In this task, you must classify if a given review is positive/negative, indicating your answer as P or N.
--------
Question: carry on at your convenience is all about the goings - on in the factory of a toilet manufacturer , wc boggs ( kenneth williams ) .
once they have won an order to manufacture 1000 bidets in two months and charles coote ( charles hawtrey ) has designed a suitable model , the factory employees set to work but are interrupted by union representative vic spanner ( kenneth cope ) and friend bernie hulke ( bernard bresslaw ) who call them out on strikes on the slightest pretext .
meanwhile , chief foreman sid plummer ( sid james ) is growing tired of his wife beattie ( hattie jacques ) and her budgie .
he would much rather live next door with fellow boggs worker chloe moore ( joan sims )
but once he discovers that the budgie can predict the winners of horse races , he is over the moon and flush with money .
his daughter , myrtle plummer ( jacki piper ) , is going out with wc 's son lewis boggs ( richard o'callaghan ) and this causes conflict on the staff day out to the seaside when vic spanner vies for her attentions .
in the end , if the strike does not cease , boggs will have to close down his factory , but the support of a group of women led by coote 's wife - to - be and spanner 's mother , agatha spanner ( renee houston ) , try to resolve the situation .
also , sid realises that his budgie has caused him nothing but trouble since it started predicting horse race winners .
there are some good performances , as usual , from sid james and kenneth williams in their standard roles .
charles hawtrey is third billing but only appears in a few scenes .
his part is mildly amusing .
richard o'callaghan is appealing as bogg 's stuck - up son , patsy rowlands is funny as miss withering , bogg 's assistant , and renee houston is terrific in her small part as agatha .
however , sole acting honours go to hattie jacques as beattie plummer .
although her character is not directly involved with the main storyline , she manages to input a great deal of pathos and feeling into her character .
a marvellous performance from a marvellous actress .
the film suffers from annoying performances by bernard bresslaw and especially kenneth cope .
in his carry on debut , cope
overdoes his role as spanner making him so annoying as to be unfunny .
joan sims returns as the love interest ( instead of barbara windsor ) .
sims ' ' usual ' part as the downtrodden wife was taken by hattie jacques .
additionally , bill maynard as fred moore is very poor .
this carry on movie tries it best to entertain the viewer : - the locations and wealth of characters are appealing . however ,
the toilet humour becomes tiresome very quickly and some of the performances leave a lot to be desired .
this movie does not know where it is going .
it was made in 1971 and talbot rothwell the scriptwriter seems to be in two minds whether to go for ' bluer ' jokes or to maintain the ' innocent ' jokes success of most of its predecessors .
that is why this film suffers .
a minor carry on film whose major asset is the performance by hattie jacques .
the new ' minor - regulars ' such as o'callaghan and piper are not able to enliven the movie and the toilet humour becomes humourless after a while .

Answer: N


Question: plot : this movie takes place over one day .
it 's a rookie cop 's narcotics training alongside a seasoned police veteran .
the rookie does n't know much about " street justice " , so the older cop teaches him about the way things work in the " real world " .
how even cops like themselves have to " bend the rules " and " break the law " every now and then , in order to catch the really bad guys .
critique : a pretty intense little movie with solid acting across the board , some ups , some downs and a thrilling ending , despite a couple of small flaws .
i really enjoyed this movie because it followed two extreme characters and put them in situations which had me wondering about what i would do if i were in their place .
the film gets right into the " dirty " side of , well .
..
the dirt on the streets , and proceeds to teach the rookie cop ( and us , the audience ) how things really work down there .
of course , we 're receiving this lesson from a man who has put away a lot of scum in his time , but the things he seems to be doing are n't exactly on the up - and - up either . and therein , lies the fun of the film .
do you agree that you yourself would need to break a few small laws in order to put away the people who break the really big ones ?
well , as the film moves along , we 're given two points of view in respect to this predicament , and to me , both sides made sense at some point or another . and
you got ta give a lot of credit to the screenplay for that , the director , who builds the film up wonderfully ( with the darkness of the day leading to the darkness in the script ) and the two actors who deliver their parts in spades .
hawke , first off , because he rarely plays these " commercial " roles but does so perfectly here , with a vulnerable side which has you feeling for the bastard right off the top .
and denzel , well , what can you say about mr .
washington that has n't already been said before ?
he comes through as per his usual high - level style here , and gives the audience a completely different side to his talent , of which , i personally would like to see more .
he 's nice
, he 's not so nice , he 's smart , he 's not so smart , he 's caring
and he 's a dog all the way .
the few problems that i did have with this film included the redundant nature of the whole thing at some point ( okay , we get it .
..
you have to be nasty in order to deal with these nasty people .
.. move on ) and this one really major " coincidence " which involved a bathtub , that saved the day for one character , but seemed a little too " convenient " for my taste .
i also never really understood how washington 's character got out of a certain dire predicament , only to be seen driving his car in the very next scene .
but obviously these small flaws did n't taint my overall enjoyment of this tense drama , a film that gets you right into the streets , into the nooks and the crannies , and into the moral dilemma which lies between the justice system and the day - to - day drug busts .
see it if you want to wrestle with some of these issues yourself
, see it if you want to see denzel and ethan strike up a palpable chemistry on - screen , and see it if you like holding on to your seat - handles real tight during a movie .
in fact , see it for the scene in which ethan hawke plays cards with a host of gang - bangers alone .
..
dang
, now that 's intense !
where 's joblo coming from ?
the corruptor ( 7/10 ) - crimson tide ( 9/10 ) - l. a.
confidential ( /10 )
- lethal weapon ( 8/10 ) - requiem for a dream ( 8/10 ) - seven ( 10/10 ) - shaft ( 7/10 ) - traffic ( 8/10 )

Answer: P


Question: when i first heard about scream in 1996 , i was told that it was a spoof of horror movies .
from the master of the horror himself , wes craven , it ridiculed the cliches of the genre by overemphasizing them , by making the teenagers do what they know they 're not supposed to do when a serial killer is stalking them ( do n't run up the stairs when you can easily go out the front door , never say " i 'll be right back , " etc . ) .
when i first heard this description , i figured that it was an easy way out of making a bad movie .
how hard is it to make an extremely terrible film but claim it is actually a mockery of other bad movies .
was this wes craven 's remedy from making " real " bad movies such as vampires in brooklyn ?
it just seemed cheap to me .
then i actually saw the movie and the first twenty minutes , involving drew barrymore and a nail - bitingly intense phone conversation , completely changed my attitude .
scream is not only a clever parody of your standard horror flick , it 's also a pretty scary movie .
if you 've seen a million of these kinds of films , you know exactly what is going to happen .
this is part of the fun of watching scream .
the movie reminds avid horror fans how similar and repetitive the genre is and it also reminds them how great a guilty pleasure it can be to watch pointless and predictable violence to innocent , attractive teenagers . to those who rarely see these types of movies , scream is a thrilling unpredictable ride that could be mistaken as a serious slasher film .
there 's nothing wrong with that misjudgment though .
i have witnessed viewers from both sides of the audience , the newbies to horror and the fanatics .
their opinions on the film were so different but
both very positive .
from these varied reviews , i am convinced that scream has not only revived the teen horror movie and the normal teen romance movies but also the hilarious parodies of these and other categories .
films that both deride and celebrate genres like galaxy quest and the big hit would not have existed , in my opinion , if it was not for the outstanding success of scream .
the low - budget 1996 gem may , alongside pulp fiction , be the most influential film of the 1990 's .
this influence may exist to the chagrin of some moviegoers who despise movies like teaching mrs .
tingle or television programs such as dawson 's creek but to others such as myself , we congratulate the movie that has opened new doors for excellent young actors , screenwriters , and directors .
scream is also an extremely funny movie thanks to its quickly - paced script by kevin williamson .
within the film are characters who tell other characters , as well as the audience , the basic rules and cliches of a horror movie .
mainly from the rants of randy ( jamie kennedy ) and stu ( matthew lillard ) , we are reminded not only of the obvious and hilarious rules but also some of the more subtle stereotypes that when thought over are mostly true as well ( the virgin always survives ; have sex and you 're dead meat ) .
not only are we treated these rules on a plate but also the rules are referenced to a number of different films and actors .
the script feels like an obsessive essay from a college film geek who has nothing better to do but find every little blunder from every little film for his own self - satisfaction .
in this case , williamson finds these errors for the audience 's satisfaction and amusement .
i hear there is a new movie coming out called scary movie which is a spoof of scream , which is a spoof of scary movies .
i will certainly see the film
but i have the feeling that this parody will be more obviously ridiculing the genre rather than scream 's perfect subtlety .
however my last gut feeling about this stuff , scream , was dead wrong .
.
. so who knows .

Answer:
P