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

Input: Consider Input: one would think that david duchovny , star of the cult favorite " x - files " would be very careful in choosing his leading man cinema roles .
at least one would hope so .
one would be seriously incorrect .
eugene sands ( duchovny ) is a surgeon so dedicated to his craft that he becomes addicted to amphetamines to stay awake and work more .
it turns out to be a bad plan when he loses a patient and his license while under the influence .
ten months later , in a seedy bar to score synthetic heroin , the doctor gets a chance to ply his trade when assassins gun down a customer . using a plastic water bottle and bar tubing , sands operates and saves his life .
smalltime hoodlum raymond blossom ( timothy hutton ) is impressed with the cutlery skills on his associate .
he kidnaps and then offers down - and - out eugene a position in his organization .
blossom needs a doctor to patch up gunshot victims that would be problematic at a hospital .
sand 's temptation is that this will give him a chance to practice medicine again albeit illegally , big chunks of cash to fuel his habit and close proximity to the gangster 's womanfriend claire ( angelina jolie ) , this film 's babe factor .
the would - be big time operator is desperately in need of help .
on the run from russian mobsters ( the bad guys that seem to be all the rage in this year 's films ) and trying to cut a pirate software deal with the chinese mafia , blossom is surrounded by blood .
after a few medical misadventures , the physician grows disenchanted with his employment .
an encounter with a couple of psycho surfer dudes who threaten to blow him away unless he " fixes " their dead buddy cements his feeling that he is in the wrong line of work .
when the fbi visits and forces him to become an informant , there is no question that he needs to be somewhere else .
oddly enough , these seem like they could be exciting scenes .
the film disproves that assumption .
then a bunch of other uninteresting things happen .
writing this only two days after seeing the film , its a struggle to remember the events .
you can take that as a solid lack of recommendation .
for all the coolness that duchovny exhibits in " x - files " , it 's a surprise that his big screen presence is
so lacking in charisma .
the doctor is particularly bland and dull .
even the cold turkey bit which is rife with dramatic possibilities come across as banal .
a little chocolate and minor sweats get him through heroin withdrawal .
like virtually everything else in the film , it 's a missed opportunity .
the fox mulder detachment does n't work here .
oscar - winner hutton 's manic mobster is much more difficult to get a handle on .
played partially for comedy and partially as crazed killer , blossom almost becomes real , but then sinks into goofiness .
most of the time hutton looks as if he 's searching for his character and coming up empty .
jolie also makes a few false moves towards creating a three - dimensional human being before giving up and turning into scenery .
the most interesting aspect of her performance is watching her pouty lips threaten to take over the screen .
the rest are n't any better .
michael massee 's eccentric fbi agent never revs up .
one of blossom 's henchmen steals a few moments of the show as a quirky gunman reminiscent of val kilmer 's doc holliday in " tombstone " .
his two - gunned blasting as he does a bizarre dance is the high point of the film .
but that 15 seconds is n't worth sitting through the other 90 minutes .
first time film director andy wilson ( known for his work on the british television series " cracker " ) appears to be attempting to jump on the " pulp fiction " bandwagon .
the best of these movies combine a sense of style and flash with significant substance .
the second - rate ones concentrate on just one of these aspects .
" playing god " does neither well .
the basic idea of the film is solid .
and then it goes nowhere .
even worse , it plods back and forth , up and down a long and winding road before
it ends up nowhere .
fox fails yet again in his search for intelligent life .

Output: N


Input: Consider Input: the army comedy genre has never turned out a truly good movie ( if you do n't count neil simon 's biloxi blues ) .
year after year , more predictably cliched military movies come out -- most recently sgt .
bilko -- and none of them ever manage to be anything more than a rehash of the last .
i thought stripes would be different .
with ivan reitman as director , bill murray as star and harold ramis as co - star and co - screenwriter , it seemed like it would be ghostbusters in the army .
instead , it was a bunch of unfunny crap in the army .
murray , about as funny and sophisticated here as he was in meatballs , plays a loser cab driver who sees the army as his only chance for success , and convinces his friend ramis to enlist with him .
so he does , and we get the obligatory drill sergeant from hell , head - shaving and marching / singing sequences ,
more mind - numbingly stale here than ever .
the characters are even less original , ranging from underachieving slob john candy to incompetent captain john larroquette .
all the big name stars in stripes ( and even larroquette ) fall victim to the lame , rehashed material and are never really likeable , murray in particular .
he only gets a few decent lines in , although those barely - funny one liners pale in comparison to the hilarious peter venkman character he played three years later in ghostbusters .
he was even better in caddyshack , for crying out loud .
as with a lot of the late 70 's / early 80 's comedies , stripes is a completely juvenile movie only a child would like
but is so sex-
obsessed no child should be able to watch it .
i 'm sure it seems funny on paper to have candy pay over $ 400 to mud
wrestle five beautiful women , but while watching it all that was coming out of my mouth was the admonition " dear god !
"
every few seconds .
stripes is n't the playful kind of sex comedy , either .
most of the time
it seems downright misogynistic , as when larroquette uses his telescope to peer into the women 's showers or murray lifts a female m .
p .
onto the stove and , with an i
- know - what - you - like look on his face , says he 's going to give her the " aunt jemima treatment , " which means shoving a spatula under her butt repeatedly .
you do n't want to stick around as the scene progresses and he uses an ice cream scoop on her genital region .
"
i 'm not enjoying this , " the woman protests .
my sentiments exactly .

Output: N


Input: Consider Input: seen december 2 , 1997 at 6 : 50 p . m . at the glenwood movieplex cinemas ( oneida , ny ) , theater # 3 , by myself for free ( free pass ) .
[ theater rating :
*
*
* : good seats , sound , and picture ] there are many philosophies as to why we are so fascinated with cartoons .
they provide a method of total escapism in which anything will work within their context , from the outrageous slapstick of looney tunes to the intensity of japanimation .
watching " flubber " really clinched this idea for me , because it 's just a live action cartoon that presents itself as a regular comedy .
it proves how painfully unfunny all those gags and slapstick would be in reality , and how important it is to actually have a story .
the film wastes no time in establishing its lighthearted , cartoony atmosphere .
we meet medfield college chemistry professor phillip brainard ( williams ) , the typical , supposedly likable mad scientist .
within the first 10 minutes we get at least a half dozen jokes about how forgetful he is .
phillip 's memory loss seems less like a cartoony gag and more like a real case of alzhiemer 's disease - is n't this rather lowbrow comedy ?
he starts teaching chemistry after walking in on a nude figure drawing class ( an inappropriate joke for a kids ' movie if i ever saw one ) .
we learn he has stood his up fiancee , sara ( harden ) , twice at the altar simply because he 's forgotten .
sara claims to love him , but says if he forgets the wedding again she 'll stop loving him ( a sign of childish attitude the film denies it has ) .
but even cartoons must have conflicts to resolve , and it 's no surprise the major conflicts here are related .
christopher mcdonald does and even worse version of his usual villain shtick as wilson croft , a scientist who not only wants to steal phillip 's ideas , but his woman too .
what 's worse is that sara actually seems interested in him !
wilson works for a rival college that wants to buy out medfield , which is going broke , unless phillip can invent something to save the day .
one of the first rules of filmmaking is to make sure the title has something to do with the film .
the flubber is played for gags after it is introduced , but is all but forgotten about thereafter .
it 's obvious phillip is going to accidentally invent flubber , a flying rubber compound that yields tremendous energy , and the promotions make the flubber look realistic and funny .
unfortunately , the flubber , like all the special effects in this film , looks very fake and unconvincing .
flubber also seems to have intelligence and a personality , and by the time it performs a song and dance routine , you give up wondering how life could spontaneously come to an inanimate object .
most of the film wanders aimlessly as it relies on the flubber to make for the comedy ( since phillip 's absent - mindedness is forgotten about ) and somehow push the story along .
but it 's clear how weak this premise is from the get - go and the film just gets worse .
all the jokes involve people getting hit by fast - moving , flubber - powered objects including : bowling balls ; flying cars that do n't fly well ; and a basketball team capable of jumping 100 feet into the air .
it 's all presented with complete logic , and no one believes flubber exists even when they see it with their own eyes .
during the basketball scene , the coach for the rival team actually says , " i think they might be cheating , " to which the referee replies , " there 's no rules about jumping too high . "
" predictable " does n't begin to describe the motions the film goes through , especially after the halfway point .
and it 's not how terribly contrived the plot is , it 's the way it 's broken down scene - by - scene , with absolutely no transition .
not only that , but all the actors here , especially williams , seem bored to tears .
i 'd say 80 percent of all the scenes were shot with a bluescreen , so
it 's almost forgivable when you realize they 're talking to nothing and interacting with nothing .
it 's safe to say everything that could be bad about
" flubber " is .
the only original element the film has is the world 's first romance between a machine and a human .
but this aspect is quite twisted if you think about it , and , like the rest of the film , you wo n't .


Output: N