In this task, you are given product reviews about dvds. The goal is to classify the review as "POS" if the overall sentiment of the review is positive(the reviewer is satisfied) or as "NEG" if the overall sentiment of the review is negative(the reviewer is not satisfied).

Ex Input:
Very light on baby care basics . This newborn care DVD is strictly for caring for a newborn infant, in other words, what you learn here won't apply after the first 3 or 4 weeks.  My biggest beef with this DVD is that it totally just skims over all the basics, such as how to breastfeed properly, how to bottlefeed properly, how to swaddle properly, how to calm a baby properly, etc.  All the stuff you want to know about looking after a newborn, each is given about 5 seconds of screen time.  Instead, the bulk of the program is wasted on things like "pre-birth preparation," which interestingly appears toward the end of the program, and how the mother should take care of herself.  These are important things to know, but not for a "ultimate baby care DVD."    The DVD packaging is also very misleading.  It says "over an hour of hints"... but that includes 1 minute of copyright warning and another 30 seconds of "you should always consult your doctor" warning, plus a long end-of-program credit.  The actual content is about 55 minutes.    I've seen this DVD and the "ABC of Newborn Baby Care" DVD and even though the latter is not great, it's better because it goes through the important topics step-by-step, and the nurse/midwife demonstrates the techniques clearly.  Between the two DVDs, I definitely recommend the latter.    BTW, you can likely find this at your local library.  It's also available from Netflix.  It's just not worth the price of the DVD, not even 1/10 of the price

Ex Output:
NEG


Ex Input:
Ken Park how not to make a movie . Larry Clark reminds me of a lot     Let's take a look at his pathetic resume shall we:    *Kids-Yes another soft porn film involving Kids.    *Bully- This movie should be when "White Trash attacks".  Bully featured mundane acting, the most UNLIKABLE characters  ever to put on screen, stupid characters, a "twist" that  aint really a twist, awful camera shots and angle and  a "gay bull". Nuff said.    *Teenage Caveman-Subpar sci-film.    Now we get to Ken Park, probably the most revolting   story of Clark's kids trilogy if you will.    These kids special? Please give me a break. I don't  call killing your neighbors or grandparents, special.    Doing drugs makes you special? Funny I thought that made  you a druggie and a loser.    There is no smoothness or observation or anaylsis of  the kids from any sort of rhetorical view. Anyone who  who seeks to compare this to classic shows like Family  Ties, or My So Called Life isn't fooling anyone.    One key difference, the kids in so called life, knew they  were troubled, lost and asked for help. The teens in "Ken Park"  could give a crap if they live or die, their days are spent  on drug binges, fornicating with the friends and in some  cases, their friend's mother.      Really it doesn't get anymore revoling that Larry Clark.    None of the characters in the movie can be considered,  weak, inept, pathetic, loony comes to mind but far  from being strong.    Softcore and hardcore pornograpy seem to be what the filmmaking  is echoing nothing else, the other reviews even the most  positive ones can ignore that.    There is no reality with these kids, they live in their  violent world and heaven forbid if you try to take them  out of it.    Clark is not anybody's master of art, if you're art is  hardcore pornography, mixed in with convulted storyline  , with no rolemodels, no point and weak characters then  people need to pick up a dictionary or read actual  definitions of art.    The movie is nothing more than tour de force of obscene garbage  that should be flushed down the toilet.    Seeing at the reception Clark has received over the year,  it's great that fans are starting to see what he really  is just a perverted old man , nothing else.    Even then his movies make him look even more pathetic.

Ex Output:
NEG


Ex Input:
Wet Willis' for everyone! . Welcome to a new style of reviews.  For those of you who have been following my career, my comments on the films that I have seen have been lengthy, verbose, and at times, just plain boring.  Today marks a day of change.  I am finding myself with less time, energy, and dedication to the cause, so I am changing.  Perhaps I will fall to the wayside, or pick up new fans - but for me, it is still all about the cinema.      War, really people, what is it good for?    Apparently, to those involved with the creation of the film "Hart's War", absolutely nothing - do you need me to say it again?  To be short and sweet, pretty-boy Farrell gets caught by Nazi's, tells a dirty secret, and somehow gets put in the posh-of-the-posh POW containment camps this side of Germany.  No brutality, no murder, no starvation - just simple catered meals and a freedom like no other.  Willis plays a Colonel that somehow was captured and has named this base as his "luxury" suite.  He is best friends with the Nazi commander, while all the time planning the big escape.     Did I hint towards "The Great Escape" - please don't think the same thoughts with this film.  What makes "Hart's War" a bit more random than you typical war film is that the bigotry, hatred, and racism comes from not the Nazis, but the American soldiers.  It comes in the form of Terrance Howard.  One time racism turns its dirty head, people look the other way - but the second time, it takes us into a melodramatic, off-the-beaten-path courtroom drama that can be viewed in an assortment of regular films.  It sparks nothing new, nor anything of interest.  Continually, we wait for Howard, or Willis, to shout that cult-like phrase, "You can't handle the truth", and it nearly happens, when Willis reveals his wild card and changes the course of the war forever.    How bland.      "Hart's War" fails because it involves too many elements and not enough time, or maybe, too many elements and too long of time.  Instead of sticking with a war story, we are bludgeoned with another story of racism, another story of respect, another story of lies, and jumbled between it all a story about escape.  It is too much for one film to handle, and as our characters become less and less dimensional, as does the film.  Willis is Willis.  If you have seen any of his work this decade, you have seen his character in this film.  Farrell remains shaved and pretty-boy throughout the film, continually denouncing the authenticity, which was already faulted by the fact that it seemed like nobody was against anyone in this camp.  I think that is what struck me as odd, the layout of the camp.  Why were the Russians treated worse than the Americans?  Did they not have a Bruce Willis of their own?      Questions upon questions continue to pile until we think we have had enough then another world opens in the final act giving us another reason to yell, "oh brother!".  The ending lacks consistency, as we are left with no resolutions, no finale, and no moment of Zen.  It is perfect for you Willis nay-slayers out there, but for the rest of us, we are left with a symbolic ending that will bring a tear to the women, and the rest of us demanding our money back.      This film contained very little action, very little suspense, and very little answers to bigger underlining questions.  It was a hastily put together film that boasted big names, but bigger downfalls.  For two hours I was plummeted into everything Hollywood could think of to throw into a film.  While I believe it had potential, what happened in the end is that the director could not control the momentum.  This is strange, because I loved "Fallen" so very much.  "Hart's War" did start strong, in my eyes, with some decent cinematography (I enjoyed the opening snow scene), but fell of the face of the Earth by the end of the first hour.          So, again my friends, I must ask - what is war good for?    To my reply ... absolutely nothing.      I cannot suggest this film to friends or family.  Poor acting, too many plot points, and an unresolved ending makes me give "Hart's War" a    (wait for it ...)    BLAH

Ex Output:

NEG