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

Example Input: plot summary : the year is 2024 .
the ozone layer has long since gone and the earth is now protected from radiation by a shield invented by connor mccleod .
the shield , although saving lives , has made the atmosphere hot and humid .
connor is a mortal and a tired old man who has given up hope .
on returning from the opera one night connor is accosted by the leader of a " terrorist " organisation .
they have tried to find out what the company that now runs the shield unit are covering up .
connor is then attacked by two assassins sent by katana from the planet zeist ( like zeit -- get it ? ) .
they fail and connor becomes immortal again by chopping their heads off .
he then brings ramirez back to life in glencoe in scotland .
both ramirez and connor are rebel leaders back on zeist and have been sent to earth as punishment .
connor now has the option to return being the last one but opts to stay with his new found immortality and fight to find out about the company and the shield .
katana meanwhile , fearing connor would return , sets out himself to kill the highlander .
if you have never seen it . being a fan of highlander and mr .
connery , i was in the cinema as soon as i could to see highlander ii :
the quickening .
i wish it had been quicker .
i feel whatever else you can say about a film ( bad script bad music , etc . ) if you sit just plain bored through most of it then nothing much else needs to be said .
the film was short but in my opinion only twelve minutes or so
( the time mr .
connery is on the screen for ) is worth watching .
the plot sounds a little ridiculous but i was willing to give it a chance .
maybe they could pull it off .
instead , i find that the characters have completely changed from those in the first film .
it 's as if they are different people with the same names .
witness connor jumping into bed with the leader of the resistance -- where is the attitude of " who wants to live forever , when love must die " gone to ?
the love sub - plot
* must * have had footage cut out .
the highlander and ramirez both seemed aware of powers they had never mentioned before .
putting our heroes in deadly situations and then having them walk away because of some new power is very annoying .
i still want to know why connor 's coat becomes flame proof when he is immortal !
we are not given enough time on zeist to believe in it , nor are we told why advanced aliens still use swords to kill .
why not dynamite or laser saws or just plain bullets followed by a quick chop to the neck ?
i know the head needs to come off
but you could at least immobilise your opponent with laser rifles first .
to be fair one assassin tried this
but he must be the world 's worst shot .
meanwhile connor develops luke - skywalker - like powers of laser beam deflection .
as for " bad guys , " we see a rebellion on zeist , crushed easier than a grape and then the rest of the plot depends on katana being obsessed with killing mccleod in case he returns to zeist .
two assassins are sent , presumably they are meant to be good at killing but an aged connor kills them both with no problems .
no more assassins are sent .
katana , supposedly a very powerful man goes himself to kill connor .
has he no more assassins ?
has he no better ?
why was the rebellion crushed so easily then ?
michael ironside is totally unconvincing
( bring back the kurgan ) .
he seems like a cartoon character and really is n't that evil , just stupid and violent .
we see the hollywood trick of the chief nasty threatening a child again and killing lots of innocents .
yet he still seems like no threat -- perhaps because he seems too stupid to threaten connor , or maybe because his two best assassins would n't have been amiss with larry , curly and mo .
so much for plot and characters .
the music is atrocious .
it is at best intrusive and at worst annoying . bring back queen .
there was an audible sigh ( of relief ? )
when connor played a queen track in a juke box .
i believe this at least is to be corrected for the american release .
the acting is at best flat , except for mr .
connery .
lambert is uninteresting and when he delivered " there can be only one " this time around it
just made me wish there had only been one -- highlander .
michael ironside is unconvincing
; sorry , michael , i usually like you and everyone else was incredibly forgetable .
so why 2/10 ?
visually the film is interesting at all times .
it has a blade runner feel to it and some of the special effects are quite stunning .
add to this an irrepressible sean connery who smiles throughout the whole film -- or is he smirking to himself ?
his lines and delivery might make the film worthwhile
had it not been so obvious that he can not take the whole thing seriously at all
but hey
--
*
i 'd * have done it for 12 million .
oh , and i agree with a previous reviewer
, she * does * look like sharon stone but i believe it is her first film .
incidentally there is a line producer credited and i hear rumours of highlander iii : the wizard .
Example Output: N

Example Input: based on the novel set in 1914 by joseph conrad , victory spins a tale of a pair of lovers , heyst ( william dafoe ) and alma ( irene jacob ) , who seek refuge on heyst 's isolated island .
however , their idyllic world begins to crumble upon the arrival of mr jones ( sam neil ) , martin ricardo ( rufus sewell ) and their servant , pedro ( graziano marcelli ) , who have come to steal heyst 's rumoured plunder .
while the novel is largely complex in characterization , the film sadly transposes conrad 's characters into lacklustre leads , the most disappointing being heyst himself .
conrad 's heyst adheres religiously to his late father 's ways of detachment and isolation .
his ascetic lifestyle is thrown into question when he meets alma , a helpless orchestra girl who charms him with her voice .
the struggle to embrace the arrival of alma into his solitude , however , is lost in mark peploe 's ( director and writer ) diluted version of heyst . without properly establishing the crucial details of heyst 's character , all that is left of conrad 's main character is a very shallow treatment of his internal conflict between detachment and human involvement .
on the one hand , actualizing the subtext is a mammoth task ( though not impossible ) , but on the other hand , dafoe 's flat acting can not be excused as an attempt at stoicism .
in the end , we are supposed to witness heyst renounce his philosophy and finally come to an understanding of what it is to love another .
the final transformation , while perceptible , lacks the cathartic revelation which is undeniable in conrad 's novel .
its absence in the film is unforgivable .
the film seems more concerned about moving the plot along when so much has yet to be said about the relationship between the two complete strangers .
alma is supposed to have overcome great emotional barriers in the relationship , namely heyst 's underlying philosophy of detachment , which heyst himself grapples with .
the struggle against heyst 's ignorance of true human involvement accounts for much of the greatness of alma 's love for him .
jacob , fair - skinned , gentle and yet passionate , handles the role with precision , detailing nuances where possible .
unfortunately , she is let down by a superficial script .
the couple 's relationship develops too hastily , leaving all subtlety effaced and replaced with a blatant show - and - tell approach .
all we know of the characters are mostly explained by their lines alone .
this is unsatisfactory when so much of the turmoil experienced by the two stem from their buried thoughts and emotions .
the sketchy handling of their relationship stands out as sorely as dafoe 's american accent ( an inappropriate one since heyst spent most of his life in london ) .
the other characters such as schomberg ( jean yanne ) , the owner of a hotel , and mr jones ( sam neill ) , also fall short of conrad 's meticulous characterization .
while schomberg should have been more menacing and vindictive , mr jones should have been portrayed as something more of an enigma .
sam neil 's caricature of a slightly stout , effeminate and soft - spoken gentleman - at - large nullifies the effect intended by conrad who describes mr jones as " an insolent spectre on leave from hades , endowed with skin and bones and a subtle power of terror " .
poor characterization aside
, kudos goes to rufus sewell for his excellent portrayal of ricardo , secretary to mr jones , a reckless ruffian capable of murder .
sewell , with his cockney accent and large expressive green eyes , becomes the true terror of the unholy trinity , masterminding deceitful plans behind jones ' back .
at the same time , we are entertained by the foolhardiness of his plans .
despite the authentic setting and marvellous cinematography by bruno de keyzer ,
very few images are left behind for us to savour after the film has ended
. sourabaya and its surrounding islands and volcanoes may have their charm , but mean nothing once the film fails to capture the essence of an epic , which is what victory deserves to be .
the delicately inter - woven complexities in the love story are lost to an inadequate production .
at the end of the film , we are told that perhaps alma 's victory was in teaching heyst how to love .
a hollow victory indeed .
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

Example Input: i 've never been a huge fan of jeff bridges , but i loved him in the big lebowski .
the part of jeff " the dude " lebowski was reportedly written specifically with bridges in mind , and the fit is perfect .
the dude is an unemployed denizen of los angeles , a hippie slob on a bowling team with a soft spot for white russians .
he 's enjoying a leisurely soak in the tub when two thugs break into his apartment demanding to be paid for the money his wife owes .
after much pleading he convinces them they have the wrong guy , but not before they urinate on his rug .
the dude assumes that these " collection agents " were after another jeff lebowski , a famous millionaire who also lives in l .
a .
so he goes to meet his namesake to ask for enough money to replace his rug .
the millionaire refuses , but calls him back when he discovers his wife has been kidnaped .
he wants the dude to act as go - between for the kidnapers .
dude and his friend walter ( john goodman ) take on the task , and get caught in an intricate web of kidnapers , millionaires , high schoolers , nihilists , artists , pornographers , thugs , and league bowlers .
comedy is perhaps the most subjective of genres , so take my recommendation as you will : for me , the big lebowski is very funny .
it is an incredibly successful comedy , the ratio of laughs to intended jokes much higher than in most films .
not only are the two leads ( bridges and goodman ) funny separately and together , but each supporting character is a refreshing comic figure .
all the characters end up as the butt of jokes , but the jokes are always deserved and never contrived .
each person may be a comic caricature , but there is always a respectful self - acceptance that lets us laugh at these people without condescension .
the characters are firmly established , and they never change their behavior for a quick , cheap laugh .
it 's not what they do
that 's funny
, it 's who they are , which is why the acting is so important , and so successful , in this movie .
worth mentioning are john turturro as jesus ( that 's jee - zus , not hay - soos ) , the greaser bowler who 's in a lusty marriage with the game ; julianne moore as the post - post - feminist artist whose work has been described as " vaginal ; " steve buscemi as the eager tagalong bowler who is constantly rebuked and ignored by teammates dude and walter ; and sam elliott as the rambling , long - winded narrator . aside from the performances , what makes all the characters funny and interesting is the astute dialogue .
people lose trains of thought , they interrupt , they boast , they repeat themselves , they repeat their friends .
. .
they sound natural .
taken with fargo , the coen brothers ' last film , it is evidence that the brothers are observant listeners and gifted writers .
ethan coen is not just good at directing actors , he 's also good at technical directing .
he and cinematographr roger deakins created a beautiful world on film .
perhaps " beautiful " is the wrong word ; nihilists , carpet - pissers and thugs are not objects of beauty .
but the bowling photography and a series of viking / bowling fantasy dream sequences are lovingly photographed , as though the dude himself were in charge of immortalizing them on film .
all around , the big lebowski is great , solid comedy .
outstanding acting , writing , direction and photography all combine to make this a great comic success .
Example Output:
P