Given reviews from Amazon, classify those review based on their content into two classes: Negative or Positive.

Example Input: Like all of her Scarpetta mystery novels, Patricia Cornwell has proven again that she must have been one dynamite of a Coroner when she was practicing. She has a wealth of information in her books and it is so interesting to follow as she progresses to solving the mystery. I've never enjoyed reading as much as when I pick up a Cornwell novel.
Example Output: Positive

Example Input: Even that single star is more than this book is worth. My Engligh professor assigned this book to me during my sophomore year of college (along with Nectar in a Sieve, a far better, though not terrific book), and what little I remember of it was that it was just awful (and offal). Her writing is repetitive and choppy, perhaps descriptive but disgustingly so. Do we really need to know the "wetness between [her] legs", or that she cooked her menstrual fluid into some poor soul's dinner? I couldn't stand the book. If you want quality, read something by Neil Gaiman, or Stephen King (his descriptions of a girl coming of age in Carrie are much better than this book). Drop the book, throw it, burn it, whatever. It's just not worth reading. How many trees did we lose to its production (and, more importantly, how many talented young writers were rejected because this woman was published). It's just a book not worth reading about a story not worth telling.
Example Output: Negative

Example Input: I'm no great fan of bluegrass or country, but this release intrigued me because - like many people, I suspect - I have a soft spot for Dolly. "The Grass is Blue", though, really is as good as the other reviewers have said.
Example Output:
Positive