In this task, you are given books product reviews in English language. The goal is to classify the review as "POS" if the overall sentiment of the review is positive or as "NEG" if the overall sentiment of the review is negative.
--------
Question: Excellent Writer.....Poor Plot . West is without a doubt a superb writer, however I found The Shoes of The Fisherman to be a great dissapointment.  In spite of the fact that most of the reviews I have read higly praise the book, it never really got to me.    The concept seems quite interesting at first:  an unknown russian, cardinal Kiril Lakota is elected pope.  After being held prisioner for quite a few years, he steps up to lead millions of people around the globe in a new world which he basically has knowledge of only from his years in captivity.    At the same time, Kamanev, the man who had been Lakota's prision guard in Russia, and who tortured him beyond belief, has become the head of the russian government.    The fact that both men now need each other provides for a very interesting plot, which in my opinion is never fully developed.  The main issue I have with the novel is that it is plotless...nothing really happens.  A large portion of the book consists of  a series of endless, and a bit boring, thoughts  from Lakota.    On the other hand, the reader is exposed to the way the catholic church funtions and thinks, which is an interesting way to humanize religion in he eyes of the reader.    There are also a series of sub-plots dealing with what Lakota has to face as a pope, regading human cruelty, poverty, and most of all politics, which could have proven to be enough for a good novel.    Unfortunatelly, the narration goes astray in many parts, which lessens one's interest in the book. Quite frankly, I had to make a great effort to finish the book, hoping that at some time it would pick up, which it never did.    As I mentioned before, West is a very good writer, but this book is in my opinion, highly overrated.  I can honestly say it never got my full atention.

Answer: NEG


Question: Not badly written, but ultimately preposterous . Toward the end of this novel, the lead character, Reichs' usual heroine Tempe Brennan, remarks on the "remarkable coincidence" of one of the plot points. By this point in the book, this is like pointing out to a rabid dog that it's got some spittle on its chin.  This book relies on coincidence so fundamentally that if it were removed, it would fall into 3 or 4 different books with little or nothing to do with one another.    Reichs is not a bad writer, and for someone who so clearly comes from a forensic background, is passably adept at character, plot and scene setting. She knows how to build suspense and intrigue, and never lets the technicalities of her lead character's profession -- a forensic anthropologist -- or the intricacies of her work, undermine the story.    This book centres on Brennan's investigation of a religious cult that perpetrates a set of murders. There are lots of interesting points about how cults work, ritual murder and even large group awareness programs get in on the action. And, of course, several forensic investigations where we are treated to the processes of digging up bones, collecting maggots and bugs, and examining various grim bits of the human body.    What undermines this book is that the first half is at least three different, unrelated stories; and the second is such a clumsy and outrageous merging of them into one, that one drifts from disinterest to incredulity. The jacket cover says this book is about the excavation of a 19th century nun's bones, and the mysteries therewith. In fact, this is just story number 1, which is of only tangential importance to the ultimate, main storyline.    It is not obvious, even in terms of the world of Death du Jour, why Reichs needed all this intermingling. It feels like she started writing a travel journal, then stuck a murder into each of her ports of call, then simply declared that they all belong to the same overarching plot. In this context, each individual story feels derivative, and the grand plot feels like a desperate trick.    A well-written and, at times, interesting book, which is ultimately unsatisfying and preposterous

Answer: NEG


Question: I simply don't understand...... . I hate to be yet another naysayer here, but seriously....what is all the hype about these books? My poor sister (who for some reason loved them) told me to read them, and I struggled for WEEKS to finish the first book in the series. Normally, a book of Eragon's size and reading level would be devoured by me in less that a day or two. However, upon reading the first chapter, I was struck almost immediately by the choppy sentence structure. Almost all the sentence were the same length. It was hard for me to read more than a chapter at a time because passages simply did not flow well at all.      When I finally finished Eragon, I thought that the second one had to be better, since it got published. I was dead wrong. Both books had an incredibly boring story, derivative plot, unoriginal characters and setting (also names stolen almost directly from Tolkien!!  ), pedestrian language and writing style, wooden dialogue (every character spoke with the same exact "voice," none were really distinct from each other), and cliched expression after cliched expression. In Eragon at least, the entire book was full of passages of "purple prose." Worst of all, the author only TOLD and hardly ever SHOWED the reader what the characters were feeling. Speaking of characters, Eragon sorely lacked both character description (I didn't even know what Murtagh was supposed to look like or how old he was until the book was almost over), and there was almost no character development whatsoever. I felt no emotional involvement and didn't care a thing for almost any of the characters. Making the reader care about their characters is one of the most important things authors must do to create a meaningful story with emotional depth. For instance, if George R. R. Martin can make me learn to love a traitorous villain who commits incest with his sister, then why can't I care about the "perfect" titular HERO of these books???      Believe me, I gave this series many chances to impress....and it failed. I love the idea of Dragon Riders (a la the Pern series) and I thought the character of Saphira had some good things about her. Being a linguist, I love the idea of language having a deep, abiding power of its own (which has also been done a la Tolkien and Le Guinn), but the things in this story just felt like a boy's fantasy daydream, down to the sexy elf chick in tight leather of all things.  Just because someone is young and writes a novel does not make said novel good nor does it make said novelist a prodigy. I truly think that the only reason either of these books were published in the first place is because Paolini's parents were the ones who published them.     My apologies if my rant offends anyone, I'm just a little upset that I spent so long plodding through this only to find that it did not improve. Normally when I read a book, I can tell its good because of the shivers of excitement I feel while devouring page after page. That quality is the main thing that was missing from Paolini's works. I truly hope he has a chance to improve his writing over time.

Answer:
NEG