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

when i first heard that romeo & juliet had been " updated " i shuddered .
i thought that yet another of shakespeare 's classics had been destroyed .
fortunately , i was wrong .
baz luhrman has directed an " in your face " , and visually stunning piece with this film .
it revolves around the two rival families , who in this version each run multi - million dollar enterprises .
these rival companies / families are the capulet 's and the montague 's .
the younger generation of these two families have formed gangs , who despise one another .
as the storylines goes , romeo montague ( played by leonardo dicaprio ) and juliet capulet ( claire danes ) meet at a fancy dress party , and it is love at first site .
i never believed love at first site was possible until i saw this film ,
the scene in which romeo 's eyes meet juliet 's through the fish tank
is one of the most memorable .
of course , they can not publicly reveal their love , for their families are arch enemies .
so they marry in secret
, this is where things begin to go wrong .
the story , as with all good shakespeare , ends in tragedy .
the cinematography is spectacular to say the least , and the soundtrack provides the perfect atmosphere in which to " lay our scene " , as the film says .
there is very little to criticise .
the performances are convincing , and several of the film 's younger stars may find that it provides a launch for their careers .
the modernisation of the script is ingenious and clever .
despite the well known storyline , this latest version still manages to cause tears among many members of the audience ( especially the younger generation ) , and this is certainly a great credit to the film .
P

it is always refreshing to see a superstar actor who gets paid more than enough to forget about working for a living to want to take a chance and play a less - than - savoury character as mel gibson does in payback .
of course , if i was being paid $ 25 million for one month 's work , i 'd probably be willing to take risks as well , but that 's neither here nor there .
payback is based on a novel by richard stark ( apparently actually donald e. westlake , author of the grifters , itself a fine crime film ) which was also filmed in the 1960s as point blank starring one of the toughest of tough guys , lee marvin .
the film opens with gibson having recovered from being shot several times in the back , by whom we do n't know yet .
all we know is that gibson , as porter , is n't a happy chappy and is hellbent on getting the money stolen from him back , and getting even in the process , no matter what the consequences .
it turns out that the man he 's after is val ( gregg henry ) , his sometime partner with whom he stole a briefcase full of cash from a gang of chinese mobsters .
obviously not having much of a crisis of the soul , val figures porter is dead and goes about using his share of the money to pay off a debt to his employers .
porter , however , is the sort of man who holds a grudge and once on his feet , goes about exacting revenge on the double - crossing val .
gibson gives a terrific performance in the sort of role which he was born to play , that of a slightly unhinged guy who does n't mind beating up or shooting people to get what he wants .
you probably would n't see other actors in his salary range take such an offbeat , out - of - character role such as porter ( jim carrey wo n't be doing anything like this in a hurry after what happened the last time he tried - the cable guy , anyone ? ) .
harrison ford 's idea of playing an unsympathetic character is presumed innocent ; the last time schwarzenegger played a villain was batman and robin , which we wo n't mention further ; and has stallone ever really played a villain at all ?
this is not to say that porter is a villain , per se .
while he is n't the sort of character you would n't want to get on the wrong side of , he 's nothing compared to some of the ones we are forced to watch in countless bad thrillers and action films where they kill innocent people in the blink of an eye or execute their right - hand men just to prove how mean they are .
porter is only trying to get back what is not - so - rightfully his , which in a way is almost understandable .
payback is an enjoyable dramatic black comedy - thriller which wo n't be remembered as being among gibson 's most important work , but is still one of the finer films he 's done .
the only real problem with it is that , while everything seems to work out in the end , i was left feeling something was lacking ; was that all ?
the ending looks as if it was tacked on at the last minute , and the final voice - over does n't ring true , even though it was used to good effect elsewhere in the film - noir style the rest of the film embodies .
the film just ends far too suddenly , after a huge build - up in the penultimate scenes .
a fine film , even though it needs just a little something more to be the kind of a film that can be recommended without hesitation .
just be ready for a possible letdown of an ending .
P

in the mid-1980s , following the splendid debut in hugh hudson 's greystoke and relative success of first highlander film , it looked like christopher lambert 's acting career might go somewhere .
but , it was n't meant to be , which became obvious following highlander ii .
in this decade christopher lambert became associated with films with low budgets and even lower quality .
very often such films were science fiction , which meant that the fans of that genre learned the hard way what to evade anything starring christopher lambert .
whether it was because of real lack of talent , terrible miscasting or simple bad luck is n't important
- the end result was almost always horrible .
the same can be said for fortress , 1993 science fiction film directed by stuart gordon , director who created cult following with his 1980s horror gorefests like reanimator and from beyond .
the movie is set in 2018 .
for some undisclosed reason , usa introduced strict population control and couples are barred from having more than one child .
jake ( christopher lambert ) and karen
brennick ( lori laughlin )
broke that law and are caught by authorities on the border .
sentenced to 31 years in prison , they are both thrown into fortress , privately owned correctional facility , equiped with state - of - the - art futuristic technology and run by computer called zed .
although equiped with gismos that regulate every aspect of inmates ' lives and make any escape impossible , prison authorities often use violence .
jake survives many ordeals and earns respect of some inmates which would help him when he begins planing the escape .
such escape should become necessity , because the warden poe ( kurtwood smith ) begins showing unhealthy interest in karen .
after rather intriguing beginning and some interesting special effects that depict the futuristic settings of prison , this film soon starts sinking into mediocrity .
the reason is in the screenplay that quickly degenerates into whole series of prison movie clich ?
s and situations that are painfully predictable .
by the time brennick begins his escape from fortress , those situations not only begin to look predictable , but utterly implausible too .
of course , film never tried to explain why the country that lacks resources to support its present population happens to spend bucketloads of money on ultra - expensive supertechnology with sole intention of keeping alive most useless and dangerous members of the society .
the initially interesting plot is done even more wrong by stereotyped characters , played by not too interested or talented actors .
lori laughlin , although physically attractive , shows the acting ability of sequoia .
kurtwood smith as prison warden is rather uninspired , capable of solid , yet forgettable performance .
lambert 's performance is also good , but even the bigger talent could n't help this film , destined to end in oblivion .

N