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

Example Input: ' bicentennial man ' is a family film without any external motive with the exception of providing the minimum dose of entertainment .
chris columbus , the director who gave you " mrs . doubtfire " , plays on sentimental strings and mushy dialogue to make his point .
based on the short story by isaac asimov , it is supposed to be a science fiction story about a robot who wants to be human , which as you can imagine is very difficult .
starting in a not too distant future the film concentrates on a wealthy family that buys an android to help them with the house and children .
soon this robot , called andrew ( robin williams ) shows abilities that makes his owner mr .
martin ( sam neill ) very curious .
andrew is interested in art and music , he " enjoys " making clocks , which clearly shows that he has genuine emotions .
it shows out that because of a small failure in the " electrical circuits " and " positronic brain " andrew has accidentally gained a soul .
this makes him unique and his evil creators worried .
then mr .
martin decides to teach andrew all the things he was n't programmed to do .
soon andrew wants to leave the house in pursuit of freedom , destiny and love .
this film can be described as a disney version of blade runner , a film that still shines as the biggest gem in the crown of science fiction .
ever since that film , the subject of humanity still stands as one big controversy .
what makes us human ?
the thoughts ?
the emotions ? is it possible to become human ?
at what point can we say to a robot " now you are one of us " ?
these are very tough questions that require a serious and thurral approach .
it is obvious that columbus did n't take them very seriously .
when you think about it , this film is not really meditating on the question
" when is a robot no longer a machine , but a human being ? " , but tells a story about racial discrimination and lack of understanding .
andrew is so complex and emotional from the very beginning that the audience immediately accepts him as a human being , and only the society has troubles with it .
in other words , it is as far from reality as from the academy awards .
further more , there are other annoying problems .
to this day no serious filmmaker has dared to speculate about the future in more than 50 years from now .
this has not been done for obvious reasons , because the filmmakers are well aware of the fact that they lack the knowledge and imagination to perform such a difficult task .
columbus is the first to have crossed that line .
the result is , as you might imagine , primitive , unrealistic and incredibly disappointing effort .
the world is simply frozen in time .
neither the society , fashion , culture or values have changed over 200 years .
mom is still working at the kitchen , doing the dishes .
when you think back to the late 17th century and then compare it to the world we live in today , you 'll see a slightly bigger difference .
i am not saying that everything should change .
it is unlikely that the human rights will change , but it 's even more unlikely that there will not be any progress in science , technology and fashion .
i suppose it 's possible to watch this as a some sort of bizarre fairytale , but it 's really hard .
robin williams is hidden behind c and speaking in a robotic way .
as always he does a decent job , as does sam neill .
but it does n't really matter .
it is the sentimentality and length that turns
this picture into a tiresome experience .
pretty much like last year 's " meet joe black " , this is a primitive and unresolved story which is presented with a splendor and professionalism that it does n't deserve .
great actors and a talented crew have worked hard to achieve something that will be instantly forgotten .
when isaac asimov wrote this story , the future seemed far away and magical .
everything seemed possible .
now is the future of asimov 's time , and we know that it is not as magical and perfect as it seemed a long time ago .
for the same reasons that the young generation of today can not be amazed by julius verne 's " 20 000 leagues under the sea " , so ca n't we accept this story as a potential reality .
let us hope that next year 's " a. i. " will be more rewarding .
Example Output: N

Example Input: city of angels is the kind of love story that i enjoy the most : thought - provoking , moving , and completely unsentimental .
i find it interesting that this film has been released the same day as my giant , which is a film that is undone completely by its wretched sentimentality .
city of angels is a wonderful film , enhanced by interesting and well - rounded characters and some of the most immersive imagery of the last couple of years .
it 's a love story that takes the familiar angel themes and makes them new and necessary to the story , and avoids most of the cliches we 're so used to seeing in films like this .
city of angels is an apparently loose remake of wim wenders ' 1988 film wings of desire .
i have yet to see wings of desire , so i am , unfortunately , unable to make a comparison of the two .
i have heard , however , that city of angels is dissimilar from the original in numerous ways , which makes me glad that this film is n't a rip - off of its source material .
nicolas cage stars as seth , an angel who , like all of his angel counterparts , is present to lead the dying to heaven ( or somewhere just like it ) .
one day , he is forced to take the life of a patient of dr .
maggie rice ( meg ryan ) , and his attention is called to her .
the angels can make themselves seen to humans , but they ca n't experience any of the senses ( most importantly , touch ) .
he shows himself to maggie , and she falls for him , unaware that he is slightly unavailable because of his apparition status .
seth wants to become human so he can feel her .
that 's when he meets nathaniel messinger ( dennis franz ) , " former celestial messenger and recent addition to the human race .
"
( as a side note , i found messinger to be the most fascinating character , for i can only imagine how incredibly liberating it must be to live knowing what lies beyond death . )
messinger explains to seth that it is possible for angels to become human .
seth manages to convince maggie that he is an angel ( i know , it sounds ridiculous , but
the scene in which she finds out is exceptionally well - done ) ; after much deliberation , she tells him that she could only be with a man who can feel .
this , of course , is when seth decides to take the plunge ( literally ) from a building ; when he wakes up from the fall , he is human , and happy to feel what it 's like to have a split lip and blood oozing from his forehead .
since i love this film so much , i 'll make a minor note that it certainly is n't perfect .
although it is original and mesmerizing , it does fall prey to a few of the cliches of the genre .
the plotting of the story by writer dawn steel is rather formulaic ( though the details are what make the story excellent , and steel has done a great job with them ) .
the ending , too , could have been more powerful and less predictable .
these elements are minor , though , and barely detracted from my overall enjoyment of city of angels .
the acting is superb from everyone involved .
this is perhaps my second - favorite performance from cage ( my favorite being the rock ) .
he 's quiet and pensive , and his eyes are engaging when he speaks his softly - toned words .
he 's perfect for a role like this , and at the same time he reassures us
he 's not bound by playing the psycho ( though he is good at it , as he shows in face / off ) .
meg ryan is a powerful , enticing , and appealingly - chirpy actress , and her work here is some of her best .
dennis franz , however , steals all of his scenes as the energetic former - angel .
what i admire most about city of angels is its overall presentation .
director brad silberling is a talented man , and he knows that a story like this is driven by the characters , rather than forced sentimentality .
his direction is steady , and he shows this in just about every scene : near the beginning , maggie has to tell a mother and her two children that their father is dead .
there is no music or elaborate camera work ; we simply see the reactions of the characters to the information .
this is the way stories should be told , and the strength of scenes resonates more completely when the emotions are real .
the film also appeals to the senses in a way that few love stories do .
cinematographer john seale ( the english patient ) provides some of the most stunning images
i 've seen on the big screen : hundreds of black - clad angels stand on a dim beach in the early morning hours ( just as an example ) .
the music , by gabriel yared ( also of the english patient ) , is perfect for this film :
it 's quiet and moody music ( but not sentimental ! ) , and adds to the atmosphere and tone nicely .
the visual presentation of city of angels is easily the best of 1998 so far .
all of this adds up to a film that is instantly set apart from other members of this genre .
it 's a film that relies on character development and imagery to get the story across -- the excellent actors and the professional production values make city of angels
one of those rare films that both entertains and instigates thought simultaneously .
Example Output: P

Example Input: ever feel you 're spending your whole life on the net ( ouch ! ) , eating , breathing and excreting web sites ? that your most meaningful relationships are being formed on the net ? that you get your best sex on the net ?
if first - time director hal salwen could shoot an entire movie of characters typing at their computers , he would .
as it is , he settles for characters talking on the phone .
denise calls up is a movie for and about the electronic generation , where characters are too caught up with their work and insecurities prefer to live out their relationships and fantasies on the phone .
it 's a satire - and
a sometimes funny one - about how we let handphones , call - waiting and answering machines run our lives .
the problem : denise calls up is a movie about an idea .
a darn good one , but still an 80 minute - long idea .
and despite salwen 's attempt at plots and sub - plots , despite some genuinely funny moments , you can predict the movie 's outcome within the first fifteen minutes .
you get the drift after a series of shots of characters explaining over the phone why they all could n't make it for a party - nobody is going to be meeting anybody in this film , they would rather be talking on the phone .
here 's salwen 's plot
: while all the characters are in a dysfunctional , telefixated limbo , loud quirky stranger denise calls up martin to announce that she is pregnant with his child , courtesy of the sperm he donated to the local bank . as martin progresses from slamming the phone on her to long phone conversations over the baby 's name , his friends - and his friends ' friends - get involved , courtesy of call - waiting and double - lines .
in the tigher and more tantalizing sub - plot , barbara and jerry are set up on a blind date that neither turns up for .
both profess to have too complicated schedules to ever meet , but they get it going over the phone .
with repeated phone sex comes a glitch ; what if the other person is simply faking it ?
denise calls up scores with some inspired moments .
mousy barbara metamorphoses into a vamp over her cordless , everyone shares the excitement of denise 's delivery through a conference call to her handphone , and barbara 's best friend gale is killed in a car accident while taling animatedly into another friend 's answering machine .
( as gale 's overly - chatty aunt recounts , her cordless was knicked into her ear and lodged in her brain . )
but these moments are not enough to sustain the movie .
the pace sags , the dialogue drags and not much acting appears to be required of the telephone - touters .
and the ending is literally a non - event as expected , everyone is too chicken to turn up for the party frank throws in gale 's memory despite promising over the phone that they will .
we get the point .
the movie appears to be intent on flogging its terribly-'90s statement until they have it coming out of your ears .
pun intended .
there 's even a on the movie 's web site where you can win cellular phones ( as if we have n't had enough of these things already ) .
watch the movie only if you find it philosophy
compelling enough for a earful .
the flying inkpot 's rating system :
* wait for the video .
*
* a little creaky , but still better than staying at home with gotcha !
*
* * pretty good , bring a friend .
*
*
* * amazing , potent stuff .
*
*
*
* * perfection . see it twice .
Example Output:
N