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

Example Input: romeo is bleeding wants to carry the unusual flavor of reservoir dogs or bad lieutenant .
with director peter medak , whose previous credits include the good films let him have it and the krays , and top - notch character actors gary oldman and lena olin , they seemed likely to be a successful combination .
those mentioned films , however , brought something to the screen that romeo is bleeding
did not : a solid , well - written screenplay .
call me cynical , but the jobs of writer and producer do n't seem to mix well .
gary oldman plays jack grimaldi , a good cop turned bad , selling information to the mob and cheating on his wife .
his cheating is obvious enough to obtain his nickname , although the name does n't provide any insight or analogy to the shakespearean character .
jack has become addicted to " feeding the hole " , a hole in the ground where he stores his payoff money .
when he realizes his colleagues are being shot , he feebly attempts to get out .
gary oldman 's performance is disappointingly weak ; he seems nearly bored .
in the process , he also gets tangled - up with mona demarkov , a russian mobsterette who wants to take over the territory from top boss falcone , played adequately by roy scheider .
demarkov , played by lena olin , is a tough but tremendously sexy woman with seemingly no problems maneuvering within the mob world .
this character is combination of both linda hamilton and arnold schwarznegger from terminator 2 .
i ca n't remember seeing a character quite like her .
after being shot , handcuffed , and thrown in the back seat of a car , she still manages to cause an accident , kick out the windshield with her legs , grab a suitcase full of money ( plus some important documentation ) , climb through the rubble , land on her shot leg , and still succeed at running for safety .
what a woman ! lena olin 's performance is the only glimmer in this dismal film .
anabella sciorra is wasted in her role as romeo 's wife .
there is little insight into her character .
she 's depressed , she makes obvious references , she mopes around the house .
juliette lewis , as romeo 's girlfriend , is treated with the same cliche attitudes , although ms .
lewis ' portrayal certainly did n't improve it .
both women were anything but sexy or attractive .
poorly developed characters aside , the screenplay also suffers from several logistical problems .
it is so discouraging to watch a film and want to shout at the main character ( not ) to do something .
for example , jack and his friends attend a funeral to hang in the background to scope - out the mob scene .
fine .
jack spots the big boss with his goons by the gravesite .
fine .
what does jack proceed to do ?
he brushes his friends off by telling them he is n't feeling well , then strolls over to the boss .
why ?
the boss had all ready threatened him ; falcone simply takes the opportunity to issue more threats by ordering his goons to take off some of jack 's toes by the gravesite .
i guess they were n't worried about any federal agents lingering around after the funeral . . .
.
or here 's another : demarkov set - up her own death by cutting off her arm with a circular saw .
she proceeded to set the place on fire .
would n't the flames burn off the fingerprints ?
are n't dental records more important ?
as bright and resourceful as she was supposed to be , could n't she come up with a better plot ?
( and it took her no time at all to get a good - fitting , functional prosthesis . ) lack of attention to detail
certainly adds up in a film .
this film does n't even add up the large details .
there is little or no consistency in the story - line .
not much makes sense .
the direction lacks cohesion , surprising from a director whose previous credits are impeccable .
the moods shift , the styles shift , and no one can seem to decide if it is a serious film or satire of one .
so while it certainly is n't reservoir dogs , it certainly is n't diva .
there 's plenty more to tear apart in this film .
my advice to someone who has n't seen it to to wait until it comes on video .
there are some quotable lines that would provide a campy evening if not taken seriously .
it 's not a boring film ,
just not a good one . or an intelligent one .
Example Output: N

Example Input: a film that means well , but is too pushy in promoting its belabored point and too sentimental to be compelling as a drama .
it 's jeroen krabb ?
's melodrama about a community of jews in antwerp in 1972 who ca n't forget their bitter past .
the heroine is an attractive , carefree , nonreligious 20-year - old , chaja ( fraser ) , who wants to forget her jewish roots by getting involved in student demonstrations , screwing a student rebel leader , and living with her gentile friends away from her nagging mother
( s ? gebrecht ) and her self - absorbed , eccentric father ( schell ) .
her parents are survivors of the holocaust concentration camps , and her home life is filled with angst .
her mother is in denial about the past always busying herself by cooking soup and baking cakes and complaining about everything , while her father is more openly loving but has recently been absorbed in searching for two suitcases filled with mementos , a family album , silverware , and his old violin .
he buried them in a garden during the war while fleeing the nazis , but ca n't locate them now due to all the changes in the city .
out of frustration after quitting her job as a dishwasher and facing eviction from her apartment , she reluctantly accepts a job as a nanny with an hasidic couple that an old man in her parents ' apartment building , mr .
apfelschnitt ( topol ) , tells her about .
the hasidics are ultra - orthodox : they do n't go to the cinema or watch tv , adhere to strict dress codes , and strictly observe their religious laws .
chaja is at first put off by the way they expect her to follow their rules , but soon finds the wife , mrs .
kalman ( rossellini ) , to be kind and she becomes attached to one of her 5 children , a 4-year - old named simcha ( monty ) who does n't talk .
the stern mr .
kalman ( krabb ? ) is not friendly to her and considers her to be a whore because of the way she dresses .
to hammer home the point of how anti - semitism has n't gone away
there 's a barrage of overdone and uninvolving scenes with a sneering concierge ( bradley ) , who keeps making nasty remarks about jews and tries to make things inconvenient for them by preventing the jewish family from using the elevator .
the film is done in by its ham - fisted script as the story , adapted from carl friedman 's book " the shovel and the loom , " goes from one false note to another until it gets lost in all the goo of its sentimentality .
it starts off telling chaja 's story of how she 's a lost jewess trying to find her identity , then to her nanny role as she loves a mute child stuck in an insulated environment , and then it makes it a story about the lingering effects of the bitter past that ca n't be forgotten .
the effort seemed heavy - handed , as the film kept delivering too many obvious messages that it ponderously kept delivering through the stock characters .
the supporting cast consists of all wooden characters who give their roles a cartoonish flavoring
: chaja 's parents are given no human shades , while the janitor villain was a particularly annoying role that was one - dimensional and falsely acted .
the only ones who fought through the script and showed some feelings were fraser , whose effervescent face was expressive of both the trying times she was going through and the joys she felt -- but most admirably showing how she could be so mistaken as to think that she could forget her roots ; while rossellini gave a warm performance of a woman suffering in silence , but is strong in accepting her faith .
topol 's reassuring performance as the wise man who says all the right things to fraser , acts as the true voice of the filmmaker in explaining all the sufferings with common sense .
the film brazenly uses little simcha to get across its agenda of pointing out how the patriarchal world can be cruel when it ca n't love : it starts out by showing how under chaja 's loving care he 's taken to the duck pond and soon starts jabbering away , beginning by saying ' quack , quack ' and then going on to ask the four questions during a passover seder .
but by showing how the boy is so terrified of his strict father that he wets his pants in his presence , refuses to speak because of his stern dad , and eventually becomes the victim of a tragic accident , the film thereby exploits the boy 's sufferings and his story just becomes tiresome and not sincerely done
.
i felt i did n't just see a movie , but i attended a lecture for the whole 100 minutes of this serious but unappetizing story .
it was the kind of movie that you hoped would somehow end soon , as it seemed to be in the habit of rehashing its same viewpoint unnecessarily -- the message it keeps sending was already received .
in the last shot where father and daughter are hopelessly digging for the lost luggage , one has the impression that no one in the film learned anything about themselves or the past .
that seems strange , since i thought that was what this film was supposed to be about . unless i was mistaken and the film 's real aim was to make us cry over simcha .
Example Output: N

Example Input: "
the 13th warrior " comes at the end of as summer where we 've already experienced man eating sharks ( " deep blue sea " ) , man eating crocodiles ( " lake placid " ) and even a man hunting witch ( " the blair witch project " ) .
now , " the 13th warrior " presents a tribe of flesh eating men who believe that they are bears .
the story , if that 's what you want to call it , follows ahmed ibn fahdlan ( antonio banderas ) an arabian poet who falls in love with his king 's wife and is banished from his home land .
he then travels to the land of the vikings and becomes an ambassador to them .
eventually the vikings are called upon to protect the people of the village who are being hunted by the flesh eating men .
thirteen warriors are chosen to go on the mission , and as you guessed it , ahmed is chosen as the thirteenth .
he 's not a warrior , and at first not well accepted by the vikings , but as the movie advances he 'll have to prove himself both on and off the battlefield .
that 's basically the entire plot .
there is also a romantic subplot that has been so badly mishandled and , one assumes , drastically cut that you begin to wonder why the filmmakers did n't just edit out all of the scenes attaining to that part of the story .
instead they chose to leave just enough of those scenes in to annoy the viewer .
the film is basically non- stop action and when it pauses and tries to develop a story
it becomes a laughing stock .
the battle scenes , although well choreographed , are not involving and not the least bit exciting .
we do n't get to know any of the characters
and so we do n't care who lives and who dies .
the film , which wants to be beowolf , comes across more as a failed action - adventure story aspiring to epic proportions but not achieving it on any levels .
it was directed by john mctiernan who 's , " the thomas crown affair " is also playing in theaters currently .
and it 's not that mctiernan worked simultaneously on both films but that , " the 13th warrior " was placed on the shelf for so long with the studio just waiting for a time to dump it on audiences .
it belongs back on the shelf .
Example Output:
N