you feel the movie review is positive
        print "This is a semantically positive review."
    Otherwise, if you feel the movie review is negative
        print "This is a semantically negative review."
