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

[EX Q]: it seemed like the perfect concept .
what better for the farrelly brothers , famous for writing and directing comedies with offensive subject matter , than to make a movie about a guy with a split personality ?
it 's exactly the sort of thing the brothers relish : poking fun at something serious ( in this case mental illness ) , throwing all care to the wind to get a laugh .
jim carrey 's signed on too ?
even better .
the national alliance for the mentally ill even helped out by levying complaints against the brothers ' new film before its opening , claiming it was misrepresenting the condition of split personality , labeling it incorrectly as " schizophrenia , " and so forth .
such a protest seemed like just the sort of thing that would , of course , only add more fuel to the farrelly brothers ' fire , proving that some people just could n't take a joke , and that the farrellys would be helping the more enlightened viewers to yet another dose of their brilliantly subversive comedy .
yes , it all seemed perfect , but one thing went wrong : their movie is n't funny .
it 's not for lack of trying .
the farrellys utilize in " me , myself & irene " their most high - concept premise ever : carrey plays charlie baileygaites , a man who after being dumped by his wife for a midget limo driver , decides to bury all his aggressive feelings deep down inside and never release them .
this , of course , means all his neighbors exploit his entirely too - forgiving nature , making his job as a rhode island state trooper increasingly difficult .
soon enough , charlie 's repressed aggression manifests itself into a second , independent personality named hank , a deep - voiced , boorish ogre unafraid of taking the assertive actions his predecessor had been unable to muster .
this guy is n't above crashing a car through the wall of the barber shop in which he 's been insulted , or holding a little girl 's head underwater because she refused to stop jump - roping in the street .
then things start getting lost in the most complicated plot the farrellys have ever attempted , and the film runs off its tracks .
some have suggested that this is n't a problem , because the farrelly brothers ' brand of humor does n't require plot to work .
they 're wrong , of course : plot was greatly instrumental in building up the kind of rollicking comic energy that infused the farrellys ' last effort , 1996 's " there 's something about mary .
"
( 1999 's " outside providence " was technically an earlier project . )
the brothers ' earlier film was n't funny merely because it contained outrageous gags ( despite what some newsmagazine articles would have you believe ) , but rather because its most outrageous gags were entirely unexpected .
in " mary , " the farrellys managed several times to pull off a neat sleight - of - hand trick : they 'd have you thinking the story was going one way , then reveal its real direction in delightfully surprising fashion .
" me , myself & irene , " by contrast , seems to have been made by folks who looked at " mary " and saw only the surface grossness , missing all of the subtle machinations that really made it work . having been produced by the same guys who made " mary , " " irene " seems like an even bigger disappointment .
the brothers pile on the offensive humor , taking shots at race , midgets , albinos , mental illness , and all manner of bathroom jokes .
but they have n't come up with a way to make any of it fresh most of " me , myself & irene " comes off as rote , by - the - numbers , adolescent comedy .
the plot , with carrey forced to drive alleged fugitive irene p . waters ( renee zellweger ) , who 's in more trouble than anyone knows , back to new york , has an ending that 's entirely predictable from the get - go .
( think charlie and irene will fall in love ?
yeah , me too . )
the farrellys then introduce scores of different characters , and none of them ever manage to do anything you have n't already expected them to do , no matter how outrageous their actions might be .
compared to the curveballs the farrellys are used to throwing , this stuff is almost entirely soft - tossed , presenting an obvious problem : when gross - out humor loses its shock value ,
it 's no longer funny , merely gross .
the jokes that do work are milked over and over until their effectiveness runs dry .
take , for example , the subplot involving charlie 's three black sons ( anthony anderson , mongo brownlee , jerod mixon ) .
the incongruity of it all is funny for a while , with three burly black men discussing higher math in ghetto language and white - bread carrey mouthing said language with an entirely too - pleasant smile on his face .
but by the end of the film , they 're still doing the same schitck it has n't been elevated to another , funnier level , and it has n't been dropped either .
that 's too bad , because it ceases to be amusing about halfway through .
" me , myself & irene " reeks of wasted opportunities .
there ought to be more focus on how other people react to charlie 's new personality , and on how charlie deals with the consequences of hank 's actions .
this does n't really happen nearly every supporting character learns about charlie 's condition early on , so they do n't have any opportunity to be surprised by it .
the film throws what looks like a patented farrelly curve in a scene towards the midway point ( involving an albino companion charlie and irene pick up called , appropriately , " whitey " ) , but the script does n't go anywhere with it , instead leaving the thread twisting in the wind before awkwardly tying it up during the climax .
jim carrey is a gifted comedian , both physically and vocally , but
he 's left with nothing much to do here
except contort himself in a manner similar to steve martin in " all of me .
"
it 's a great showcase of flexibility and split - second role - shifting , but none of it is terribly funny .
carrey does n't pull any stunts we do n't expect him to pull , and the farrellys ' script does n't give him anything else to pull : the situations in which he must perform the role - shifting are n't set up in any meaningful way .
perhaps carrey can take solace in the fact that his supporting actors fare no better .
zellweger 's irene is not a strong female lead mary in " mary " may have been part adolescent fantasy , but she was also intelligent and strong - willed .
irene is nothing in particular , as the film never makes clear whether she 's ditzy , clever , or neither . as such ,
she gives us nothing to latch onto as the only " sane " person in the film .
chris cooper is stuck playing exactly one note as a corrupt fbi agent , and his character is entirely too straight - laced for a movie like this .
he , like the others , does absolutely nothing unexpected .
after viewing the shapeless mess that " me , myself & irene " eventually dissolved into , i was stuck wondering whether or not the farrellys had outsmarted themselves .
maybe their kind of comedy can only work for so long until audiences get wise to it and stop being shocked .
but i do n't believe it -- good filmmakers find ways of surprising their audiences even after people have grown attuned to their style .
if the farrellys are indeed good , smart filmmakers ( and i still think they are ) , they 'll rebound just fine .
even after that happens , though , i 'll still consider " me , myself & irene " to be a high - caliber misfire .
[EX A]: N

[EX Q]: the bond series is an island in the film world ; where else would we look forward to cliches , and all of the other things that occur in most of these films ?
where else would pure escapism , a vulnerable hero , the " talking villains , " blatant product placement , predictable action sequences , and lots of promiscuity be hoped for instead of a significant change ?
i do n't understand it myself , but that 's what the bond series is based on .
for ( i think )
18 films , we 've mostly got the same thing over and over again , with some variation ( and a bit of change , most notably in the two dalton films ) .
but even i , a king of cynicism , ca n't bitch about it . and " tomorrow never dies , " the ( again , i think ) eighteenth bond film , and second brosnan bond film , is no exception .
thank god !
the plot , as in most of them , is pure balderdash , but seems to have a nice kind of edge to it .
instead of just plain billionaire psychotics , we get a rupert murdoch - esque media mogul / psychotic - elliot carver ( jonathan pryce , looking bitching with a white - haired cru cut , and always talking like he 's out of breath ) , who has the admittingly ingenius idea of getting ratings by creating a war .
no , this is not " wag the dog " - he wants a real war , between china and england , and is stupid enough to put the coverage out before anyone else discovered it . . .
in comes bond .
james is sent all around the world , trying to do research on carver , fighting with his men , and running into ( on more than one occasion ) a chinese secret agent like him : wai lin ( michelle yeoh , asian action star extraordinaire . . .
and co - star of " supercop , " nearly stealing the screen from jackie chan in that one ) .
the two eventually , and predictably of course , begin working together , and yes , there is some sexual tension between the two .
luckily , their relationship is never strained , and she never gives into his cassanova - ness until the finale .
thank god again .
in every bond film , james bags , on average , three women ( sometimes more , sometimes less - the latter being more potent towards the aids - cautionary dalton ) , and he does n't spoil this one ( though we never see them , of course - i mean , they need to stay around a pg-13 rating ) .
there 's always one at the beginning with some chick
we never see again , the big bond girl ( yeoh ) , and this time we have an almost - cameo by teri hatcher as carver 's wife , paris , who , it seems , was once one of the girls he bags at the beginning .
yes , teri 's very attractive , but she seems kind of dull .
of course , it 's not really her fault ; her part is under - written , and she 's only in a small part of it .
oh well .
and there are always the big henchmen , the guys who do the dirty work for the polished big villains .
this time we get a tall , arian - looking ( not to mention robert shaw in " from russia with love " -looking
) guy named stamper ( goetz otto ) , who is pretty awesome , although a bit stiff ( well , mostly his posture , really ) .
and for a bit of comedy , we get a cameo from vincent shiavelli as a german or austrian assassin who is ordered to do in bond at one point .
the government people have small parts , as usual , with q ( desmond llewelyn , looking near death , sadly ) getting only one scene ( in a more grouchy mood than usual ) , and m ( judi dench ) , getting more than m usually gets ( i mean , it is judi dench ) .
and for no reason whatsoever , except 'cause he was so good in " goldeneye , " joe don baker shows up again as wade , admitting he has no reason for being there , and is this time more annoying .
again , oh well .
the action sequences are not a let - down , although sometimes go on too long .
they pop up every now and then , mainly because they have to ( for the sake of the series ) , and some significant ones are the opening one , one in a garage with a bmw that runs on remote control , and a motorcylce chase ( on a bmw cycle , nonetheless ) through china streets ( or was it vietnam . . .
the plot 's not really essential ) .
they 're more high - tech , and feature much more laughs , which , yeah , i dig .
so what if they 're distracting ; they 're supposed to be !
the acting , from most around is great .
yeoh is , actually , one of the better bond girls , mainly because
she 's so unique .
the better bond girls are more independent , and have a certain wily - ness to them .
pussy galore , with her homoerotic undertones and all , is one of the best , and diana rigg , who married bond at the end of " on her majesty 's secret service " only to be killed , added some emotional depth .
yeoh is notable since she 's so active , and has great chemistry with brosnan .
pryce is an awesome villain , being slimy and lovable at the same time .
and brosnan is , once again ,
the mack daddy .
the bond series is built on cliches , mainly because they 're so fun and add to the escapism . if you can remember the dalton years , and they 're serious direction , you remember how unsuccessful they were , both financially and aesthetically .
the series would falter if bogged down with too much plot , too many themes , and too much characterization .
i do n't really understand it myself , yet i 'm one of the bigger fans of the series in the northeast united states .
having seen all of them more than once ( yes , i 've seen this twice already ) , you can tell i adore them .
while it 's not one of the best , like " goldfinger " or " from russia with love , " " tomorrow never dies " is nonetheless a truly awesome installment , even if not being as fully amazing as some of the better ones .
[EX A]: P

[EX Q]: what would you do if no one could see you ?
well , if you 're a super smart bio - molecular research scientist working for the military , you 'd grope a co - worker and rough - up your neighbor from across the street .
that 's right .
of all the non - criminal possibilities brought about by rendering oneself invisible , in " hollow man " kevin bacon 's character opts to commit sex crimes .
er , it 's kevin bacon who plays the super smart military bio - molecular research scientist ?
something sounds horribly wrong already .
but this is a paul verhoeven film , and the sleazepin director of such open - crotch classics as " basic instinct " and the infamous " showgirls " never lets a little credibility get in the way of his voyeuristic tendencies which , when you come right down to it , is all this film is about .
"
hollow man " features a string of hapless , c - list actors
( among them bacon , elisabeth shue , josh brolin , and kim dickens ) in a grade - z plot with a lot of special effects that , frankly , do n't look much better than those used in the 1933 version of " the invisible man .
"
oh bacon glistens when he gets wet all right and looks like a rather fatty side of cheap flank steak when he 's attempting reentry but
otherwise it 's lots of " thermal " shots and inanimate objects
( elisabeth shue included ) bobbing around without any visible signs of support .
since invisibility , once achieved , is n't much of an effect ( the actors spend half their time conversing with nobody and the other half of their time talking to each other -- it amounts to much of a muchness ) , the director elects to wardrobe all of his female protagonists in loosely - buttoned sweaters so that the minute bacon 's character gets invisible he can head straight for them .
it 's as if that fascinating concept -- what would you do if no one could see you ?
--is
simply a verhoeven ploy to show some skin .
as a horror film , " hollow man " is unsophisticated and disturbing
( in its intent , not its achievements ) and not worth your time or your hard - earned dollars .
it 's minor verhoeven -- and even that 's not saying much -- and boy is it hollow .
[EX A]:
N