In this task, you must classify if a given review is positive/negative, indicating your answer as P or N.

Ex Input:
what hath kevin williamson wrought ?
while the horror movie revival spurred on by his _ scream _ has yielded a few decent entries in the genre--_i_know_what_you_did_last_summer _ ,
_ halloween :
_ h20 _ , and
_
scream_2
_ --it must be noted that williamson himself had a hand in the writing of those films .
those williamson - less post-_scream _ efforts , among them _ wishmaster _ and the recent _ disturbing_behavior _ , have been frightening all right --
frighteningly , insultingly _ bad _
. add to that list
_ urban_legend _ , which takes a promising premise and runs it through a predictable meat grinder of idiocy .
the influence of williamson on screenwriter silvio horta is clear in two key areas .
first , the opening sequence , like that of _ scream _ , is an extended set piece detailing the singular murder that gets the proverbial ball rolling .
this sequence , in which pendleton college coed michelle mancini ( natasha gregson wagner ) is decapitated while driving , also reveals the other obviously williamson - esque touch : the killer 's look .
dressed in a large hooded parka , wielding an axe , the killer bears more than a passing resemblance to the _ i_know . . .
_ fisherman , sans the hook .
one thing horta does not borrow from williamson , however , is the intriguing premise .
students at pendleton are being killed by way of urban legends -- those contemporary bits of " mythology " passed from person to person , group to group , year to year that become so embedded in the social consciousness .
it hardly matters if they are true or not , such as the tall tale that mikey from the life cereal commercials died from a fatal combination of pop rocks and pepsi ( he did n't ) .
michelle , slain by the " killer lurking in the backseat " of lore , is but
the first to fall prey to an urban legend come true ; as the body count rises , fellow pendleton student natalie ( alicia witt ) suspects not only a link between the murders , but a personal link to her past as well .
the setup shows promise , but the story never takes off , due in large part to horta and the director , the aptly named jamie blanks , who fires round afer round of his namesake in terms of suspense and scares .
too many of the would - be shocks are fakeouts reliant on bombastic music cues , and the film 's chase scenes are riddled with the cliches that _ scream
_ tried to subvert , like screaming damsels knowingly running themselves into dead ends when they should -- and could -- run out the front door .
but that is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to cliches ; there 's also the climactic villain confession , in which a contrived and way - too - convenient motive is revealed , not to mention the credit card opening up the locked door trick , which is a cliche in any film genre .
banks and horta 's ( intentional ) attempts at humor are also lame ;
the fact that the best gags are lazy , in - jokey references to the other credits of co - stars joshua jackson and rebecca gayheart says a lot about the imagination of their humor .
some laughs are also had when the rather predictable identity of the killer is revealed , but i 'm not so sure if some of the more hilarious things about it were meant to be so .
the filmmakers do n't get much help from their onscreen talent .
i was far from a fan of bland _ i_know . . .
_ starlet jennifer love hewitt , but i 'd talke her
any day ove the dreadfully stiff and uncharismatic witt , whose inept attempts at emoting were often met with laughter
; witt has a pefect foil in her equally pesence - challenged leading man , jared leto .
_ dawson's_creek _ star jackson mugs his way thorugh a glorified cameo ; gayheart displays all the depth and range of , well , a noxzema spokeswoman ; and robert englund lends the film little more than his freddy krueger pedigree as a folklore professor .
granted , the cast is hampered by their material .
loretta devine , who has done some fine work in films such as _
waiting_to_exhale _ , is saddled with the ridiculous role of a pam grier - worshiping campus security guard .
the recently resuscitated horror genre can not rely on the efforts one man -- namely , kevin williamson -- to stay alive . if other filmmakers continue to make such shoddy product as _ urban_legend _ , the genre looks to once again go the way of screen slashers ' many victims .

Ex Output:
N


Ex Input:
deep rising is one of " those " movies .
the kind of movie which serves no purpose except to entertain us .
it does not ask us to think about important questions like life on other planets or the possibility that there is no god . . .
screw that , it says boldly , let 's see some computer generated monsters rip into , decapitate and generally cause irreparable booboos to a bunch of little known actors .
heh !
them wacky monsters , got ta love 'em .
of course , since we can rent about a thousand b movies with the same kind of story , hollywood must give that little extra " oumph " to get people in theaters .
that is where deep rising fails , which is a good thing
.
confused ? let me explain : despite all them flashy effects and big explosions , deep rising is still , at heart , a good ' ol b movie .
luckily , it 's a very good b movie .
the worst cliches in movie history are a b movie 's bread and butter .
therefore , things that would destroy a serious movie actually help us have a good time while watching a movie of lower calibre .
of course we know there 's a big slimy creature behind that door , that one person will wander off to be picked off by said monster and we always know which persons or person will make it out alive .
we just do n't know when or how horrible it will be .
i went to see deep rising with my expections low and my tolerance for bad dialogue high .
imagine my surprise when i discover that deep rising is actually , well ,
pretty darn funny at times .
a funny b movie ?
well , that 's new .
these flicks are not supposed to make us laugh .
( except for a few unintended laughs once a while . ) and before you know it , treat williams , wes studi and famke jansen appear on the big screen .
hey !
i know them guys ( and gal ) from a couple of other movies .
cool .
familiar faces .
so far so good .
our man treat is the hero , he 'll live .
wes is a staple of b movies , he is the token victim .
we know he 'll buy the farm
but he will take a few creeps with him on the way out .
famke is the babe , 'nuff said .
there is also a guy with glasses ( the guy with glasses always dies ) a black person ( b movie buffs know that the black guy always dies , never fails ) and a very funny , nerdy guy .
( ah ! comic relief .
how can we possibly explain having to kill him . . .
let him live . )
after the first fifteen minutes i felt right at home .
i know who to root for and who i need to boo too and a gum to chew .
( please kill me . )
suffice it to say that for the next hour and a half i jumped out of my seat a few times , went " ewwww " about a dozen times and nearly had an orgasm over all the explosions and firepower our heroes were packing .
i 'm a man , we nottice these things .
all in all , i 'd recommend deep rising if you are looking for a good time and care to leave your brain at the door . . . but bring your sense of humor and excitement in with you .
the acting is decent , the effects top rate . how to best describe it ?
put together the jet ski scene from hard rain , the bug attacks from starship troopers , a couple of james bond like stunts and all those scenes from friday the thirteenth and freddy where you keep screaming " do n't go there , he 's behind you " and you end up with deep rising .
for creepy crawly goodness , tight t - shirts , major firepower and the need to go to the bathroom every fifteen minutes from seing all that water .

Ex Output:
P


Ex Input:
i 'm not sure i should be writing a review of the witches of eastwick , because i 'm not sure just what the hell ( pardon the expression ) was going on in it
.
however , i can express the most important observation i made of it , i .
e .
i did n't like it .
if i had to summarize this film , i think i 'd conclude it was an updating of one of those old new england folk tales of someone selling their souls to old scratch and
how they try to get out of the deal .
that 's the kernel of it , anyway .
tossed into this are little bits and pieces that occasionally seem to be saying something about men and women , feminism , the role of the devil , modern reformers , and friendship .
unfortunately , little or no effort is ever made to follow up and elucidate on these concepts ; they 're simply thrown out and then left to rot while the film goes on apace
.
actually , i think that most of the audience was even more confused than i was .
they came in expecting some kind of supernatural comedy , on the level of ghostbusters , and were a bit confused to be getting a folk tale with philosophical overtones .
they laughed , or tried to laugh , at moments that were either barely funny , or much more horrible than funny , as if that could bend the film away from it 's rather frightening direction .
three women ( cher , susan sarandon , and michelle pfieffer ) live in eastwick , a small midwestern town .
one night , while drinking late into the evening , they begin wishing for the ideal man to drop into their lives .
in seeming answer to their idle daydreams , a wealthy eccentric moves into a mansion on the hill and seduces each one by attempting to be everything they want him to be .
he soon shows evidence of mystical -- perhaps demonic -- power , and his devotion to the women 's merest fantasies or wishes has dangerous overtones .
even worse , when ignored his moods become ugly , and he mistreats the women for spurning him .
anyway , the problems : all three female characters are fairly uninteresting , and several are cardboard stereotypes , especially sarandon 's character .
we never get inside them , never feel sympathetic to them , because their dialogue and personalities seem pretty bland
.
as for nicholson , well , even the devil needs a direction to go in , and while darryl van horne is the most interesting character in the movie ( due to the grace of the screenwriter and , more importantly , nicholson 's acting ) , he still ca n't be yanked in one direction and then another without making him a little vague .
and then there 's the special effects .
not in themselves -- they were n't that good -- but their overuse .
i was almost positive , until i saw the credits , that the witches of eastwick was either produced by alexander salkind ( who has turned out the slop named superman ii and iii and supergirl ) , because of the big name actors in dopy stunts , or stephen spielberg , after the 18th vomit scene and the nicholson - blown - down - the - street stunt .
nope , it 's another bunch of guys , and directed by george miller , who has shown great skill with stunts / special effects before ( the road warrior , " nightmare at 20 , 00 feet " episode of twilight zone : the movie ) but apparently does n't know when to turn off the wind machine and let his people act .
f'gawds sake , guys , this is jack nicholson ! let him loose !
let him grin demonically !
skip the splitting earth and fake lightning !
watching the scene where nicholson is tossed out of the car by the voodoo doll , all i could think of was , " what a waste " .
if you 're going to use slapstick like that , use it up on pee wee herman .
nicholson does what he can with the role , and when he can find his bearings , can be extremely good ( the scene in the church , for instance ) , but most of the time , he seems a bit stiff , as if he 's not sure what he should be doing next .
and no wonder .
this script goes all over the map , giving you the feeling that it 'd just love to be allegory , but it 's not sure about what-- maybe if you give it time it 'll think of something .
so what is the witches of eastwick ? a horror movie ?
a folk tale ?
a comedy ?
a statement about women ?
an examination of the religious right or comparitive morality ?
i tend to think of the image that seems to dominate the movie for me . . .
watching someone regurgitate half - digested bits of food and cherry pits all over rooms , people , the screen , and ultimately , the audience .
in other words , a mess .
( $ 2 . 00 ) if you like nicholson enough to watch him here ; maybe 25 % of his charm is able to make it through the logjams of others .

Ex Output:

N