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

Example Input: sandra bullock in high heels and wielding a chainsaw ?
yup , it 's got ta be summer .
just when you thought the pointless sequel had gone the way of franchise films and direct - to - video releases , into port slams speed 2 : cruise control , the gloriously godawful follow - up to the 1994 sleeper about a bus rigged to explode if it slowed below a certain speed .
the gimmick , this time , is an ocean liner rigged to , well , crash into stuff .
sound exciting ?
dennis hopper 's disgruntled bomb squader , the villain of the first film , has given way to willem dafoe 's disgruntled computer programmer , a maniac whose main beef has something to do with having to use live leeches , i kid you not , as a self - treatment for copper
poison- ing .
( and said poisoning induced by prolonged exposure to electro- magnetic fields , no less !
calling dean edell . . . )
so , he overrides the boat 's computer , convinces the crew to abandon ship , and sends the remaining passengers , those who could n't evacuate in time , on a col- lision course with destiny .
( oddly , no one thinks to just . . .
jump off the back of the boat . )
with keanu reeves electing not to return--
perhaps he read the script ?
-- the job of john mcclane goes to jason patric ( sleepers ) , as the * second * la cop and swat team member that that bus drivin ' babe annie ( bullock ) has dated .
( what are the odds ? )
they 're on this caribbean cruise for pleasure , as are a handful of requisite stock characters , including a deaf teenager
( ! ) who has a crush on the hero
( ! ! ) who also knows how to sign
( ! ! ! ) .
( and you thought the raptor slam was a cool summer movie move ?
wait till you see the feats that * this * little girl can do , when stuck on a shipboard elevator ! )
bullock is her pesky , perky self , though she ends up with far less screen time than her top billing suggests .
( those paying attention to her bikini-
and tank- tops probably wo n't complain , however ) patric is the main man in motion and that 's damn good , 'cause when he stops to talk , he 's only slightly less monotone than his predecessor .
( his first lol line is to ms .
bullock :
" i 'd like to boogie with you .
" ) of course , nobody in front of the camera embarrasses themselves quite the way that returning director jan de bont does .
he also produced this mess , which is insulting even by the most lax summer standards .
( con air , buddy , father 's day , romy and michelle 's high school reunion , murder at 1600 , 8 heads in a duffle bag , anaconda , vegas vacation , meet wally sparks , metro , bevery hills ninja , the relic , all is forgiven ) .
worse , he 's spent a hundred mil on a premise that does n't even live up to its title !
there 's no sweat - inducing motion of the ocean here-- just two hours of shaky handheld camera work and a handful of cross - cut exteriors , all leading up to the big slam , when the love boat sideswipes an oil tanker and then plows into a harbor town .
( oh , how far we 've come in twenty years .
remember the simple fun of seeing a locomotive smash into railway station in the silver streak ? )
admittedly , either of the aforementioned sequences is worth the price of admission .
it 's just the rest of the movie-- the other hundred or so minutes-- that 's pure nonsense .
and wonderful nonsense at that .
i know he did n't intend to , but de bont has done one thing right : he 's created the hands - down funniest film of the year .
so , now , allow to present a few more things that made me laugh :
o a box with a big label :
" fiber optic converter " o plain english , whole - sentence computer instructions o an entire sequence devoted to opening a fire door o jason patric 's character walks onto the bridge and immediately understands everything that 's happening o a ships ' navigator who speaks in a scottish accent and actually gets to say " i canna override it !
"
o willem dafoe 's amazing arm - mounted keyboard o two living , breathing adults ( bullock 's character and the first mate ) who have to be told , step by step , how to disconnect a trip wire from the pin of a hand grenade .
duh
o " no wait !
"
screams
the ship 's intercom o
yet another damn dog in peril
o fishing reel .
pontoon plane .
memories of weekend at bernie 's
Example Output: N

Example Input: no filmmaker deconstructs a story as well as atom egoyan .
i 'm referring , specifically , to the narrative form .
in the sweet hereafter , egoyan tells his story in a similar framework to his exotica or the adjuster .
said story , of a fatal school bus accident in the small town of sam dent , british columbia , that shatters the morale of the locals , is told in a most unstraightforward manner .
when the film opens , the accident has already happened , and stephens ( the wonderful holm ) , a polite ambulance - chaser , has arrived with the promise of a lawsuit that will eek out the truth of what really occurred that fateful morning .
throughout , we get to meet the parents of the dead , broken souls who follow stephens like " the pied piper " ( passages of which are read during the film ) .
but there is one living passenger , the paralyzed nicole ( polley ) , whose dark secrets of a life before the accident may affect her decision to testify .
we finally do see the accident , about three quarters into the film , which is a stunning visual effect .
a horrific long take that shows the bus sliding , then stopping , then collapsing into a frozen lake , is the best digital trickery in any movie this year
and , perhaps , ever , in a motion picture .
the fractured narrative also intercuts a preoccupied stephens on an airplane , traveling to meet his hiv - positive runaway daughter , as well as glimpses of the artificially happy lives these people led pre - accident .
i have a problem not with the story or story structure , but with egoyan 's heavy- handedness behind the camera .
for the first hour or so , i can quite honestly say i was on the verge of tears ; these are miserable , miserable people .
but that 's just the problem : so anguished are these folk that sympathy wanes after a while , when a lot of sadness becomes too much .
also , a subplot involving incest rings untrue .
perhaps it would n't feel so contrived if it were n't shot in such a tasteful manner .
there are two characters who are father and daughter ; when they first appeared i thought they were lovers .
i was half - right .
nevertheless it 's worth - seeing .
the delightful critic geoff pevere recently wrote that " american films are about action , canadian films are about consequences , " hence a recent wave of films about the effects of shock and death from toronto directors , including crash and kissed .
the sweet hereafter is much better
than either of these two films , simply because it 's not boring
or , in the case of kissed , afraid of its own material ( necrophilia ) .
egoyan is a fine , fine , postmodern storyteller , whose work is entertaining , edgy and smart , if a bit too intellectual at times .
though i harped on the weightiness of the material ,
i was always absorbed , engrossed , and surprised by the sweet hereafter .
Example Output: P

Example Input: dear god , this is a fantastically bad film !
regardless of what i say about knock off , you ca n't grasp its awfulness from my words .
you have to see it and experience it for yourself .
here 's the kicker , though -- i suggest that you do so .
yes , this is a bad film -- easily one of the most incompetent films of the year --
but it has a certain misguided charm that makes it a unique kind of disaster to endure
.
in fact , i enjoyed myself for most of its brief running time , despite the dreadful acting and a completely incomprehensible story
.
do n't get me wrong : i 'm not excusing knock off .
it reaches an unacceptable level of badness ; it 's so incoherent that i wonder if it was hacked up worse than the avengers was .
it also features some truly terrible performances from lela rochon , michael wong , paul sorvino , and -- of course -- jean - claude van damme .
it does , however , have the entertaining presence of rob schneider , and the excessively inventive and pretentious direction of tsui hark .
as i watched it , i occasionally wondered if it was aware of its own awfulness .
now , in retrospect , it seems clear that it was n't , but it 's still a fascinating kind of mess .
i do n't like writing plot descriptions ( it is , by far , the most boring part of writing a review ) , but , in this case , i 'm off the hook : there is no way i could write an accurate synopsis for knock off .
for the sake of comparison , i had no trouble understanding the usual suspects during my first viewing .
i paid closer attention to knock off , and the only thing i am able to say about it is that van damme plays a dude named ray , and is accused by the cia ( i think ) of selling
knock off products ( knock off products are , of course , products that look like name - brand materials but are generic and cheap ) .
i do n't know what any of this has to do with martial arts , but there are lots of martial arts in the film .
ray is good at martial arts , so when he has to beat up bad guys , there 's no problem .
rob schneider plays his sidekick , although i had no idea who he really was by the end of the film .
lela rochon is just some woman who accuses them of stuff , while paul sorvino is both the good guy and the bad guy at once !
in fact , every character goes through so many shifts from good to bad that the end provides absolutely no insight into what any of them really do .
in that order , knock off is completely incoherent and makes absolutely no sense .
but what a strange mess
it is .
it was written by stephen e .
de souza , who also wrote die hard and 48 hours .
can this be the same man ?
i do n't see how , unless , of course , huge chunks of the film have been removed for the sake of running time .
knock off seems to have an interesting premise ( as far as action films go ) , but there 's no semblance here .
for instance , van damme is introduced , and then seconds later he 's running a chariot race through the streets of hong kong .
why ?
who knows .
what are the implications of this ?
i have no idea .
most action films abandon depth in favor of action , and this is normally a problem .
knock off , however , is the first film that i would have preferred to see with all of the talky sequences cut .
the acting is embarrassingly bad :
rochon , in particular , delivers each of her lines with stiff and talentless insincerity .
sorvino , in addition , deserves better than this .
van damme is bad , but he 's charming in that bad way , and so i ca n't say that he 's hard to watch ( although i rarely understood what he was saying ) .
the only exception is rob schneider , who is actually quite funny a lot of the time .
tsui utilizes so many tricks that he makes john woo look tame by comparison .
they 're all pointless gimmicks
though , such as shots of the inner - workings of a knock off running shoe .
but his action scenes are never boring :
one particular piece inside of a fruit factory ( a fruit factory ? ) is well - choreographed .
lots of the scenes are pitched well to comedy , such as our heroes ' first encounter with the rochon character .
but did tsui know that his film is beyond ludicrous
?
i hope he did , for the alternative is a frightening thought .
knock off has the feel of a truly terrible exercise in camp mania .
if it were boring , i 'd give it zero stars .
but it 's not boring :
it 's loud and excessive and completely incoherent .
it 's also funny , even when it is n't meaning to be funny .
a bad film that succeeds as entertainment does n't deserve to be fully lambasted .
i recognize knock off for its irrefutable badness , but i ca n't deny it 's zany , useless charm .
oh , i know , they 're just action scenes looking desperately for a real story , but they 're fun action scenes amongst a crowd of laughably inane concepts .
it 's fun to admire
the awfulness of a film like this , but that does n't excuse the fact that it is , indeed , awful .
Example Output:
N