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

Q: as i write the review for the new hanks / ryan romantic comedy you 've got mail , i am acutely aware that i am typing it on a computer and sending it a billion miles away on the internet .
i am also aware that i have just spent the last 2 hours watching the world 's biggest paid commercial for america online .
and i wonder : is that so bad ?
well , the commercial part is .
as for the movie , well , as long as i can watch tom hanks and meg ryan , i think i 'll be okay .
to paraphrase james berardinelli , whose reviews i admire very much , tom hanks and meg ryan can act .
they are both wonderful , but for all of hanks ' glorious work in serious films , such as his magnificent performance in saving private ryan , and his glorious triumph in philadelphia , i like him best when he 's suitably obnoxious .
tom hanks is wonderful
when he is obnoxious in a romantic comedy when he 's going to get the girl : the only question is how ?
meg ryan , america 's high school sweetheart , can act .
she 's had a handful of memorable performances , including the great scene in the diner in when harry met sally ( i must not mention what she does , due to the , well , um , you get the idea , and if you do n't , get the movie-- fantastic ) .
but , i like her best when she 's , well , perky .
she is so adorably perky / cute that together with hanks , they are the most amazing onscreen duo in my short lifetime .
some people have them going back to really old classic romantic couples , but i do n't really know .
all i know is that i just like them both .
they have such wonderfully kinetic chemistry that 's really hard to resist , and i 'm not going to even try .
they 're just really , really cute , sweet , and charming .
hanks and ryan collaborate once again with nora ephron , who directed them in the megahit sleepless in seattle .
here , the setup is a little different .
kathleen kelly ( ryan ) owns a small children 's bookstore which her mother founded 42 years ago and passed down to her .
she is successful , beautiful , and dates a well - known columnist with very radical idea ( kinnear ) .
she is also having an affair , of sorts .
you see , kathleen , with the handle shopgirl , is secretly emailing ny152 .
they have a strictly un - detailed relationship : there are no specifics , and they have no idea who each other is .
ny152 happens to be joe fox ( hanks ) , a multimillionaire bookseller who is the heir to the fortune of the fox chain of mega - bookstores , run by his father ( coleman ) .
fox books has decided to open a store on the west side , right across from a little children 's bookseller named " shop around the corner " , run by a perky girl named kathleen kelly .
every morning , these two email each other silly , and every day , they fight " to the death ! ! " .
it 's a charming premise , and one that works nicely , balancing the immense troubles kathleen is in with the romance she wants to have .
it also has the great sense of being a classic romance : there is
no " let 's have sex tonight " mantra , if you 'll excuse my bluntness .
this is a solid romance built around that vague concept of love .
hmm .
well , the movie goes through twists and turns , having some sad moments and happy ones , until at one moment tom hanks and meg ryan " hook up " , to use modern terminology , and kiss their way into happiness .
you know it 's going to happen , the question is now ?
thankfully , ephron has a wonderful supporting cast with posey , kinnear , chappelle , and a host of others , including a great scene involving brothers , aunts , and two sweet kids .
it 's all cute and wonderful , and for all of the idealism , it makes me feel good .
hanks is as obnoxious as ever on the outside and as warm on the inside as he always is .
he is , i believe , america 's greatest actor .
does he show it here ?
nah .
but he 's still tom hanks , and she 's still meg ryan .
which is what this movie boils down to .
it 's pure confection .
all the bits about the godfather , the jokes , the superb script
, it 's all really sweet .
there are some immense flaws , like pacing .
the last third of the movie really does n't work as well as i would have liked , and for a romantic comedy , it 's slow .
once hanks knows the secret , it gets really slow .
i even looked at my watch a couple times , to make sure ephron was going to deliver the big onscreen kiss i was waiting for , so that i could get home at a reasonable hour .
the other problem is that this movie is shaping up to be really dated .
e - mail ?
when my kids are my age , i do n't know what we 'll be using .
but hanks can do more with one eyeroll than anybody , and meg ryan just loves to dive into a pillow better than anyone in movie history .
they just work together , and it 's nice to see .
it gives you , well , a smile .
the script helps with some great lines that are absolutely hilarious , and that always come at the exact right time to keep the audience awake .
i was arguing with my father on the drive back home on what the purpose of movies was .
i 've always believed that movies are very powerful , very powerful indeed .
you see , mankind has three abilities he needs to survive : the ability to think , entertain , and procreate .
movies can definitely do the first two , and as for the third , well , i 'd rather not think about that .
i always thought films that made you think enlightened you and made you see something from another viewpoint , and that films that entertained you were good , because you forgot about your troubles and thought about something nice for a night .
and i was thinking about how incredible a year tom hanks has had .
hanks was the driving force behind one of the year 's best films in saving private ryan , which is one of those thinking films that truly made someone wonder about the world .
he 's also half of the glue behind the year 's best example of pure entertainment .
tom hanks and meg ryan are magical , as is this movie .
it 's a sweet , lovely affair with a technology twist .
it may be a long commercial , but it gave me a pretty big smile on my face .

A: P
****
Q: james l . brooks , one of the developers of the simpsons and director of broadcast news , returns to the big screen with this entertaining , if slightly flawed comedy .
nicholson plays melvin udall , probably the most horrible person ever on the screen .
he 's racist , homophobic , and never has a good word to say to anyone .
so , nobody talks to him , except waitress carol conelly ( t .
v sitcom star hunt , who was last seen in twister , 1996 ) .
naturally , udall , conelly and gay neighbor simon bishop ( kinnear ) who nicholson hates , all hit it off in the end .
like good will hunting ( 1997 ) and titanic ( 1997 ) , even though the outcome is completely obvious , as good as it gets is an enjoyable , funny and warm comedy .
nicholson is hilarious as melvin , churning out insults with superb relish .
only nicholson could get away with the lines that melvin delivers .
hunt is also good as waitress carol , and easily rises to the challenge of nicholson .
there 's also ( thankfully ) a bit of chemistry between them .
kinnear , as the gay neighbor , seems to have a slightly underwritten role , he 's more of a plot convience than a character .
although his performance is good , his character just seems to exist to help melvin and carol come together .
in fact , the scene stealer is simon 's dog , who is funnier than nicholson .
but then again , pets are always cute on screen .
providing solid support is cuba gooding , jnr ( jerry maguire , 1996 ) and yeardly smith ( who is the voice of lisa simpsons in the simpsons ) although gooding is n't as good as is character in maguire , he is still fun .
he overacts a little , but not so much as to be annoying .
smith is also good , although she has a fairly small role .
even director lawrence kasdan ( body heat , 1981 ) makes an appearance as a doctor .
but this is primarily nicholsons film , and
every scene he 's in , he 's steals it .
he 's character is so hateful , though
, it 's amazing that anyone talks to him at all , especially carol .
and this is the films main problem .
it 's totally unbelievable that carol would ever consider liking melvin .
she does n't fall in love with him naturally , the film forces her to fall in love with him .
also , melvins character seems to go too nice , too quickly .
i would doubt anyone with a character like melvins would be able to turn back to a nice , loving person .
it would take a helluva long time , much longer than this film would like to make out .
brooks direction is good , though , if a bit average , but he usually manages to get an emotion out of the audience .
he handles the comedy scenes better than the sentimental ones ( he tends to pile on to much schmaltz ) but
generally he 's good .
there 's also a nice soundtrack by veteran composer hans zimmer .
but , generally , as good as it gets achieves what it sets out to do , which is to make the audience feel good by the end of the movie .
the movie is a bit overlong , but nicholson is such good fun that the running time passes by pretty quickly .
overall , as good as it gets is a fun movie , even though it may be unbelivable , and certainly worth seeing
( if just for jack nicholsons performance . ) not quite as good as it gets ( pardon the bad joke ) , but still good fun .

A: P
****
Q: " dangerous beauty " is a really nothing more than a grandiose soap opera set in venice circa 1583 .
it is beautifully filmed , wonderfully acted , and certainly nothing short of entertaining
,
but it lacks any true fundamental seriousness .
dealing with themes of forbidden love , religious intolerance , subordination of women , sexual freedom , and the roles of pleasure and sin in a high - cultured society , it still feels like brightly lit fluff .
the director , marshall herskovitz , does n't want to follow the dark and dangerous trail this story could lead down , so he opts for a more genial , livelier , and relatively shallow interpretation .
the film takes place during the renaissance , a time when venice was the pleasure capital of europe .
at this time , venice was its own republic , and it thrived on being the central juncture of east - west commerce .
the film is told almost entirely through the viewpoint of the aristocracy and the bourgeoisie of venice , so we rarely get to see how the rest of the society lived .
however , there is an abundance of detail concerning the lives and livelihoods of the upper classes , their hedonistic lifestyles and constant merriment .
the story centers on veronica franco ( catherine mccormack ) , a lower class woman who falls in love with marco venier ( rufus sewell ) , the son of wealthy aristocratic parents ( jeroen krabb ? and joanna cassidy ) .
unfortunately , the culture of that time period did not view marriage as an act of love -- rather , it was more like a business transaction , where rich families married their sons and daughters to each other in order to secure power , wealth , and ensure that outsiders could n't get in .
veronica , despite her charm and good looks , is certainly an outsider .
after a short love affair , marco breaks her heart with the news that he can not marry her . however , because she is beautiful and intelligent , veronica has a chance to enter marco 's world , albeit not as his wife .
she decides to become a courtesan -- a class of women who were as well - educated as they were ravishing , and sold their sexuality to wealthy men for the privilege of wining and dining with the elite .
a courtesan was not a mere prostitute ; they were afforded a special place in society , and they were greatly revered , respected , and often envied .
at one point , a character mentions that some rulers obtain more political advice from their courtesans than from their lieutenants .
veronica goes through the transformation with the help of her mother , paola ( jacqueline bisset ) , who was once a famed courtesan herself .
once she enters the lifestyle , veronica finds that it suits her quite well .
she is allowed to read all the books she wants , she is given the opportunity to publish her poetry , and she has the richest and most powerful men in the republic throwing themselves at her feet , including the awestruck marco .
their relationship develops into a playful bantering , with veronica utilizing her newfound power by constantly rejecting marco 's advances .
in many ways , their relationship is sad because marco is married to a women he is unable to love , and veronica is consumed by multiple relationships with men she is unwilling to love .
" love the love , not the man , " as her mother told her . " dangerous beauty , " which was based on a factual book by margaret rosenthal ,
flows along as smoothly and serenely
as the grand canal running through the heart of venice .
it has multiple plot lines -- including veronica 's adversarial relationship with a court poet ( oliver platt ) , her role in obtaining france 's military assistance in venice 's battle against the turks , and even the dreaded shadow of the plague and the encroachment of the spanish inquisition -- yet it is never confusing or overbearing .
much of the film 's success is due to the glowing performance by catherine mccormack in the lead role .
known chiefly for the small part she played as the lover whose murder raised mel gibson 's ire in " braveheart " ( 1995 )
, mccormack shows the true gifts and inarguable talent of a leading lady .
she has the kind of exquisite classical beauty that would be treasured in a courtesan ; her character is intelligent , witty , and both sensual and vulnerable , all of which mccormack easily transmits with a single flash of her eyes .
the rest of the roles are also filled well , including rufus sewell whose performance here and earlier this month in " dark city " have assured him a solid place in hollywood .
he has the same kind of unusual good looks and charm of ray liotta , and he seems perfectly at home in period dramas .
oliver platt plays a variation of the comic relief role that he has come to inhabit like a second skin , although the film deals his character a cheap blow at the end by having him improbably join the inquisition and turn into the bad guy .
platt is a good actor , but he 's just too hard to hate .
jacqueline bisset proves that she is every bit as stirring as she ever was , and even fred ward turns up in a small , but moving performance as marco 's uncle .
" dangerous beauty " is marshall herskovitz 's sophomore directorial effort , after the overlooked 1993 film " jack the bear .
" partnered with edward zwick , herskovitz has spent most of his time as a producer on television ( " thirtysomething , " " my so - called life " ) and in the movies ( " legends of the fall " ) .
his directing style can be best described as transparent -- it never gets in the way of the story , yet it has no discernible flourish or particular distinctions .
he could have approached the film in any number of ways , including overdosing on the sexual aspect , which he wisely avoids .
" dangerous beauty " contains just enough bare flesh and ribald sex to make it appropriately erotic , but not so much that it seems exploitative .
herskovitz is also aided by a strong supporting crew , including the luscious photography by bojan bazelli , whose previous efforts include the highly - stylized thriller " kalifornia " ( 1993 ) and abel ferrara 's dark sci - fi film " body snatchers " ( 1994 ) .
bazelli captures the film in strong , bold colors , and be brings sixteenth - century venice to life in wide , panoramic shots that are often enhanced with digital imagery .
however , the real details are found in the production design by norman garwood ( " brazil , " " the princess bride " ) and the costumes by gabriella pescucci ( " the age of innocence " ) .
the only problem with " dangerous beauty " is that it does n't stick with you .
it 's a good story well - told with interesting characters , but it 's easy to shrug off once you 've left the theater .
the only sequence that has the chance to be truly indelible is veronica being pulled in front of the hypocrisy of the inquisition and threatened with the death penalty for her transgressions , but it never quite comes off because it 's simply too melodramatic and conventional .
herskovitz tries with all his might to make it a nailbiter , but somehow its outcome is a foregone conclusion , and like the rest of the film , it carries no real weight , despite the potential severity of the subject matter .

A:
P
****