In this task, you are given product reviews about dvds. The goal is to classify the review as "POS" if the overall sentiment of the review is positive(the reviewer is satisfied) or as "NEG" if the overall sentiment of the review is negative(the reviewer is not satisfied).
--------
Question: No Stars from a  Cold War Submariner . I watched the film in the theater when it came out, was very disappointed in all the inaccuracies. Trying to "entertain"/ educate people on a subject matter so serious with a plot so ludicrous is irresponsible at best. The Pet Dog was cute but also unrealistic. The book "The Gold Crew" had a more believable plot.      Having served on a few Ballistic Missile Submarines, I find it an insult to the Crews of the Boats Especially to the Captains and officers.     It's Understandable why the Navy Refused to Bless this. By placing there seal of approval on this film they would be saying it could happen, which it couldn't as depicted. Too much control and too many people in the loop to allow it.     From November 15, 1960-May 25, 2001. The Navy completed 3500 Deterrent Patrols which roughly equates to 671 years of combined ship service on alert ready to launch. And there Still out there boring holes in the water

Answer: NEG


Question: Never achieving its goal . I'll be right up front and admit that I do not own this DVD. I hesitated writing a review for it because of that fact. But then I realized that if you're reviewing a DVD, 90% of the review must be based on the movie itself, and having saw the movie when it was released, and having seen it again on the various cable channels, I felt I could write a respectable reveiw.    Frankly, the movie barely approaches a "B-Movie" status. It's only claim to fame is that it was the first major Hollywood motion picture that did not portray homosexuals in a bad light.    The plot is rather unbelievable, naming the fact that all three main characters are leaders in their field.... successful author, high-ranking network producer, top-rate doctor. Nobody has a profession, or is in a position, with which the audience can relate. The dialog is forced and, at times, rather cliche. Acting is acceptable, though supporting cast members are rather amateurish. Direction is functional, at best.    One glaring problem is the tendency for the movie to suddenly switch from drama to documentary. After or before key scenes, the camera cuts to a monologue from one of the main characters. The effect is startling, doesn't advance the story, and only serves to distract the viewers and lessen the already-weak emotional impact of the film.    To its credit, the actors did whole-heartedly portray gay characters and gay love scenes. At the time, gay characters were never portrayed in a positive light from the media, and it was a great risk to do so here. There were no previous movie experiences of this topic that the director and actors were able to draw on, and they did the best they could.    It was a very ambitious project and was supposed to be ground-breaking and revolutionary, but the weaknesses in the film never raised it high enough to truly make much of a difference in society. This is absolutely proven by the fact that Brokeback Mountain, released about two decades later, had to work very hard to break the same stereotypes that Making Love previously attempted to break. The difference is that Brokeback Mountain was a true work of art impeccable in its execution and actually broke ground and stereotypes, and Making Love all but disappeared in the annals of time.    If you're a collector of good film, this really wouldn't be part of your collection. To add into a collection of films showing early portrayals of homosexuals and homosexual relationships, it would be very appropriate. Sadly, it really is good for only that one reason, as part of a collection of gay films throughout the years

Answer: NEG


Question: John Tucker lives??? . Okay the person that puts this movie in the same catogory as "Bring it on", "Clueless", "Mean Girls" and, especially the superior "Heathers".. is painting a false picture of what this movie is.. I'm sorry but, "John Tucker Must Die" is no where close to being as sharp or clever as these other mentioned films. These other films have a balance that allows more adults to enjoy them as well as the intended target of younger teenagers. "JTMD" appeals more to that teen crowd and has older viewers wondering if this has anything new to offer.. and wonder is all I did. This film tries taking alot of plot lines and ideas from other teen films and brings them all together.. the results are one BIG mess. 2.5 stars is all I can give.. the other films mentioned above are the ticket. "Heathers" = 5 stars. "Mean Girls" = 4 stars. "Bring it on" = 4 stars. "Clueless" 4.5 stars. All four of these movies have something that "John Tucker Must Die" doesnt have..

Answer:
NEG