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

Input: Consider Input: there 's a thin line between satire and controversy , and mike nichols ( the birdcage , wolf ) has directed a sharp and very honest look at a us presidential election .
based on the book written by " anonymous " ( actually former " newsweek " writer joe klein ) , john travolta plays governor jack stanton .
but he does n't actually play stanton .
he plays bill clinton ; just the same as emma thompson no doubt plays the first lady and billy bob thorton is the campaign manipulator james carville ( although the credits will of course say otherwise ) .
the film is taken from the perspective of henry burton ( adrian lester ) , a morally correct and somewhat hesitant new advisor to stanton .
he searches for justice and dignity in the ugliest possible situations , and whether it be keeping the history of his boss ' pants under wraps or contemplating digging up dirt on another politician , he approaches his work with a keen desire to skillfully serve his country and his fellow workers .
richard jemmons ( billy bob thorton ) and daisy green ( maura tierney ) team up with henry as the would - be president 's advisors , and hire lesbian veteran libby holden ( kathy bates ) as the campaign 's eccentric " tougher than dirt " incriminator .
together they face all sorts of sexual allegations , the irritatingly discourteous media and other witty politicians in the election race .
in its satire and controversy , primary colors is a similar film to wag the dog : they both are not afraid to wipe their noses in the nitty - gritty and take a bold look at something that will never has honesty as a virtue .
but whereas wag showed us how much affect a few people can have on the media , primary colors is much more concerned with fleshing out it 's characters , letting us understand what they want and why , and making us truly appreciate the humanity and rectitude that they graciously represent .
seeing john travolta play bill clinton
so confidently and justly is enough to make the film more than worth a look . and the rest of the cast also make
superb performances - adrian lester sharply portrays the intellect of henry whilst kathy bates is perfect as the robust and energetic libby holden .
at occasions , you ca n't help but feel that these terrific characters are going to waste .
there are long slabs of time where john travolta ( unquestionably the most interesting to watch ) is missed from the screen ; and since it is awkwardly structured as henry 's story we are often forced to watch scenes that perhaps are not so necessary to the central plot - or even the point of the film .
having said that , make no mistake - primary colors is always enjoyable to watch
.
but frequently we have to ask ourselves - exactly what are we watching ?
most of the first half of its duration is a lightheaded look at melodramatic confrontations that seem so genuine we can not help but laugh , but the way primary colors chooses to finish tackles aspects that are very contrary , and almost unsuitable , to the rest of the film .
but as i mentioned before , there is a thin line between satire and controversy - and for the most part , primary colors delivers an entertaining indulgence of political matters combined with a far - from - overpowering look at winning the public 's opinion .
although at occasions the film may jump around a little too freely , focus is never lost on how important and vulnerable the subject matter really is .
thankfully , it is clear to make the distinction on what is entertaining movie cosmetics and what is a provocative documentation of something
so really it 's scary .

Output: P


Input: Consider Input: synopsis : melissa , a mentally - disturbed woman who likes to smoke , seduces doug , a minor - league baseball player who likes to study anatomy , work on motorcycles , and make out with his girlfriend in a public library .
when doug decides to stop seeing her , melissa maliciously takes revenge on those around him , including his girlfriend , his mother , and his cat .
comments : malicious , i suppose , is an acceptable moview for what it is : a cheap , b - movie thriller which rips off dozens and dozens of spurned - psycho - lover - who - wants - revenge films
( like fatal attraction , hand that rocks the cradle , etc . etc . ) that have come before it .
malicious , however , really does n't provide very many particularly suspenseful moments .
the plot starts off energetically enough , the main characters are introduced and the affair between doug and melissa begins and ends pretty early on in the film .
it starts to drag , unfortunately , after this .
melissa will obviously try to take her revenge on doug ( as always seems to happen in movies like these ) , but she does so in unimaginative ways that have been done in other , better thrillers before .
she drugs someone .
she kills a family pet and leaves it in the girlfriend 's apartment .
and , of course , she stalks ,
so we see a number of shots , which are supposed to be suspenseful , where she 's spying on doug and his girlfriend .
i wo n't reveal the ludicrous ending to this turkey , but i warn you that it 's both painfully obvious and a real yawner
.
john vernon does a remarkably good job at playing the not - so - bright baseball jock who initially gets swept away by melissa ( one of the script 's faults is to try to pass off a character like this as a pre - med student ) .
the same can not be said , though , for molly ringwald .
at times , she can effectively pull off the obsessed lover routine , especially during her silent , i'm - going - to - stare - you - down scenes .
at other times , however , she just seems somehow goofy and out of place .
in one particular scene which i guess was supposed to be suspenseful , she screeches " f --
k you , you b-----d " and throws a phone .
she delivers the line so ridiculously that one ca n't help but laugh
.
malicious certainly is n't the worst thriller of its kind out in the video racks ( a number of really fat turkies in this genre are out there ) , but it is n't all that good or original either .
feel free to treat this film maliciously , watch something else .

Output: N


Input: Consider Input: an experience like baby geniuses can have certain effects on an average moviegoer .
you may be scarred for life after seeing this petrified piece of garbage , which is so disarmingly horrible that it may cause you to ponder it 's hollywood existence .
when i think of the screenwriters behind this film , i picture a room full of monkeys .
the monkeys are pounding on their typewriters while scratching themselves .
all of the monkeys combine their efforts , hop in a cab and take the finished product downtown to director bob clark 's office .
the designated monkey explains the plot by jumping up and down on clark 's desk while flailing his arms and shrieking .
the director appears to be deep in thought , until he slams his fist down on the desktop and exclaims ` i love it ! ! ! '
the writing behind this project is embarrassing
.
for your amusement , i will explain the plot .
dr .
kinder ( kathleen turner ) and dr .
heep ( christopher lloyd ) are two of the cold - hearted executives at the baby geniuses institute , where peculiar studies are going on .
as the story goes , there is an ancient myth explaining that babies ( ages 2 and under ) know all the secrets of the world from previous life experiences .
when they move past this phase , they become like any other drooling toddler .
kinder and heep want to unlock the secrets using their test babies , namely little sylvester ( sly for short ) , who can break in or out of any given situation so efficiently that he would be right at home on the mission : impossible team .
there is so much crap derived from this premise , despite the fact it 's virtually identical to the plot in look who 's talking !
( a far superior film in any league ) .
you will be able to determine the quality of the film by examining the opening scene .
sylvester has broken out and managed to elude several security guards with his amazing intellect and kung - fu tactics .
question :
it 's obvious the babies are super - smart , but why are they able to fight like jackie chan ? ?
the adults in this film are furiously beaten by these youngsters in diapers .
it 's a shock when writers will stoop this low just to draw cheap laughs by using john hughes ' familiar home alone formula .
i also found it disturbing that the babies in this film have attitude and endless 90 's knowledge , quoting numerous movies and insulting their adult captors .
the effects in baby geniuses ( similar to the talking animals in babe ) are pathetic , the editing is a disaster , and the jokes are never funny .
the only reason viewers may avoid vomiting is the argument that the babies are ` cute ' .
i suppose they are .
i can admit to smiling a few times because the babies were cute .
other instances , though
, i was howling in laughter due to the inane stupidity of the script .
there are supporting characters who have no personality whatsoever ; their entire existence is based on punch lines .
peter macnicol and kim cattrall , as an unwilling couple who have adopted sylvester 's twin , are both miscast .
then again , i do n't suppose any performer could handle the uneven material without looking incredibly stupid .
meanwhile , dom deluise plays a fellow who gets hit in the crotch with a monkey wrench ( hahaha ) .
i would avoid baby geniuses at all costs .
instead of watching this , i would recommended filling your bathtub with cement and going snorkeling .
or perhaps you would consider going diving in shark - infested waters . anything to avoid this painful movie .
the final line in the film , spoken by the bratty sylvester , is ` if they think i 'm doing the sequel for less than $ 20 mill , they 're nuts ' .
sequel ?
please have mercy .


Output: N