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

Input: Consider Input: star wars : ?
episode i -- the phantom menace ( 1999 ) director : george lucas cast : liam neeson , ewan mcgregor , natalie portman , jake lloyd , ian mcdiarmid , samuel l. jackson , oliver ford davies , terence stamp , pernilla august , frank oz , ahmed best , kenny baker , anthony daniels screenplay : george lucas producers :
rick mccallum runtime :
131 min .
us distribution :
20th century fox rated pg :
mild violence , thematic elements copyright
1999 nathaniel r. atcheson a fellow critic once stated his belief that a reviewer should not speak of himself in his own review .
i 've attempted to obey this rule in recent months , but to do so would be impossible in this case .
the fact is , nearly every person who goes to see the phantom menace brings baggage in with them .
the original star wars trilogy means so much to so many people .
for me , they calibrated my creativity as a child ; they are masterful , original works of art that mix moving stories with what were astonishing special effects at the time ( and they still hold up pretty darn well ) .
i am too young to have seen star wars in the theater during its original release , but that does n't make me any less dedicated to it .
on the contrary , the star wars trilogy -- and the empire strikes back in particular -- are three items on a very short list of why i love movies .
when i heard that george lucas would be making the first trilogy in the nine - film series , i got exited .
when i first saw screenshots from the film , well over a year ago , i embarked on a year - long drool of anticipation .
and when the first previews were released last thanksgiving , i was ready to see the film .
but then there was the hype , the insane marketing campaign , and lucasfilm 's secretive snobbery over the picture .
in the last weeks before the picture opened , while multitudes of fans waited outside of theaters and stood in the boiling sun days in advance just to be the first ones in the theater , i was tired of hearing about it .
i was tired of seeing cardboard cut - outs of the characters whenever i went to kfc or taco bell .
i just wanted to see the movie .
reader , do not misunderstand .
i did not have an anti - hype reaction .
the hype was unavoidable .
i understand and accept the hype -- it 's just what happens when the prequel to the most widely beloved films of all time get released .
five minutes into the phantom menace , i knew there was a problem .
" who are these jedi knights ?
"
i asked .
"
why are they churning out stale dialogue with machine - gun rapidity ?
" " why are n't these characters being developed before their adventures ?
" " why is there a special effects shot in nearly every frame of the entire film ?
" these were just some of my questions early on .
later , i asked ,
" where 's the magic of the first three films ? " and
" why am i looking at my watch every fifteen minutes ? '
by the end of the film , i was tired , maddened , and depressed .
george lucas has funneled his own wonderful movies into a pointless , mindless , summer blockbuster .
the phantom menace is no star wars film .
take away the title and the jedi talk and the force , and you 're left with what is easily one of the most vacuous special effects movies of all time .
it 's an embarrassment .
i looked desperately for a scene in which a character is explored , or a new theme is examined , or a special effects shot is n't used .
there are a few of each , but they 're all token attempts .
the fact is , george lucas has created what is simultaneously an abysmally bad excuse for a movie and a pretty good showcase for digital effects .
this is not what i wanted to see .
i did n't want to leave the phantom menace with a headache and a bitter taste in my mouth , but i did .
the story centers mostly around qui - gon jinn ( liam neeson , looking lost and confused ) and his apprentice , obi - wan kenobi ( ewan mcgregor , who scarcely has a line in the film ) and their attempts to liberate the people of the planet naboo .
naboo is the victim of a bureaucratic war with the trade federation ; their contact on naboo is queen amidala ( natalie portman ) , the teenage ruler who truly cares for her people .
after picking up jar jar binks ( a completely cgi character , voiced by ahmed best ) , they head to tatooine , where they meet young anakin skywalker ( jake lloyd ) and his mother ( pernilla august ) .
qui - gon knows that the force is strong with young anakin , and so the jedi knights take the boy with them on their journeys .
the bad guys are darth maul and darth sidious , neither of whom have enough lines to register as characters .
there is n't anything particularly wrong with this story when looking at it in synopsis form .
the way lucas has handled it , however , it unsatisfactory .
first of all , we do n't learn one single thing about qui - gon jinn .
not one thing .
what was his life like before this film ?
well , i imagine he did n't have one .
that 's why he feels like a plot device .
this probably explains why neeson looks so hopeless in the role , and why he 's recently retired from film ( i do n't blame him , honestly ) .
obi - wan , a character i was really looking forward to learning more about , is even less interesting .
mcgregor has just a few lines , so
anyone hoping to see the engaging young actor in a great performance is urged to look elsewhere .
since these two men are the focus of the phantom menace , lucas has served us a big emotional void as the centerpiece of his movie .
things start to pick up when our characters reach tatooine ; young anakin is perhaps the only truly fleshed - out character in the film , and lloyd does a thoughtful job with the role .
i was also hugely impressed with the sand speeder scene ; rarely is an action sequence so fast and so exciting .
and when anakin says goodbye to his mother , i found it moving .
also fairly good is portman , and she manages to give a little depth to a character where no depth has been written .
jar jar binks is one of the most annoying characters i 've ever had to endure , but he 's more interesting than most of the humans .
as soon as the relatively - brief segment on tatooine is over , it 's back to the mind - numbing special effects and depthless action scenes .
i 've seen many movies that qualify as " special effects extravaganzas , " but the phantom menace is the first one i 've seen that had me sick of the special effects fifteen minutes into the movie .
the reason is obvious : george lucas has no restraint .
i ca n't say that i did n't find the effects original , because i did -- the final battle between darth maul , obi - wan , and qui - gon is visually exceptional , as is most of the film .
but i also found the effects deadening and tiresome .
my breaking point was near the end of the picture , as anakin is getting questioned by yoda and the other jedi masters ; in the background , we see hundreds of digital spaceships flying around through a digital sky ,
and i wanted that to go away .
ca n't we have one stinking scene that is n't bursting at the seems with a special effects shot ?
i got so sick of looking at the cgi characters and spaceships and planets and backgrounds
that i really just wanted to go outside and look at a physical landscape for a few hours .
and then there 's the question of magic .
what was lost in the sixteen years between the phantom menace and return of the jedi ?
i have a feeling that lucas was so focused on how his movie looked
that he forgot entirely the way it should feel .
john williams ' familiar score is no help , nor is lucas ' direction .
i think it comes right down to characters
: there are none here .
i longed for the magnetic presence of han , luke , and leia , but i got no such thing .
and what about the ridiculous expectations ?
mine were n't that high ; i simply wanted a film that showed me the roots of the films that i grew up loving , a story that had a few characters and a few great special effects .
instead , i got two hours and fifteen minutes of a lifeless and imaginative computer graphics show .
i do n't hate the phantom menace as much as i resent it : i 'd like to forget that it exists , and yet i ca n't .
it 's here to stay .
i can only hope that episodes ii
and iii have something of substance in them , because if they do n't , then lucas will have pulled off the impossible task of destroying his own indestructible series .

Output: N


Input: Consider Input: for about twenty minutes into mission impossible 2 director john woo ( the killer , hard boiled , face off ) appears to have made an exciting , elegant , charming spy thriller , kind of a post millennium james bond adventure with a strapping american ( read : unsophisticated ) hero more willing to drop kick villains than out fox them .
sadly , as the picture progresses , the final product begins to bear a closer resemblance to a souped up , two - hour long episode of magyuver .
and not a particularly good one at that .
what went wrong ?
mi2 begins flashily enough , that initial flash leading us to believe that it 'll soon give way to something of a plot , but it only gives way to more flash , then digresses further into a presumably unintentional parody of itself with much slo mo posturing and countless action set pieces wherein bad guys seem to deliberately leap into the way of tom cruise 's firing gun just so they can die really cool .
early on , during a car chase between soon to be lovers ethan hunt ( tom cruise ) and nyah nordoff - hall ( thandie newton ) , woo works some of his trademark magic .
in one hypnotic , though completely inexplicable sequence , the director slows the action down to a languid semi - stall as cruise and his stunning opponent stare into one and other 's eyes with come hither sexuality ? ? ?
just as their respective cars smash and spin in accordance , coming ever so close to toppling over a neighboring cliff .
prior to this we see the famed trailer opener of cruise climbing a steep mountain , sans scaffolding , then leaping from one jagged rock formation to another .
why ?
i have n't the foggiest .
i doubt even john woo could provide you with a logical reply .
with mi2 woo has become a slave to the summer movie machine , the one that jettisons logic for gravity defying effects and story for more gravity defying effects .
it 's possible that these " spies " could be adrenaline junkies climbing mountains and crashing into each other as means to get off , though of course this is never explored .
the scenes i 've described are really only included to titillate , not to give any insight into character .
god forbid .
woo certainly knows how to make each set piece energetic , but they remain individual set pieces never connecting to form anything more than splices of beer commercial - like visuals .
still in terms of crackerjack eye candy , the opening has much to cherish .
cruise and newton first meet during a vigorous flamenco dance featuring several welcome woo devices ( the graceful slow mo artistry of synchronized movement juxtaposed against the stage 1 romance of two attractive individuals discovering how attractive the other is ) .
between the frantic dancing , woo trains his camera on cruise and newton as they make with some sensuous eye contact .
the scene is a little over the top in a bon jovi music video circa 1988 kind of way , yet it has style and something of soul , and woo casts a bit of a spell on us .
sure it 's all smoke and mirrors , but we can see that there happens to be a talented maestro behind this particular product .
thandie and cruise later meet in a bathtub in a scene that 's about half as playfully charming as the jennifer lopez \ george cloony trunk meeting in out of sight .
they flirt and exchange obvious double entendres .
newton bats her eyes flirtatiously .
cruise grins a little too slyly .
the cruise character , ethan hunt , has been drastically altered since the first film .
here cruise plays him more as a hip , sexual dynamo than the square jawed robot he impersonated in part 1 .
he 's cool and dashing , which is precisely the kind of role we want to see cruise in after watching him sleep walk through eyes wide shut ( which might just be the longest episode of red show diaries ever committed to film ) , and blustered his way through magnolia ( quite possibly the most overrated performance of the 90 's ) .
sadly as the film progresses we see less of cruise 's initial " i 'm the man !
" charm and more slo - mo close - ups of his preening mug .
mi2 falls apart on nearly every level during its repetitious third act , which is essentially one hour long action sequence that just wo n't stop .
the whole thing commences with an utterly generic gun battle ( the first gun fight in the film ) , which really should be unheard of in a john woo film , but alas this particular battle could 've been staged by anyone from renny harlin to joseph merhi ( of course excepting the " symbolic " pigeons who seem to find their way into every john woo picture ) .
we 've all seen guys slide across the floor in slo mo while firing a gun in each hand .
it is n't done any differently here .
the action is pure hard target \ broken arrow theatrics with nothing to propel it but the apparent need to see tom cruise drop kick face less villains while his hair whips stylishly in the wind .
he 's cool for sure but
he 's made to be as empty as the movie .
the actor is n't used so much for his boyish appeal as for his chiseled looks ; he smiles narcissistically into the camera at literally any moment , be it during a gunfight , before one or after one .
when he 's not beaming away , he 's staring into the lens with cold eyes trying to look mad as hell , but woo 's editing seriously undermines the effort .
he fetishizes cruise 's angular face with such glee that it turns into a naked gun style spoof .
i half expected cruise to peel off his facemask and reveal that he 's really austin powers .
in a classic woo action moment , ethan hunt struts past a fiery doorway glaring at the baddies within its frame like a pin - up boy angel of death .
the gunfight turns into a daring escape which turns into a reckless mission which turns into a motorcycle attack in which bad guys seem to angle directly for cruise to kill them like some kind of mass suicide ritual ( one dumb bastard even jumps his bike over the gun toting cruise , basically inviting our handsome hero to shoot him in mid air which he does ) .
the lead bad guy ( played by the appropriately british dougray scott ) and cruise face off in a mentally deficient game of chicken ? ? ? on motorcycles .
though instead of jumping off to the side at the last moment , the two grown men leap directly into the other giving each other a mid air bear hug , only to fly about a hundred feet ( still in bear hug position ) , land on a beach below and begin a mano - e - mano fist fight that ends with the bad guy pulling a " so you thought i was dead . . .
"
.
not to worry , cruise takes care of the problem without even breaking a sweat .
what a hero !
you may have noticed that i opted not to describe an iota of mi2 's plot .
my reasoning is simple : i 'm not sure of any good it would do .
the film itself has absolutely no concern with story , only with hurtling forth to the next " special " effect .
i was n't kidding when i told a friend of mine that mi2 has less plot than the average aerosmith video .
nobody will go to this for the plot , and if they do they 'll surely regret it .
as summer movies evolve ( or devolve ) character and plot have become increasingly whittled down to nearly nothing .
in mi , the plot seemed to be built around brian de palma 's ( that film 's director ) stylistic flourishes , while in mi2 the plot only serves to give us an intermittent breather from woo 's non - stop masturbatory pandemonium .
it 's irrelevant in every sense , as is character .
all that ultimately matters are those pesky smoke and mirrors .

Output: N


Input: Consider Input: only a year after the initial release of " scream , " the horror send - up from veteran horror director wes craven and screenwriter kevin williamson that seemed to breathe new life into the slasher genre , the inevitable sequel " scream 2 " has arrived in our theaters .
while the tongue - in - cheek , parodic element is still noticeable in this film , it 's really a sideshow to a broader commentary on violence and the media and a more conventional horror story .
the first film , while often violent and gruesome , was mostly lacking in genuine scares because almost every scene was played for camp value and the discussion of the quirks and cliches of horror movies was nearly constant .
the premise of " scream 2 " is that a series of copycat killings begin when a movie called " stab , " based on a book written by opportunistic reporter gail weathers ( courtney cox ) about the events in " scream , " is released and two audience members are killed during the opening screening .
i had heard about this scene before i went to see the film and was surprised to find this sequence largely lacking in camp comedy .
its conclusion , in which a bleeding , wounded woman stumbles in front of the screen and dies in front of an audience that cheers on because they think it 's a publicity stunt , is more surreal and disturbing than anything else .
the satire in " scream 2 " thus takes on a broad focus and gradually evolves into an exploration of media perceptions in general .
although resident horror film geek randy ( jamie kennedy ) is back with fresh dialogue about sequels ( and , interestingly enough , how they are usually inferior to their predecessors ) , the characters in this movie are drawing from other entries in the pop culture encyclopedia as well .
everything from " friends " and " saved by the bell " to " showgirls " and " terminator 2 " is referenced here ; horror is only one of many genres available for lampooning , and there are n't any " wes carpenter " jokes this time .
more importantly , this film portrays characters willing to go to disturbing lengths for media attention as well as characters whose perceptions have clearly been warped by what they have seen on tv and film .
the killings are clearly an imitation of the previous murders from " scream " ( in fact , the culprit even plans to use the influence of horror movies as a courtroom defense ) , weathers exploits the situation for her own notoriety , and one man seems willing to save the heroine 's life only if it will earn him an interview on the today show .
understandably , " scream 2 " does not go so far as to actually blame the movies , but rather shows that those who do imitate horror movies are already sick and twisted .
couple that with the fact that several of the characters , most notably the lead character sidney prescott ( neve campbell ) , are fairly well - developed and that there are some genuine moments of spine - chilling suspense , and what we have is a pretty darned good horror movie in its own right
.
we do n't just get the horror of scary masks and graphic gore - we also get the horror of sympathetic characters who seem helpless as their friends are slaughtered ( and , in one case , a significant character who was an audience favorite even bites the dust ) and whose lives have been reduced to constant fear of a crazed murderer lurking around the corner .
while i have not seen any of his other work , it 's easy to see why craven is generally touted as the most sophisticated " slasher film " director , as he clearly cares about something more than just the actual acts of slashing .
unfortunately , " scream 2 " occasionally reverts to the time - honored horror tradition of throwing logic out the window .
for example , several characters seem quite clearly dead and inexplicably turn up alive later - there has been a running gag in both movies about the villain being able to pull off this particular trick , but it also happens with other characters and in an even less believable fashion .
there are also a few scenes in which the killer suddenly appears behind the next victim in a situation such that ( s ) he clearly would have been seen moving in that direction .
as for the question of whether or not " scream 2 " is yet another sequel not as good as its predecessor . . .
well , it 's hard to say .
i gave the first " scream " 3 1/2 stars as well because it worked pretty consistently as a light - hearted send - up .
" scream 2 " bounces all over the place stylistically , but
it does a better job delivering the genuine scares and asking the questions about media violence that were only hinted at in the first installment .
i 'm not sure which is the better movie , but i did leave the theater convinced of one thing : sequels , however much randy might argue , do not necessarily suck .


Output: P