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

Input: Consider Input: " desperate measures " was something i was excited about seeing back when it was originally scheduled to be released : summer ' 97 . for some reason , it was delayed until hollywood 's traditional dumping ground : january .
now that it 's out , i see no real reason for that delay , as it 's a simple yet highly entertaining film .
michael keaton stars as a maniacial murderer who 's bone marrow can save the life of the dying son of a san francisco police detective ( garcia ) .
keaton agrees to the transplant , only so he can attempt escape .
he succeeds , in a plan that of course could only work in the movies .
the police force is now trying to kill keaton , while garcia is working against them trying to keep keaton alive in order to save his son .
the film definately has it 's flaws .
the plot is strictly tv movie of the week fare , but the acting and direction certainly boost it far above that status .
also , after keaton 's escape , garcia 's captain barks at him " how many men have to die to save your kid 's life ? " which the film treats as such an evil and insignificant remark .
the thing is , it 's a vaild point .
how many people have to be needlessly crippled , burned , and killed just to save this one child ?
what 's the greater good here ?
many lives or one life ?
if movies really had guts nowadays , i would have loved to have seen this movie come down to a final choice for garcia 's character .
place him in a situation where he knows that he has to kill keaton because keaton is about to kill someone else .
alas , movies these days generally have no such ambition to pull the audience 's strings in ways which might make the uncomfortable .
despite a few silly moments ( and one or two really stupid ones ) , the good things about " desperate measures " outnumber the bad .
the main highlight would be keaton 's performance .
the character could have easily been an overacting , scene chewing freak , but keaton underplays it nicely .
he 's not as menacing as he was in " pacific heights " or even as menacing as he was in " batman
" ( yes kids , batman used to be a dark character ) , but you certainly get the idea that he 's evil .
even the final scene of the film , which normally i would just hate , seems strangely appropriate for this film .
so much so that i did n't mind it in the slightest . and another bonus : the film takes place in san francisco , which usually means a car chase on those hills that you 've seen a billion times before .
and for a moment , it looked as though it was about to happen .
but it does n't ,
and that 's creative .
[ r ]

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: "
if there 's a beast in men , it meets its match in women , too .
" starring sarah patterson , angela lansbury , tusse silberg , david warner directed by neil jordan written by jordan and angela carter , from a story by carter cinematography by bryan loftus in recent years , there has been a trend in the field of fantasy : writers have been revisiting the fertile world of myth and fairy tale and reclaiming that world , investing it with new life and energy .
in modern times , fairy tales have become disneyfied and debased ; they have become trite adventures involving leering witches , friendly dwarves , and cuddly talking animals .
but in their original forms , fairy tales have a dark , wicked edge .
crows tear out the eyes of cinderella 's sisters , a gorier fate then they receive in the animated version .
hansel and gretel relish cooking the witch in her own oven .
writers have become fascinated by the bloodier , morally ambivalent aspects of fairy tales , and are now modernizing the old stories while simultaneously going back to their roots .
before this trend was in vogue , angela carter -- whose stories always have a dark , wicked , subversive edge -- had been reinventing fairy tales for years .
in the company of wolves , she and neil jordan retell the story of red riding hood , enlivening it with werewolves , rolls royces , and a visit from satan .
the story is structured as a dream , occurring in the mind of rosaleen ( sarah patterson ) , an adolescent girl about whose ' real ' life we learn very little .
within the dream , there are a number of inset stories , most told by dream - rosaleen 's grandmother ( angela lansbury ) , and these tales gloss the central story in intriguing , suggestive ways .
the result is a surprisingly successful example of a sinister , contemporary fairy tale .
i say " surprisingly " because there are so many ways this film could have gone wrong .
and there are ways in which it does .
the performances are mediocre , except for lansbury's --
she finds the right note for the prim
, apple - cheeked granny , the wise and stern teller of cautionary tales .
the soundtrack , synth - heavy , reminded me of bad 80s horror movies , as did the special effects in the shapechanging scenes .
probably state - of - the - art at the time
, they are now laughable .
but jordan succeeds at what i consider the trickiest aspect of the film : he transcends the poor acting / music / effects and conveys a sense of the fantastic , of otherness .
one of the problems in adapting full - blown fantasies is that fantasy is often best left to the imagination of the reader , rather than being subjected to the ' realism ' of the screen .
part of me would love to see an adaptation of ' the lord of the rings , ' but , on the other hand , i know that any filmmaker 's recreation of ents , hobbits , and balrogs is inevitably going to be really lame compared to what i picture in my mind .
this makes jordan 's accomplishment here seem mighty impressive to me : he imbues the company of wolves with a genuine sense of magic and mystery .
the somewhat ruritanian dreamworld becomes a kind of ur - reality .
the sunshine is exceptionally warm and abundant .
the nights are quiet and misty and eerie and ghostly .
the peasant village is rustic and cozy , the woods old and hoary .
this archetypal realm is the setting for a smart , subtle , literate script , a script which is as good as you 'd expect from jordan ( himself an accomplished fiction writer ) and carter . for carter , the cauldron of story is a witches ' brew , bubbling over with primal ingredients : mist - shrouded forests , ancient graveyards , virginal girls and wise women , wolves with glowing eyes .
she adeptly blends them all together .
there is a symbolic richness to the film ; everything is permeated with a sense of significance .
the point of it all , i think , is to represent a girl 's rites - of - passage on an unconscious , primordial level .
a night - journey through the forest , from the village to the grandmother 's home , is the crux of the company of wolves .
" do n't stray from the path , " rosaleen is told , again and again , and the path is both literal and figurative : the path through the forest and the path of life .
staying on the path is the conventional approach suggested by rosaleen 's elders .
carter and jordan , never conventional , explore what goes on when you leave the path .
those who stray will supposedly meet with a dark fate .
this fate is literalized in the dream as werewolves , but the werewolves connote many things : death , sex , knowledge .
if straying from the path leads to death , then it 's not a good idea -- but if that 's what you have to risk to get sex and knowledge ( and therefore power ) , then maybe it 's worth the risk .
when you leave the path , the world becomes a dangerous , ambiguous place , but it 's full of potential .
and it 's certainly more interesting than the disney version .


Output: P