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

Ex Input:
i am starting to write this review before going to see strawberry and chocolate , cuba 's oscar nominee for best foreign film , directed by tomas gutierrez alea ( who also directed the sometimes and in some circles critically acclaimed memorias del subdesarrollo-- " memories of underdevelopment " .
i saw memorias as part of a cuban cinema class back in the late ' 70s ; it merged the politics of the cuban revolution with mundane elements of the human condition .
i knew then that memorias was probably a state - sanctioned political missive , and now expect strawberry will follow suit .
fellow internetters , primarily in the newsgroup dedicated to cuba ( soc . culture .
cuba ) , have mentioned that strawberry is a harsh criticism of the revolution and its current state of affairs .
i have jumped to the conclusion that strawberry is nothing more than a veiled attempt at espousing the party line -- it probably looks like political criticism , but it ai n't so .
having some first hand and extensive anecdotal knowledge of castro 's repressiveness , i ca n't conceive of his tolerating honest and adversarial criticism of the revolution , and i ca n't imagine his letting anyone even suggest his failure as a leader of a failed movement .
as kids say these days , duh ! , the revolution 's current state needs no criticism ; its physical and spiritual crumbling is self evident .
the proper questions to put relate to castro 's legitimacy .
i bet the film takes castro 's power for granted , and that this or any other movie , produced under cuba 's state control , can not question his right to run cuba 's political show ( ongoing now for more than 36 years ) .
that 's why i just ca n't believe strawberry is an honest criticism of the regime .
let 's see what happens after the room goes dark and the screen lights up .
i saw the film -- twice .
i was right ; castro remained intact .
strawberry negotiates the relationship between a young " dialectic materialist , " as he describes himself , and a homosexual photographer ( diego ) in 1979 cuba .
the young man ( david ) is the son of peasants ; a symbol of the revolution 's reason for being .
grateful to the revolution for the opportunity to receive a university education , he studies political science instead of literature , his avocation , because he perceives it is his duty .
therein lies a likely unintended irony , since cuba has no need for political theoreticians .
cuba 's government is castro .
diego 's lifestyle is the antithesis of revolutionary life .
he enjoys the finer things -- tea , opera , art .
he does not do " voluntary work " for the revolution .
his small apartment is a sensual oasis .
the moniker " bourgeois " figuratively hangs over his head during the early parts of the movie .
however , he is a " revolucionario " in his own way .
the supporting roles are filled by : an aging busybody with a heart of gold and a troubled psyche ; david 's roommate , who rally takes the communist party line to its expected extreme ;
david 's ex - girlfriend , who dumped him for another guy , yet wants to bed him before she leaves for italy with her husband ; german , a gay sculptor whose work diego is attempting to exhibit , and who strikes a faustian pact with the government .
gutierrez alea and co - director
juan carlos tabio
do a fine job at almost showing that homosexuals can be revolutionaries too .
heck , towards the end of the film you begin to think the guy deserves a medal for his patriotic fervor .
he really loves the revolution ( as supposedly does everybody else in cuba ) and wants to make it better by exposing and correcting some of its flaws .
real criticism is missing though .
this movie is political window dressing .
luis aguilar leon 's op .
ed .
piece on fresa in the miami herald ( 10 march 1995 , at 21a ) did not color my judgment ; it presaged my intuition .
aguilar leon expressed my sentiment about this film 's political angle best : like many artistic manifestations in cuba , strawberry and chocolate sprang from a totally manipulated environment .
as art critic ivan de la nuez well states in the latest issue of the magazine postmodern notes , the silenced artists are those who refuse to accept " the charade in which artists can provoke up to a point , while the institutions legitimize themselves by forbidding them to go beyond that point .
" although terrible propaganda , this is otherwise a fine film .

Ex Output:
P


Ex Input:
another ' independent film ' , this comedy , which was brought by miramax for $ 5 million , is good fun
.
favreau and vaughn
( the lost world : jurassic park , 1997 ) play mike and trent , two everyday 20somethings on the lookout for women .
the film just basically follows their plight on the lookout for lurve , and along the way we get to meet some of their friends , see their attempts at chatting up girls , and just basically get a insight into their lives .
and all of this is great fun .
swingers does n't rely on huge special effects , or big name stars to provide entertainment .
no , it just has a great script and superb little known actors .
the script , by favreau , is great .
mike is always missing is girlfriend , who has n't called him for six months , and every time he meets a girl , he always end up telling her about the ex .
the audience feels for this pathetic little man , thanks to the great script .
vaughn is ' the money ' ( swingers speak for ' the best ' ) as the womanizing trent , always on the lookout for a new girl .
some of his chat - up lines are awful , but he always seems to get the girl thanks to his ' hard man ' nature .
vaughns character also gets the best laugh in the film , towards the end in a diner .
the conversations that go on between mike and trent are great , but it never quite reaches tarantino standards ( which i suspect the film was trying to reach . )
there are some excellent , laugh out loud jokes in the film , and some superbly funny set pieces ( such as favreau cringe - worhy battle with a answer machine that always cut him off before he finishes his sentence .
embarrassing to him , hilarious to the audience . )
mike & trents friends are also good , although there characters seem a bit underwritten , and we never really learn as much as we would like about them .
although this is primarily mike and trents film , it would of been nice to learn a bit more about their friends .
they just seem to wander aimlessly in the background .
but again , the lines they say are usually pretty good , and they do have some funny parts .
it 's just a shame that they did n't have more meatier roles .
the acting is superb .
as said above , vaughn is superb as trent , he 's definitely the best thing in the film .
favreau is also good , acting as ' the little man ' very well , and the way he always feels sorry for himself is very funny .
graham ( boogie nights , 1997 ) has a small but good role as lorraine , a girl mike finally falls in love with .
she hardly features in the film at all , but she still manages to make an impact on the audience .
swingers , then , is funny , but it does have some flaws .
firstly , the running time is a bit too short .
the film comes to an abrupt halt , and i actually wanted the film to carry on longer .
it never really comes to a satisfying conclusion , which is a shame , as most films are too long !
also , this type of film has been done too many times , such as sleep with me ( 1994 ) .
but these small flaws do n't really spoil what is a funny , entertaining comedy .

Ex Output:
P


Ex Input:
in the company of men made a splash at the sundance film festival because , in a year plagued by brothers mcmullen - style , earnestly shallow gen - x angst pictures , it seemed to be actually about something .
it angered people , started arguments outside the theater , riled things up .
it ignited a spark of excitement in what otherwise has been a disappointing year for independent film .
having endured my share of the hype , i waited calmly for men to reach the hinterlands wherein i reside , and then checked in to see what all the fuss was about .
does men live up to its press ?
well , yes it does .
and it may make you think twice before you consider dating anyone your office .
for the uninitiated , newcomers aaron eckhart and matt malloy play chad and howard , two corporate drones who are dispatched by their nameless company to a remote branch office for a six week assignment .
chad and howard are archetypes , examples of which you can no doubt find in your own place of business .
chad is the blond golden boy , genetically engineered for success , the natural charmer who seems to glide effortlessly up the corporate ladder .
howard is chad 's boss , but he is weaker of will , the clumsy practitioner of office politics who has achieved his position through dogged persistence rather than raw talent .
we first meet them awaiting their flight in a drab airport lounge .
there chad suggests a scheme worthy of a shakespearean villain : he and howard will find a vulnerable single woman at the branch office , woo her simultaneously , win her love , and then dump her .
the reason ?
both men have recently been dumped themselves , and chad sees an easy route to revenge against the fairer sex .
"
it 'll restore a little dignity to our lives , " he says .
howard , helpless against the force of chad 's will , agrees to the plan .
they quickly spot their prey in the form of christine ( stacy edwards ) , a fragile deaf woman working as a temp .
chad moves in for the kill , flashing his golden boy smile , plying christine with lunch , then flowers , then dinner .
howard follows suit , though his efforts are in contrast ham - handed and desperate .
flattered to have the attention of two eligible men , christine dates them both .
you can guess which one she falls for .
soon a tragic lovers ' triangle develops : christine loves chad , chad loves himself , and howard loves christine on the grounds that , since she 's handicapped and shy , she just might be wretched and lonely enough to settle for him .
adult social interaction never really progresses beyond the level of junior high , does it ?
in chad , writer / director labute and actor eckhart have created one of the most chilling monsters ever committed to film - hannibal lector may eat human flesh , but chad is an eater of souls .
his evil is as subtle as a viper 's , and as easy as his smile .
we watch in stunned disbelief as he back - stabs coworkers , humiliates his subordinates , and works his deadly venom into christine 's heart .
his character would be a joke if he was n't so chillingly real-
all of us have worked with a chad , and some of us may be him .
he 's the guy who takes your job and then laughs at you for your weakness .
if one of his co - workers should happen to go postal and walk into the office with a bag full of handguns , he had best have his escape route clearly in mind .
politics is his game , and the modern cubicle - filled office is his playground .
men wears the guise of a black comedy , but it functions best as allegory .
the most controversial moment in the film happens when chad humiliates a black temp by asking him how badly he wants to succeed in the company , then forces him to prove it in a manner i wo n't describe .
the scene is charged with racism and fraught with peril .
could it happen in the real world ?
probably not .
taken as allegory , however , it is representative of the treatment of the meek by the powerful in all facets of society .
maybe it 's just the english major in me , but chad , in his motiveless cruelty towards christine and his careful manipulation of howard , can be seen as a symbol of unbridled capitalism , of greed without conscience .
the entire film is a metaphor for social darwinism- only the strong will survive .
the marvel of labute 's multi - layered script is that it can disturb each member of its audience in an entirely different way .
but does the film work as entertainment ?
its darned funny in spots , particularly in the men 's room scenes , which demonstrate the lengths to which guys will go to hold a conversation while engaged in the most basic of bodily functions .
it works less well as drama , since by necessity the characters in an allegory tend to be flat ciphers .
stacy edwards gives a measured dignity to christine , and succeeds in making us care for her
, but by the end of the film we still know nothing about her .
likewise , chad and howard are simply the sum of their actions .
by the end of the film you 'll feel as if you 've met a genuine monster in chad ; perhaps we can also classify men as a horror film .
certainly those expecting a conventional hollywood resolution to the story will walk away disappointed . but the picture is often mesmerizing , and the script is a work of fine craftsmanship , which makes it well worth your time .
like all good films , it offers a myriad of parallels to the outside world .
while watching chad in his moment of triumph , i could n't help but think that bill gates must have felt the same sort of cold , merciless satisfaction when he finally stuck it to steve jobs .
there may be a little bit of chad in all of us , but some of us have taken chad - ness to the level of art .

Ex Output:

P