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

Input: Consider Input: susan granger 's review of " the watcher " ( universal ) just what we need : another lurid , trashy serial killer saga .
this time , keanu reeves plays an elusive homicidal maniac who engages in a gruesome ticking - clock cat - and - mouse game with james spader , a burnt - out fbi agent who has suffered a traumatic nervous breakdown after too many years on the job with the lapd .
to taunt spader , who has relocated to chicago , reeves packs up his trusty piano wire and moves too .
before long , he starts mailing photographs of the lonely , unsuspecting young women who are his intended windy city victims , challenging spader , along with the chicago police department , to stop him within 24 hours before he strikes again .
in the midst of this murderous frenzy , there 's spader 's psychologist , played by marisa tomei , who is even less convincing as a medical professional than jennifer lopez in " the cell .
"
writers david elliot , clay ayers and darcy meyers , along with first - time director joe charbanic ( helmer of music videos for reeves ' band dogstar ) , dwell on the warped thrill of the methodology and the chase , revealing , early on , exactly whodunit since the killer says he and the cop " need each other to give meaning to our lives .
"
plus , as reeves explains , " we 're all stacked right on top of each other , but we do n't notice each other any more .
" after that , it 's all sound effects and tricky camera - work , along with a muddled , discordant soundtrack .
james spader 's acting technique can be described as ' wooden deadpan ' while keanu reeves maintains his perpetually monotone ' dude ' persona which sometimes works , sometimes does n't .
chris ellis , as spader 's self - important colleague , is the only cast member who manages to be convincing .
on the granger movie gauge of 1 to 10 , " the watcher " is an appallingly awful , amateurish 2 .
the real torture is watching it .

Output: N


Input: Consider Input: here is a film that is so unexpected , so scary , and so original that it caught me off guard and threw me for a loop .
okay , it is n't quite original ,
considering it is a sequel to the box office hit species , but
it certainly is smart .
most films of this genre are reminiscent of those cheesy b - horror films from the 50s and 60s , and some even become them .
however , as we learned with the 1995 small - budget horror / sci - fi film , sometimes expectations can be shattered .
a lot of criticism has gone against this film ( from what i have read so far , anyway -- yep , all two reviews ) , and it makes me wonder why these types of films are automatically dismissed as gory , laughable pieces of trash .
but , the thing is , it is n't .
it 's well made , well acted , and quite intelligent .
i can see most of the critics now complaining about the level of gore or the level of sexuality in the film .
but the species series is n't about the lack of these elements .
it 's about how much it can get into one film .
and yet , behind it all , it has this basic premise that allows it to get away with doing so .
species ii begins in the present day , though it seems to be an alternate universe .
many films ( especially sci - fi ones ) create similar timelines as our realistic one , but change it to fit the film 's needs .
species ii begins with the arrival of an american spacecraft , the excursion , landing on the surface of mars .
aboard is patrick ross ( justin lazard ) , a very bright and very handsome astronaut .
patrick is the son of senator ross ( james cromwell ) , who just wants patrick to succeed .
well , it would seem that he has succeeded .
landing on the surface of mars , he is the first human being to ever do so .
of course , he is n't the first ever .
about a billion years ago , an alien species supposedly landed on mars and destroyed the perfect living conditions that were able to sustain life .
now , of course , the red planet is cold and rocky .
no life lives on it .
that is , no visible life .
patrick , upon leaving the spacecraft and landing on the red soil , collects samples from the ground .
he takes them aboard , and puts them in storage .
unfortunately , one of the samples contains a form of life , and it gets loose when it is heated aboard the ship .
just prior to heading back to earth , this life form creeps along the floor and inhabits the earthlings .
they pass out for approximately seven minutes , and then shrug it off as nothing , because they ca n't even remember .
they blame it on a technical malfunction .
back on earth , patrick begins to have strong urges to mate with as many women as possible .
as we know from the original , this is because the alien wants to breed and take over the planet .
however , the children that are bred are half - human , as their father is .
patrick is really looking for another alien to breed with , and he finds it in eve ( natasha henstridge ) .
eve was cloned from dna taken from sil , the original alien .
however , this time around , most of her " alien " urges have been either decreased dramatically , or lie dormant .
the project is led by dr .
laura baker ( marg helgenberger , reprising her role from species ) , and her motives seem respectable .
since she was involved with the original alien attack , she wants to learn how to stop the alien should it come again .
and it has .
story - wise
, species ii is much stronger than its predecessor , but it is also much stronger than , say , aliens
( hey , i love the film , but you ca n't tell me it was strong on story ) .
what surprised me the most with this film was the incorporation of historical facts into the screenplay .
in my search for extraterrestrial intelligence course in college , we learned about a piece of rock from mars which landed in one of the poles .
this piece of rock contained fossils which may have been proof of life on mars ( later , it was proven that it was not a living creature that created it ) .
the script uses this effectively , but also manages to provide a well - balanced plot .
beginning with the first man on mars ( something i have always dreamed of seeing ) , i was hoping that the film would turn this element into a useful starting point for the movie .
and it does it quite well .
the characters are all smart , and they know what to do and what not to do .
the only character that seems a little cliched is the general ( george dzundza ) , and yet
, he remains logical in everything he does .
there are the obvious flaws of course , mostly lying in the technical aspects .
the special effects are only mediocre , and some are just plain bad .
but for the most part , they remain believable
( i even noticed a homage to the alien series when the mothers gave birth to alien children ) .
also , the most realistic ones are usually the goriest , ranging from people being torn open , or someone 's head being blown off .
however , some plot elements also may elicit laughs from the audience , including a menage a troi that is all but necessary .
many people dislike the species series because all it is is an excuse for sex , nudity , and gory violence .
however , i tend to disagree .
what were the alien films about ?
and , if an alien species ever did come to earth , and their sole purpose was to destroy us , would n't you mate as quickly as possible with as many people as possible ?
my only gripe with this is during the scene where patrick goes searching for a mate in a grocery store .
i did n't realize that aliens were that picky on choosing women to mate with
( i just assume it is his part - human side looking for the most beautiful one ) .
the acting is quite good for this kind of film .
it is a vast improvement over the first film , at least .
the acting is the key element to this film : if it was bad , it would have lowered itself into camp ; if it was good , it would have asked for comparison with films like aliens .
okay ,
so it is n't that good .
george dzundza is probably the most obvious mistake on casting , as his over - the - top impersonation of a general makes him annoying and distracting .
natasha henstridge is limited this time around , as she is usually enclosed in a cage .
however , she does manage a very impressive performance with this aspect hindering any of her talent .
oh yeah ,
and she 's quite fun to just plain watch .
marg helgenberger is immensely better this time around , and her performance is probably the best in this film .
michael madsen is so - so , but he is n't annoying ,
and he soon becomes rather appealing
( with his nice cynic personality ) .
james cromwell has a small part , but he makes it much better than what it could have been with a more incapable actor .
as i say , any film with james cromwell dramatically increases in likeability .
mykelti williamson gives an enjoyable performance , and he gives the film a more down - to - earth feel .
and , of course , justin lazard .
lazard has so far been ridiculed for his performance ,
but i think he is effective .
sure , he is wooden , but is n't that what his character is like ?
the moment when he touches the glass separating henstridge from him was extremely well done , due to the couple 's acting .
species ii is rated r for strong sexuality , sci - fi violence / gore and language .
this is definitely an r rated film that young kids should not see .
more than likely , they would probably have nightmares and never have sex for the rest of their lives .
hell , i do n't even know if i will .
what is sure to be a critically lambasted film turns out to be the surprise film of the year .
i probably wo n't see another film where i was expecting so little and got so much for quite a while .
director peter medak has crafted a very suspenseful , and sometimes very scary movie out of a mediocre series .
medak has also mastered the wonderful " jump !
" moments , and has probably the second scariest moment i have ever seen on film ( scream still has the first ) .
strong acting , smart dialogue , intelligent plotting , and a sure - handed director , species ii is exactly what these films should be : entertaining .

Output: P


Input: Consider Input: to me , nicolas cage sounds like an ideal choice for the lead role in a martin scorsese film .
despite the rantings that sean penn so rudely expressed , the actor remains a gifted and versatile screen presence .
ever since the big success of the action - thriller ` face / off ' in 1997 , the hollywood road has been a rocky one for mr .
cage .
the perpetually awful assassination thriller ` snake eyes ' was one of 1998 's worst films .
` 8 mm ' was a disappointing lost cause .
but who better than scorsese to match cage 's wit and intensity , which he does in miraculous fashion with ` bringing out the dead ' .
cage delivers one of his finest performances as frank pierce , a new york city emergency paramedic who is running on fumes from day - to - day .
after five years of the stress - inducing job , frank basically just staggers onward , relying on heavy doses of caffeine and booze until his shift finally ends .
he also begins seeing the ghosts of past patients who died under his care , namely a young girl named rose , who stares back at him with pale features at every street corner in new york .
frank desperately wants to be fired , but his boss needs him to scour the city and help those in need ( ` i 'll fire you tomorrow . . . '
he promises ) .
frank is accompanied by a fresh face every night in the ambulance .
the first is larry ( john goodman ) , who always has food on the brain .
the second is marcus ( ving rhames ) , a deeply religious black man who incorporates the power of jesus into a regular rescue operation .
and finally , tom ( tom sizemore ) is a deranged sociopath hungry for blood .
i found it unique how scorsese used each of these characters for a single shift with frank , but they never figured into the actual plot .
each is merely a colorful presence to help develop frank 's character , because ` bringing out the dead ' is predominantly a study of his mind and detailed personality .
the one character alongside frank that truly comes into play is mary ( patricia arquette ) , the daughter of a newly admitted patient who suffered from a severe heart attack .
arquette , who recently received the wounds of christ in ` stigmata ' , performs well around real - life husband cage .
it 's unfortunate
that , after such intriguing character trials and tribulations , the relationship between frank and mary slips during a mishandled , ineffective finale .
the movie belongs to the one - two punch of cage and scorsese , who were born to collaborate their efforts in an arrangement similar to ` bringing out the dead ' .
although it certainly lacks the grit and hard - edge of something like ` goodfellas ' ,
scorsese manages to hit a nerve with his latest picture .
the incredible camera - work and photography represent stunning flashes of brilliance in an otherwise unspectacular conglomeration .
fans will be pleased to find the director has returned to his abrasive , darkly humorous roots after somewhat of a departure with 1997 's ` kundun ' .
does ` bringing out the dead ' rival scorsese 's finest work ? only occasionally .
some of the film feels surprisingly limp , but there is enough energy in it 's interesting material and breathtaking visual appearance to suffice .
those expecting a grisly , risqu ?
product may be somewhat disheartened at the fairly straight - arrow approach - but it 's still a solid , admirable effort .
` bringing out the dead ' was written by the acclaimed paul schrader , who collaborated with scorsese on such classics as ` taxi driver ' and ` raging bull ' .
schrader 's script is full of moments - wonderful , sharply defined moments
- that are sorted throughout the remainder of his meandering screenplay .
the exceptional aspects of the film are it 's astounding technical credits and the amazing cast .
goodman and sizemore are both electric ( well , mainly sizemore ) , but it 's the phenomenal ving rhames who deserves a second look .
watch the actor 's deeply inspired dedication as he resurrects a gothic band member , and you 'll understand why he won a golden globe .
` bringing out the dead ' is raw and electrifying often enough to mask it 's certain flaws .
scorsese - and cage , for that matter - have done better , but their intentions are certainly admirable .


Output: P