Q: Based on this review, would the user recommend this product? === Review: There is something vicious lurking in the woods around the mountains of France. It kills, it maims, it eats, and it is terrorizing the people of Gevaudan. On the kings orders, the royal taxidermist Grégoire de Fronsac is traveling to the area with his friend Mani, an Iroquois who is a martial arts master, to investigate the dilemma. These men spend a lot of time in the brothel while maintaining a respectable front and when they have time they perform round house kicks left and right. In all honesty, this film had potential when they began shooting it, however, somewhere in the production the director must have lost focus from the theme. Answer:
A: No

Q: Based on this review, would the user recommend this product? === Review: I own different dictionaries and by far Oxford dictionary of... is on the bottom.No dictionary is perfect but when I see etymology in title Iexpect etymology inside.One example--police;where I expected to see itsroots from Greek,no luck,instead dictionary gives the difference in pronunciation in parts of Great Britain.My wild guess is the authorsare not familiar with term etymology. Answer:
A: No

Q: Based on this review, would the user recommend this product? === Review: Does what I wanted and was the cheapest can of air w/prime shipping on amazon. Even beat ebay. Answer:
A: Yes

Q: Based on this review, would the user recommend this product? === Review: Disappointing, beyond belief! I've liked all three of Harris' earlier books, including both with Lechter, and found them thoughtful, thrilling, and gritty. Better than "genre fare." But great thrillers need great villians, and the Lechter victim seeking revenge here is lamely underwritten, and foolishly cartoonish -- a hideous, disfigured, crippled meat packing czar who agents are secretly breeding the Terror Pigs of Europe as his instrument of vengeance. This is like something out of Danger Mouse or Inspector Gadget; James Belushi, not James Ellroy. Pathetic. The ending (interesting in principle) is so poorly developed and prepared that it turns preposterous, unconvincing, and arbitrary. Stephen King's review in the New York Times is inexplicable, except as a mutual back-scratching blurb bouquet. Answer:
