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

Example Input: toward the bottom of the ' 80s action movie barrel lies action jackson , the only movie in hollywood history to show sharon stone and vanity topless within a span of ten minutes .
this carl " apollo creed
" weathers vehicle features the traditional cop vs .
evil establishment crook , and relies on all the ' 80s trappings , from the token heroin addict who needs a fix to the shouting superior officer .
somewhere in between come the explosions and boobs , although there is a curious lack of exploding boobs .
weathers is action jackson , a detroit cop known for all sorts of crazy vigilante techniques .
speaking of one past criminal apprehension , jackson 's superior yells , " you tore his arm off !
" jackson replies , " he had a spare .
"
jackson has been busted down to a desk job because of past problems with auto manufacturer dellaplane ( craig t . nelson ) and now has to act as department liaison to a dinner honoring nelson .
after hearing what jackson thinks of him , stone says , " i take it
you 're not one of dellaplane 's friends . "
" not unless they changed the definition , " jackson glowers .
and of course it turns out stone is mrs .
dellaplane .
faux pas , jackson . .
.
not everything is happy in motown ; people are being killed and dellaplane has evil plans for the awa .
it 's all up to jackson to stop it , and his only lead lies in vanity ( not his own ) .
wherever she left off with prince in terms of exchanging sexual favors for career advancement she picks up in action jackson .
she plays the heroin addict and chanteuse in dellaplane 's nightclub .
after singing one particularly sultry number for him , she saunters over and complains , " i expected a standing ovation .
"
he responds , " you 're getting one , " and it 's damn clever because he 's sitting down at the time .
prince would n't even let out an innuendo that lame
and he 's the king of the horndogs .
. .
or at least the prince .
it 's a testament to the ' 80s that sharon stone is killed off within the first 30 minutes but vanity survives the whole movie .
action jackson is another variation on the " unlikely partners " buddy action flick , with jackson lugging junkie vanity around .
this leads to some of the worst paired acting of the me decade , and with the dialogue they 're given , there 's not much room for improvement .
my favorite is when vanity , feeling the effects of drug withdrawal , says , " i feel like my teeth are hollow , my gums are made of dry rubber and someone 's trying to start a bonfire in the back of my bloody head .
"
jackson 's response is , " i think i felt that way once .
they called it love .
"
you 'll understand when i say watch this at your own risk . serving the world for nearly 1/25th of a century !
Example Output: N

Example Input: _ in brief : _ this film needs no introduction . if you have n't heard of it , then you must have been up in space on a sabbatical , and if you have n't seen it -- well , i suspect you 're in a small minority !
first thing 's first ?
is it all it 's hyped up to be ?
well , yes ?
and no .
it 's a good film , and there 's a lot to like about it , but it 's not without its problems .
when i saw the first trailer for " titanic " , it was when i went to see " bean " last summer , i think , my intial reaction was --
ai n't that downright sick to make a disaster movie out of such a dreadful , real - life tragedy ? !
i mean , what 's happened to hollywood 's script - writers , have they run entirely out of new ideas ?
gads ,
whatever next , i asked myself , how about an action film based on hiroshima starring jean claude van damme ?
i was not entirely filled with anticipation , but then i was n't alone in that respect .
it 's when it came out in the cinema , to rave reviews ( well , mostly ) and
anyone who 'd been to see it seemed disturbingly obsessed by it that i started to take notice !
i did n't see the film until several months after its release ( by which time my sister had seen it about four times ! ) , so i went with a slightly more open mind , but i still did n't think i 'd enjoy it much .
did i ?
yes
and no .
mainly yes , i 'm happy to say .
the first hour or so was beautifully done , not so much because of the scripting
( i 'll talk about that later ? ) but because the re - created ship and sets were stunning to look at , as was cameron 's directing , and the performances of the principal cast were so strong that the " human " aspect of the story , the romance between rose ( kate winslet ) and jack ( leonardo dicaprio ) , was enchanting
.
the film is told via flashback , with gloria stuart playing the elderly rose in the modern day ( you knew that , a ' course ! : - ) ) .
well , it 's an often effective device to use in storytelling -- though sometimes it can fall flat .
does it work here ?
in script form it does n't add all that much to the story .
what does add a lot to the story is gloria stuart , whose stunning performance is the strongest , most moving of the film .
her presence brings a much deeper level of passion , and depth to the story , and though her appearances are relatively brief , the film would have suffered without her . also impressive are dicaprio and winslet , who wholly succeed in rising above the often poor dialogue , and the bond they form is both heartfelt and moving
.
it 's an old story , you know -- forbidden love ala romeo and juliet -- but it works , and jack 's " rescuing " rose ( in both literal and figurative senses ) and teaching her to live life for what counts was pointed and touching .
in fact , i enjoyed the first half of the film a lot , largely because winslet and dicaprio bring such and charm , energy to the romance .
it 's engaging , touching and very enjoyable .
there 's more than a tinge of poignancy to it as well ,
simply because you know it 's not going to be a happy ending .
which leads us to the second half of the film .
we all knew it was coming .
i 'm sure director cameron was looking forward with eager anticipation to it , because as he 's stated in interviews , the real thrust of the story ( for him ) was the sinking , and the jack / rose romance was a merely a manipulative plot device to get you emotionally into the film .
i think that understates the importance of the romance , as i found it far more enjoyable than an hour of watching people die .
the iceberg arrives , and the captain announces that titanic will have sunk in about an hour .
and it is an hour .
my goodness , we do n't miss a second of that hour ?
gratuitous ?
well , perhaps not by today 's standards , i 'm sure there 's been far worse produced under the banner of " entertainment " in other films .
but i certainly was n't prepared for how shocking and graphic the last hour or so would be .
not that i 'd expect the word " understatement " to be part of cameron 's vocabulary ( he who brought us such , umm , vivid films as " terminator 2 " and " aliens " ) .
is it overdone ?
i thought so .
understatement can sometimes work wonders in conveying tragedy .
no , no one expected a happy ending , but i did n't quite expect the horrendously shocking and powerful scenes we were bombarded throughout the film 's second half .
still , whether it was overdone and heavy - handed or not , if it was the shock - factor cameron was after it worked , because i was shocked and moved , in fact i spent most of the last hour in tears !
you really could n't help but get emotionally involved ,
whether it was wishing someone would knock that dreadfully psychotic fiance of rose 's overboard or desperately hoping that rose would rescue jack , or that jack would rescue rose , or that they would both survive .
perhaps the most harrowing scene was when the ship has sunk , and those that sunk along with the ship freeze to death on the water surface .
the bit where rose lets go of jack 's hand , while promising she 'll never let go in her heart was particularly heart - wrenching , and the sight of rescue boats sailing amid the ocean of corpses was a pretty powerful image , to put no fine a point on it .
i loved the ending , however , which was both moving and slightly uplifting following the horror of the past hour and a half .
so , we 've established that the film is powerful and moving , if the last hour was rather excessive . have n't mentioned the script .
plot - wise
it 's ok , though the jack / rose relationship was beautifully developed
,
but i 've a feeling that 's to the actors
credit if anything .
as for the dialogue ?
well , titanic is set in 1912 .
it 's a period drama .
but i saw very little indication of period in so far as the dialogue is concerned .
did they really use phrases like " goddamn it !
" back in the turn of the century ?
i doubt it .
would someone talk like this : " do ya love the guy or what ? " .
i doubt it .
is such dialogue as " i saw the iceberg , and i see it in your eyes now
" not just a bit ? clumsy ?
yes it is .
a little more attention to dialogue would not have gone astray , and cameron himself is to blame ( he wrote the script ) .
stick with directing , dude .
but its more than redeemed by the acting , with dicaprio and winslet on fine form , ably supported by a strong cast .
star of the show was gloria stuart , though --
why did n't she win that oscar ? !
after all , they were throwing oscars at " titanic " left , right and centre , but gloria was perhaps the most deserving nominee . directing - wise cameron does a spectacular job .
like i said , his vision was a bit excessive , but at least he directed it well .
i have n't even mentioned james horner 's beautiful score .
utterly heavenly , though when your dad and sister play the soundtrack a lot you do start to get a bit bored with it !
; - ) i 've finished my rant , which lasted a lot longer than i thought it would !
just leaves a couple of questions ; was it worth all those oscars ?
hell , do n't talk to me about oscars .
bloomin ' farce .
it was deserving in a number of departments , though .
last question ; is it , as some suggest , one of the best films of all - time ?
nope , i do n't think so .
it 's certainly one of the most powerful and memorable films i 've ever seen ,
but i do n't think it quite ranks as one of my all - time favourites .
and as for the fact they 're reportedly making a " titanic 2 " ?
well i guess that 's typical hollywood for you !
Example Output: P

Example Input: do the folks at disney have no common decency ?
they have resurrected yet another cartoon and turned it into a live action hodgepodge of expensive special effects , embarrassing writing and kid - friendly slapstick .
was n't mr .
magoo enough , people ?
obviously not .
inspector gadget is not what i would call ideal family entertainment .
younger viewers will likely be taken in by the abounding goofiness , but their adult companions may feel a wave of nausea sweeping over them as they attempt to endure this appalling 80-minute exercise in glaring stupidity .
the movie is poorly edited , grossly manipulative , and the finished product resembles somewhat of a failed jigsaw puzzle .
all the elements are there , but the manner in which director david kellogg pieces them together is laughable and trite .
as a huge fan of the 80 's animated tv show , the first thing i must express is my anger toward the treatment of the main villain .
in the cartoon , dr .
claw was a frightening , raspy - voiced presence who remained a total mystery to the viewer .
we never saw his face ; he simply sat back in his arm - chair , watching surveillance cameras and gently stroking his loyal cat .
as a child , i always imagined what dr .
claw would appear as - and this curiosity kept me watching for many years .
with the release of the live - action movie , the face of this once intriguing villain has been unrightfully exposed -
it 's . . .
rupert everett ? !
only now , dr . claw is simply known as claw ( ` one word , '
he explains , ` like madonna ' ) .
he sports a shiny clamp instead of the steel glove , and seems far less interesting than the animated version .
it helps that the dashing everett is enthusiastic , but he overplays the role entirely too far .
when all is said and done , this was n't a very wise move on the part of the screenwriters - the infamous dr .
claw has been turned into a wisecracking game show host who makes cheap attempts at being suave and cool .
he does still have his cat , though .
in the title role , matthew broderick looks lost .
the actor , while usually downright charming , does n't know exactly where to take his character - a fault that again can be blamed on the hapless writers .
broderick first plays a friendly , naive security guard named john brown , who dreams of becoming a cop and upholding the law for the good of the people .
he has a mad crush on pretty scientist brenda ( joely fisher ) , who has stumbled upon a new wave of technology involving the interaction of human tissue and electronics .
but one fateful night , her lab is destroyed and her experiment is stolen by a fiendish millionaire ( everett ) who wants to take over the world .
john courageously pursues the limousine from the scene of the crime , but loses the chase when his vehicle bursts into flames .
in a full body cast , he is chosen to be the first human prototype for brenda 's work ; a revolutionary crime fighting tool with numerous fancy gadgets to dispatch bad guys .
and so is born inspector gadget .
as bad as this movie is , it does have a certain charm in isolated scenes .
broderick actually fares better playing robo gadget , an evil and destructive clone that claw has set loose on the city .
and there are about two or three amusing punch lines , the funniest being when robo gadget impersonates a rampaging monster with shadow puppets on a brick wall , and a japanese man flees the scene while screaming , ` this is why i left tokyo !
' alas , the hit ratio of the ongoing gags is about 20 to 1 in favor of not even cracking a slight giggle .
there are so many tired plot additions .
gadget 's talking car ( voiced by d .
l
. hughley ) is the same type of character as zoot the suit from my favorite martian .
both are wisecracking , non - human additions designed to coax laughter from smaller children .
well , it just does n't work
( in fact , zoot functioned marvelously in comparison to this ) .
and do n't even get me started about the villains .
i did n't mind everett 's performance , but his bumbling assistants will make every adult cringe with disgust .
the characters from the cartoon have been reduced to thankless supporting roles .
penny ( michelle trachtenberg ) and brain the dog now have little to do with the action , and chief quimby ( dabney coleman ) has lost considerable appeal in the transition of animation to live action .
the special effects are everywhere , but not so annoying they will cause your eyes to peel over .
the problem here lies solely in the script .
perhaps the next time disney attempts a remake like this , they will invest more in the screenplay than the fancy - schmancy visuals .
here is one critic crossing his fingers , anyway .
Example Output:
N