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

Example Input: when i ponder childhood memories past , one of the things that always springs immediately to mind is watching the " inspector gadget " tv show with my older brother .
truth be told , we were rabid fanatics ; our version of cowboys and indians was chasing each other around our coffee table to the theme tune , alternating who would get to be gadget and who would be stuck playing the part of dr .
claw , the inspector 's arch nemesis .
i was never a biggie on nostalgia , but you just ca n't help but have fond memories of something like that .
sometimes i even find myself up at 4 am watching re - runs of my favorite episodes , trying to recapture some of that sense of wonder i felt as a kid .
at the very least , i was expecting the new film version of the classic television series to have at least some kind of similar effect on me .
despite how horrid a film may be , the simple task of rekindling even a slight feeling of nostalgia is pretty tough to screw up .
so back i sat , with minimum expectations of what the movie would deliver ( let 's face it ; exactly how good can a live - action disney film really be ? ) .
i was wise enough to steer clear from the likes of mr .
magoo and george of the jungle ( two previous disney adaptations ) ,
and i wish to god that i had been sharp enough to skip gadget as well
.
rarely has a movie left me with such an utter feeling of emptiness .
as everyone else was getting up to exit the screening room after the movie had completed its assault on mankind , i was left sitting there , absolutely speechless and totally dumbfounded at what i had just seen
.
can something this awful
truly exist in such an evolved world ?
right from the beginning , i knew i was in trouble .
in the opening scenes , each character is introduced as if their sole purpose is to just be , to simply serve as real - life duplicates of their cartoon clones .
when referring to them , people almost yell in fear that the audience will not catch on as to who a certain character is supposed to be ( " oh , hi penny !
is brain with you ? " ) . creating one - dimensional replicas is one thing ; having mere names take the place of them is quite another .
the " plot " , shall we call it , stays fairly in tune with the original series .
matthew broderick stars as john brown ( how creative is that ? ) , a security guard who is horribly injured by a pack of ruthless businessmen headed by scolex ( why , rupert everett ,
for the love of god
why ? ? ? ! ! !
) , who himself is transformed into claw by an unfortunate chain of events .
brown is then rescued and used as a prototype for a new law - enforcement technology wherein he 's joined with various machine parts and some nifty gadgets to form ( drumroll , please ) . . .
inspector gadget !
> from here on out
, the movie becomes a hodgepodge of stupid dialog and confusing situations
( although , to be fair , my confusion could have been caused by the virtual concussion the film was inflicting upon my fragile mind ) .
there 's something about an evil gadget taking over the city ( his first crime must have been swiping matt dillon 's dentures from there 's something about mary ) and it all ends with ( what else ? )
a bunch of post - credit nonsense and a cameo by don adams himself .
to be honest , i was n't much paying attention to these " treats " .
i was just glad that it was over .
Example Output: N

Example Input: look back at all the times in your life when there was a fork in the path to the future .
some sort of decision had to be made , and , for better or worse , it irrevocably altered the course of your existence .
> from time - to - time , everyone thinks about the roads not taken , and how things might have turned out if the choice had been different .
perhaps even more dizzying to contemplate is how a seemingly minor action -- catching the 10 am train , for example -- could have an equally profound , yet less obvious , impact .
maybe that 's where you met your significant other , and , had you reached the platform just a few seconds later ?
film makers are no less fascinated by issues of destiny than anyone else , and that 's why there 's no shortage of movies about this subject .
the best of the bunch were probably made by the late polish director krzysztof kieslowski , who was obsessed with questions of fate and chance .
these themes weave their way through many of his movies , including decalogue , the double life of veronique , and the triptych of blue , white , and red .
however , they are most explicitly examined in a 1981 film called blind chance , where kieslowski presents the three different fates of one man after a minor action ( missing or catching a train )
changes the course of his life .
in his autobiography , kieslowski on kieslowski , the director describes his attraction to the concept this way : " [ the idea is ] rich and interesting ?
that every day we 're faced with a choice which could end our entire life yet of which we 're completely unaware .
"
while this approach has been the fodder for several notable dramatic films ( including , in a way , frank capra 's it 's a wonderful life ) , sliding doors is the first romantic comedy to plumb its depths .
the " road not taken " approach is n't just a plot device , either .
writer / director peter howitt expands upon both possible fates of a character after she just misses / catches a train .
the audience watches , with ever - growing fascination , how this one event impacts upon every aspect of her life : her future career , where she lives , whom she loves , and whether she has a family .
as her separate destinies diverge and then re - converge , she becomes two completely different individuals .
that woman is helen , played by gwyneth paltrow as a long , dark- haired brit .
one day , after losing her job as an advertising executive , she decides to return home in the middle of the day .
the scene of the pivotal moment is a train platform .
in scenario # 1
, she just slips through the sliding doors before the train pulls out of the station .
on board , she meets the cheerful , talkative james ( john hannah ) , a monty python fan who is taken with her beauty .
minutes later , in her flat , she walks in on her lover , gerry ( john lynch ) , in bed with another woman ( jeanne tripplehorn ) .
in scenario # 2
, she misses the train and , shortly thereafter , is the victim of an attempted mugging .
she does n't meet james and fails to make it home in time to discover gerry 's infidelity .
juxtaposed one against the other , while sharing many places , cues , and characters , the two stories proceed in parallel from there .
on one level , for viewers who enjoy pondering the workings of fate , sliding doors can be viewed as a deep and wonderful experience .
but , for those who just appreciate a romantic comedy characterized by solid acting , a script with a few twists , and a great deal of genuinely funny material , sliding doors still fits the bill .
one of its most obvious strengths is that it can satisfy many different types of audiences -- those who demand something substantial from their motion pictures , and those who could care less .
it should n't come as any surprise that the acting , at least from three of the four leads , is solid .
paltrow , who does double duty as two helens who are initially the same , yet gradually become much different , is the standout .
she plays both of her roles effectively and believably -- the shy , insecure woman who stays with gerry and the liberated , platinum - blond who severs the ties to her old life and embarks on a new career with a new man .
john hannah , known to most american viewers as the younger gay character in four weddings and a funeral , is instantly likable .
john lynch , taking a break from movies about ireland 's troubles , does a good job presenting gerry as a inept , selfish philanderer .
only jeanne tripplehorn , who plays an over - the - top vixen , seems out of place .
her attempts at broad comedy are occasionally jarring , and it 's occasionally difficult to see her lydia as anything more than a plot element .
one member of the supporting cast deserves special notice .
douglas mcferran , who plays gerry 's best friend , russell , is an absolute delight , stealing every scene that he 's in .
part of this is surely because he is given the best lines in the movie .
on one occasion , he has a marvelous monologue bemoaning how advances in the telecommunications industry have trapped men into a life of monogamy .
on another occasion , while laughing at gerry 's plight with the women in his life , he comments , " being with you makes the wait for the next episode of seinfeld more bearable .
"
but it 's not all in the dialogue .
mcferran tears into this part with relish ; his performance becomes one of the most memorable aspects of a top - notch comedy .
this is the first feature film for peter howitt , and he approaches the task with unimpeachable aplomb .
the script is shrewd and inventive , combining wit , romance , and intelligent melodrama into a crowd - pleasing whole .
sliding doors grants more than just a good time at the movies , however .
for those who are so inclined , its central theme offers an opportunity to ponder some of the more philosophical questions about the workings of the universe -- all while having a good time .
Example Output: P

Example Input: written by alex cox , tod davies , terry gilliam and tony grisoni directed by terry gilliam
i 've always preferred mushrooms to blotter acid .
dropping acid is like riding a roller coaster blindfolded ; you have no idea where the peaks and valleys are , no idea when the next terrifying decent will send your stomach into your throat , and no idea how long the ride will last .
then there 's the hard knot in your gut and the clenched teeth that come with ingesting a strychnine - laced dose .
mushrooms , on the other hand , offer the psychedelic equivalent of a leisurely ride on a ferris wheel : a steady , reassuring assent , a short period of thrilling motion and color , and then a smooth landing .
acid is for daredevils ; mushrooms are for refined seekers of joy .
my point is that in fear and loathing in las vegas , director terry gilliam has made an acid movie , when i wish he would have made a mushroom movie .
full of shocking sight gags , aggressive images and grotesque comic performances , the film certainly offers something for those fans of hunter s .
thompson 's book who want to experience its twisted pharmacological world - view from the inside out .
but for those of us who just want to enjoy a well - made film , gilliam has produced a mixed bag .
fear and loathing tells the ostensibly true story of how self - professed " gonzo " journalist hunter s .
thompson ( johnny depp ) and hispanic activist attorney oscar zeta actosta ( benicio del toro ) , came to las vegas to cover a motorcycle race and found themselves trapped in the middle of a district attorney 's convention while ingesting every conceivable drug available to a man of means in 1971 .
operating under the pseudonyms of " raoul duke " and
" dr .
gonzo " , the two men careen into vegas on an acid and mescaline bender , then hole up in a hotel suite to binge on amyl nitrite , cocaine , tequila and a rainbow of multi - colored uppers and downers .
they terrorize every one they meet , mostly because every one they meet terrifies them .
duke hallucinates giant bats on the way into town , then is attacked by horrifying lizards in the casino lounge .
dr .
gonzo becomes enamored of a thick - bladed hunting knife and begs duke to throw the tape player into the bathtub with him just as jefferson airplane 's " white rabbit " reaches its climax .
and these guys do n't just trash hotel rooms
- they rape them , humiliate them and leave them for dead .
that neither of them ends up dead or in jail is testament to blind luck or providence , depending on your point of view .
thompson 's book , besides being a hilarious read , has stood the test of time as an important historical document .
it simultaneously exposed the 60 's drug culture for the sham that it was and exposed las vegas as the place where the american dream came to die .
pontificate all you want about how the film illustrates thompson 's message , but the truth is that , stripped to its bare essentials , what gilliam has wrought is a drug comedy .
it 's a cheech and chong movie .
you 're there to watch depp and del toro ingest a lot of chemicals and then laugh at the results :
see johnny take drugs , see johnny fall down .
there 's nothing wrong with this concept , but gilliam tries too hard .
this is a frantic movie - all sweaty close - ups , wide - angle lenses , dutch tilts and other - worldly lighting schemes .
there are times when gilliam really does put a convincing representation of an acid trip on the screen .
but to what end ? much of the dialogue comes verbatim from thompson 's book , and there are some priceless comic observations .
but you 're hard pressed to hear or digest them amidst all the jumbled camera work .
this brings us to the performances , which strike me as all wrong .
depp plays thompson as groucho marks filtered through george c . scott in patton - a gimmicky performance which works against the biting satire of thompson 's dialogue .
in between his several puking scenes , del toro fares better as dr .
gonzo , but
he also mumbles and sputters
so many of his lines that their weight is lost .
watching these two made me wish that the movie had been made twenty years ago , with dan akroyd and john belushi as the leads - now that would have been something to see .
it 's interesting to note that alex cox , credited as a co - writer on the screenplay , was originally slated to direct before gilliam took over .
as much of a fan as i am of gilliam 's work , cox would have been the better choice .
sid and nancy , cox 's best work , covered essentially the same subject matter , but cox was able to pull back and allow the characters of sid vicious and nancy spungen to carry the film .
gilliam commits the compound sin of over - directing his film while being uncertain of his purpose .
what kind of movie was he trying to make , anyway ?
it does n't try to be a cautionary tale , and it does n't work as broad comedy .
if he had considered more carefully his purpose , the result would have been a much more interesting film .
but i do n't want to be too hard on it .
there are some truly funny moments , and if you 're in a good enough mood you might get a kick out of it .
i do , however , recommend watching fear and loathing in las vegas under the influence of your favorite controlled substance
- i guarantee it will enhance the effect .
Example Output:
N