In this task, you are given books product reviews in English language. The goal is to classify the review as "POS" if the overall sentiment of the review is positive or as "NEG" if the overall sentiment of the review is negative.

Input: Consider Input: Not badly written, but ultimately preposterous . Toward the end of this novel, the lead character, Reichs' usual heroine Tempe Brennan, remarks on the "remarkable coincidence" of one of the plot points. By this point in the book, this is like pointing out to a rabid dog that it's got some spittle on its chin.  This book relies on coincidence so fundamentally that if it were removed, it would fall into 3 or 4 different books with little or nothing to do with one another.    Reichs is not a bad writer, and for someone who so clearly comes from a forensic background, is passably adept at character, plot and scene setting. She knows how to build suspense and intrigue, and never lets the technicalities of her lead character's profession -- a forensic anthropologist -- or the intricacies of her work, undermine the story.    This book centres on Brennan's investigation of a religious cult that perpetrates a set of murders. There are lots of interesting points about how cults work, ritual murder and even large group awareness programs get in on the action. And, of course, several forensic investigations where we are treated to the processes of digging up bones, collecting maggots and bugs, and examining various grim bits of the human body.    What undermines this book is that the first half is at least three different, unrelated stories; and the second is such a clumsy and outrageous merging of them into one, that one drifts from disinterest to incredulity. The jacket cover says this book is about the excavation of a 19th century nun's bones, and the mysteries therewith. In fact, this is just story number 1, which is of only tangential importance to the ultimate, main storyline.    It is not obvious, even in terms of the world of Death du Jour, why Reichs needed all this intermingling. It feels like she started writing a travel journal, then stuck a murder into each of her ports of call, then simply declared that they all belong to the same overarching plot. In this context, each individual story feels derivative, and the grand plot feels like a desperate trick.    A well-written and, at times, interesting book, which is ultimately unsatisfying and preposterous

Output: NEG


Input: Consider Input: Incredibily unpleasant read . I have been a huge fan of the Anna Pigeon mysteries.  The hard truth about Hard Truth is skip it.  It is a very unpleasant experience.    The graphic representation of child abuse and cruelty in this book still makes me ill.      What I've loved about the Anna Pigeon series is that I felt like I got a good sense of the national park where the story took place with an appreciation for the natural beauty of the area.  I doubt Anna spent more than a night in Rocky Mountain National Park.  Not only does she completely miss the unique character of the park but the park has no necessary link to the story.  The whole thing could have taken place in urban Chicago.    I have been picking up Nevada Barr books as fast as I could find them.  This book, however, was truely repulsive.  I'll be much more cautious about investing a part of my life in her next book

Output: NEG


Input: Consider Input: How To Inflame The Situation. Should be the title of this book. . One parenting acting like a jerk is bad enough. Advising the other parent to act like a jerk is not going to help the children.   Be as kind to yourself, your children and your X as you can. Don't behave like a jerk or make things harder for any reason.  Not recommended


Output: NEG