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.

Example Input: Shocked.  Stunned.  Horrified. . I realize that Patterson is known for his exciting, page-turning reads.  I realize that he is famous for the relentless pace of his novels.  And, most importantly, I realize that he is famous for stunning twists at the endings of lots of his books.    Keeping all that in mind, I have to say that I was shocked and hurt by the, well, absolutely horrifying surprise ending to this book.  To say it came at me out of left field would be a massive understatement.  It's more like I was standing at home plate in Dodger stadium and was hit by a ball thrown from left field in Yankee Stadium.  Truthfully, I never saw it coming.  And I was horrified by it.  I finished the last pages with my mouth hanging open.    And I feel betrayed as well.  I realize that twist endings happen often, especially when it comes to Patterson, but I DID NOT LIKE this one.  I felt hurt by it.    Putting that aside, it was a good read overall, which is why I give it 2 stars instead of one
Example Output: NEG

Example Input: Boring But Interesting.  Does That Make Sense? . The story is very boring.  A middle class family has high aspirations for obtaining upper class status and this `class consciousness' controls everything they think and do.  Despite their foolishness, one can't help but feel sorry for each character (with the exception of the mother) who continually finds failure and disappointment.  The characters are not developed to the point that I usually enjoy, and there are quite a large number of characters.  An interesting thing about the characters is, none of them are `good.'  Probably the closest thing to a good character is Virgil's Boss, Mr. Lamb.  But even he is a business monger, ultimately concerned with his own business.  This reflection on man is insightful.  In real life, are there any people without flaws?  Major flaws?  Even the Bible presents the heroes of the faith as people with big problems (King Solomon was a womanizer, David was a murderer, Peter was a coward, etc.).  In general, people are selfish.  Our motives are selfish, and our own desires drive everything we do.  However, often fiction reflects one or two main characters who are flawless.  In an attempt to make characters likable- reality is bypassed.  This doesn't happen here in Alice Adams.      I believe this book is about expectations.  The Adams' family lives in the false hope of a brighter future, all the while neglecting the life they are currently living.  I feel that this is the same discontenting experience that Westerners face.  Maybe this is even a reflection of the way the author wrote the book- seemingly slow, but with flashes of brilliant foreshadowing which gives hope to the reader that something more grand is on the horizon.       The story is interesting because of the absolute stupidity of this family, and the fact that it probably is a very real experience for many. The story, though slow, is written very well, and was very easy for me to read (a plus for me, I am a bit slow).   It is also interesting because even though the story takes place in America- it seems a different culture.  This different culture was interesting.  I think the difference came in that the story is supposed to have taken place in the South (a foreign country as far as I am concerned), and it probably took place in the very early part of the 20th century.  One aspect of Tarkington's writing that I appreciated was the way he foreshadowed things.  Maybe I appreciated the subtle foreshadowing hints because of the drudgery of the story, but whatever the reason- I think he did an excellent job.
Example Output: POS

Example Input: folksy but conducive of thought crystallization . I found this book unsatisfactorily casual and slap-happy for the work of putative been-there-done-that expert with such lengthy tenure in and around things ufological.  Yet, by reading this, I did manage to concretize a philosophical system that has been emerging for years as I read one UFO book after another--while also reading widely in other things paranormal, as well as a spate of less abstract fields, such as history, science, linguistics, anthropology, and such.  Let us posit that aliens (1) exist; (2) have the technology to visit remote star systems; and (3) took greatly enhanced interest in earth only when it developed weapons systems capable of either harming other civilizations (i.e., in combination with its rocket technology) or of destroying itself (which would constitute a crying shame from the viewpoint of fundamentally beneficent aliens who respect other sentient life forms).  Keyhoe leads me to believe--amid his conspiratorial musings and his subtle hints at what was meant by what was really meant by what Mr. X thought that Mr. Y intended--that they are watching us and executing a hands-off policy until such time that we pose a direct, immediate danger to ourselves (this will occur long before we pose a direct and immediate danger to exocivilizations), at which time--Starfleet-style "Prime Directives" od non-interference notwithstanding--they will take whatever steps are necessary to ensure the harmonious continuation of our culture. Whether that means utterly conquering and enslaving us, or surreptitiously seizing control over certain key organs of our governments (possibly to include forging certain elements of the whole-earth government whose existence Einstein endorsed as a logical and necessary eventuality), or just providing cultural "guidance counselors," who can really say.  It is indeed food for thought to ponder the likely--well, the possible--archetypal alien ethos and surmise what it might intend for us and why it should, or will, occur when the time requires it
Example Output:
POS