There is no way a human reading this review would think its positive.
"I'll just tell you that it's slightly reminiscent of U Turn by Oliver Stone but is a way down in all artistic properties."
Oh and UTurn only scores 6.7 so its a bit of a crap movie to start with.
The first notable point is that the model caught that (on its first read, FWIW), even though the original human doing the labeling didn't.
And the second is that the researchers discovered this, and presumably discussed it. And yet when they wrote up the paper they not only dropped the content but denied that the analysis had been done.
> I am so happy not to live in an American small town. Because whenever I'm shown some small town in the States it is populated with all kinds of monsters among whom flesh hungry zombies, evil aliens and sinister ghosts are most harmless.
Mocking irony, in the context of a negative review.
What I find fascinating here is how generative AI has inverted all our sci-fi tropes. I mean, sure: you're right! That's the way "sarcasm" is defined in most dictionaries. But you and I both know that as the language is actually used, the term means a whole host of techniques used to convey negative emotional content in language that is not directly negative. Your (correct!) dictionary pedantry isn't interesting to me. We've been here before.
But GPT-4 wasn't trained on dictionary rules. It was trained on actual language. And it's actually better at inferring this stuff than the pedants are. Our introvert brains have trouble teasing meaning like this and have to hide behind rules and structure. The computer doesn't.
To wit: the robot is us.
There is another message that the reviewer doesn't like the genre, but that isn't a comment on the movie.