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

Input: Consider Input: the new austin powers film continues a movie tradition begun in the eighties .
produce something , anything , that will get the high school and junior high kids in the theater because they buy more soda and popcorn than senior citizens .
the usual hallmarks of this filmmaking tradition are all here .
gross humor , sex jokes , silly sight gags , more sex jokes .
and the film is a strong contender in the current race to be cruder , grosser and more outrageous than that last film .
what the film is not , however , is funny .
the plot centers around the return of dr .
evil , who goes back in time to steal austin powers ' mojo ( a liquid with red stuff in it extracted from austin 's pelvis ) which gives austin his sexual prowess and the charisma to defeat his enemies .
austin must go after him , and returns to the swinging sixties where free love and sexy secret agents had their heyday .
i almost avoided this film because i did not like the original .
but the films premise sounded like an excellent comic vehicle and the film received many good reviews .
i wish i had stuck to my first impression .
myers is trying to be the jerry lewis of this generation .
and he has the talent to do it , at least as an actor .
but the material he is working with here , much of it his own , falls short of anything resembling comic genius .
this movie tries to carry the day with sight gags about drinking distilled feces , a five - hundred - pound fat man 's butt crack , and a barrage of sex jokes aimed at the level of the average 15 year old .
after some of these scenes , one has to wonder how gross the next generation of films will have to go to get an audiences attention .
the direction also helps the film achieve a new low point in cinematic humor .
for the most part , i felt as if i was watching a saturday morning chalderns live action tv show .
there is no sense of comic timing or subtlety .
the director just throws the material at us , giving us nothing except the hope that anyone with a camera could be a film director .
i am sure the film will have appeal to many of the under 22 crowd , at least the one 's who have yet to discover literacy .
certainly the movie is directed towards the generation that prefers everything described as ' in your face , kick you in the teeth , take no prisoners ,
( action - verb + blah blah blah ) .
' if you see the film and you find you 're not laughing , there is nothing wrong with you .
it just means you grew up since seventh grade .

Output: N


Input: Consider Input: carry on at your convenience is all about the goings - on in the factory of a toilet manufacturer , wc boggs ( kenneth williams ) .
once they have won an order to manufacture 1000 bidets in two months and charles coote ( charles hawtrey ) has designed a suitable model , the factory employees set to work but are interrupted by union representative vic spanner ( kenneth cope ) and friend bernie hulke ( bernard bresslaw ) who call them out on strikes on the slightest pretext .
meanwhile , chief foreman sid plummer ( sid james ) is growing tired of his wife beattie ( hattie jacques ) and her budgie .
he would much rather live next door with fellow boggs worker chloe moore ( joan sims )
but once he discovers that the budgie can predict the winners of horse races , he is over the moon and flush with money .
his daughter , myrtle plummer ( jacki piper ) , is going out with wc 's son lewis boggs ( richard o'callaghan ) and this causes conflict on the staff day out to the seaside when vic spanner vies for her attentions .
in the end , if the strike does not cease , boggs will have to close down his factory , but the support of a group of women led by coote 's wife - to - be and spanner 's mother , agatha spanner ( renee houston ) , try to resolve the situation .
also , sid realises that his budgie has caused him nothing but trouble since it started predicting horse race winners .
there are some good performances , as usual , from sid james and kenneth williams in their standard roles .
charles hawtrey is third billing but only appears in a few scenes .
his part is mildly amusing .
richard o'callaghan is appealing as bogg 's stuck - up son , patsy rowlands is funny as miss withering , bogg 's assistant , and renee houston is terrific in her small part as agatha .
however , sole acting honours go to hattie jacques as beattie plummer .
although her character is not directly involved with the main storyline , she manages to input a great deal of pathos and feeling into her character .
a marvellous performance from a marvellous actress .
the film suffers from annoying performances by bernard bresslaw and especially kenneth cope .
in his carry on debut , cope
overdoes his role as spanner making him so annoying as to be unfunny .
joan sims returns as the love interest ( instead of barbara windsor ) .
sims ' ' usual ' part as the downtrodden wife was taken by hattie jacques .
additionally , bill maynard as fred moore is very poor .
this carry on movie tries it best to entertain the viewer : - the locations and wealth of characters are appealing . however ,
the toilet humour becomes tiresome very quickly and some of the performances leave a lot to be desired .
this movie does not know where it is going .
it was made in 1971 and talbot rothwell the scriptwriter seems to be in two minds whether to go for ' bluer ' jokes or to maintain the ' innocent ' jokes success of most of its predecessors .
that is why this film suffers .
a minor carry on film whose major asset is the performance by hattie jacques .
the new ' minor - regulars ' such as o'callaghan and piper are not able to enliven the movie and the toilet humour becomes humourless after a while .

Output: N


Input: Consider Input: us critic - type people are always shaking our heads and telling everyone that movies are n't thrill rides , but i think that " back to the future ii " is one of the few exceptions .
if the original film had the spirit of the 1950s , then this has the spirit of the 80s : full of fights ; chase scenes ; cliff hangers ; special effects ; some detective work ; and of course the vision of the high - tech future .
the film picks up exactly where the first film left off , with doc ( lloyd ) , marty ( fox ) , and jennifer ( elizabeth shue ) travelling 30 years into the future , because something bad is going to happen to marty and jennifer 's kids .
doc tells marty he must take his son 's place at an incident that will cause a chain reaction if marty mcfly jr .
says yes to griff ( wilson - in one of four different roles ) .
whoever said history tends to repeat itself was n't joking , especially when it comes to the movies .
essentially the same chase scene that marty endured in the 50s takes place again in the year 2015 , but it 's not as authentically exciting this time because it is so obviously a parody of itself .
at the end of the situation marty has changed the course of history for the better , and it seems like everything 's copasetic right ?
wrong .
since when do things go according to plan in the " back to the future " movies ?
there are so many minor conflicts and details that effect the plot and the direction of the story i wo n't even bother to list them all .
basically we get to see marty as an old man , his house , his family , etc .
we also go back to an alternate 1985 , and then back again to 1955 , with everything happening so fast the film never stops to catch a breath .
the films ' best aspect is the fact that it actually goes back to the first movie and shows a lot of the action that occurred from another angle .
it 's difficult to convey the sense of wild and zany fun without describing every little detail .
the only thing sacrificed in this film is the suspense .
instead of a grand finale , we get lots of little victories .
by the end everything is back to normal , but something happens that leads to yet another sequel , but it does n't seem gratuitous .
" back to the future part ii " is a really great adventure movie .
it certainly has more originality than other films but it lacks a certain charm that was dominate throughout its predecessor .


Output: P