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

Ex Input:
the only historical figure that has been written about more than william shakespeare is jesus christ , which explains why the bard 's materials are such a popular source for remakes , revisions , rewrites , inspiration , subtlety , credit , and dispute .
indeed , in recent years , american contemporary cinema has been swamped with a wash of shakespearean products . including this year 's upcoming a midsummer night 's dream , shakespeare 's material has been the cause for twenty - six big screen productions since 1990 .
but for a change of pace , mrs .
brown director john madden gives us a story of the bard himself in the wonderfully vibrant shakespeare in love .
marc norman and tom stoppard 's story is largely fantasy , although as the viewer soon learns , shakespeare in love is not a movie that takes itself seriously .
( will shakespeare of the 1590 's would 've been married to anne hathaway , and he would 've had a teenage daughter and two young sons ; here he is a bachelor played by joseph fiennes . )
will is a writer struggling to come up with a great play , and his current comedy in the works -- " romeo and ethel , the pirate 's daughter " -- just does n't quite seem right .
with the help of the great writer christopher marlowe ( rupert everett ) , and the inspiration of true love with noblewoman viola de lesseps ( gwyneth paltrow ) , he changes things around and writes one of his greatest tragedies , " romeo and juliet .
"
the love story between will and viola loosely parallels the story of romeo and juliet , to great effect .
fiennes and paltrow develop a sexy chemistry as the two lovers which gives the movie much momentum ; this momentum smoothes out the bumps in the unfinished and largely unsuccessful comedy .
the supporting roles are well filled out , from geoffrey rush as will 's worrisome agent , philip , to tom wilkinson as the producer hugh fennyman .
even ben affleck , leading the troupe of actors , manages to make a favorable impression ; and judi dench lends some brief moments of screen time as queen elizabeth i .
gwyneth paltrow is by far , however ,
the standout of the lot , creating a large percentage of the forementioned vibrance .
the story is well - crafted if nothing else , although it has dangerous moments where it flirts with the " let 's make a movie " -genre .
the dialogue is breezy and lighthearted , and certainly accessible by the audience 's lowest common denominator .
there 's something for everyone in this romantic comedy , making it prime date flick material .
although certainly not inspiring in any regard , it revels in a wholesome , well - rounded atmosphere that has been absent in many of 1998 's pictures ; the true - love story is one of the best around .
certainly recommendable when the traditional slew of indifferent year's - open releases is just around the corner .

Ex Output:
P


Ex Input:
when the film features richard lynch in the role of chief villain , you know that you can expect nothing more than a b grade action movie .
however , since this film also featured michael madsen , more than capable character actor , this time in the role of protagonist , the author of this review decided to give the film some benefit of the doubt .
however , the very first scenes show
clear b grade action credentials
- madsen plays richard montana , tough policeman who raids a drug warehouse and make life miserable for local crime lord mario gio ( played by lynch ) .
however , the raid was only partially successful , and montana is getting the rap .
so , he begins his own private war against gio , trying to penetrate his organisation pretending to be corrupt .
in the process , he meets gio 's mistress gina zamora ( played by rosie vela ) and starts relationship with her too .
although it does n't stink like many of the similar films can , inside edge is mostly forgettable b grade action routine .
nobody in this film actually puts much effort , including madsen or lynch , and this is especially case with uninspired screenwriter william tannen or director warren clarke .
the only not so forgettable element in this film is presence of former supermodel rosie vela , who , apart from showing her more than impressive looks , shows some of the singing talent too .
however , this is n't reason enough for viewers to spend hour and half watching a film that they would , in most likelihood , forget the next day .

Ex Output:
N


Ex Input:
the formula is simple .
trap a varied group of people on an isolated location , then pop in a seemingly unstoppable monster to kill them one by one .
these have been the successful ingredients for many good films ( the thing , alien , aliens , and tremors to name a few ) .
so , why is it that so many films following this recipe end up pathetically bad ?
( see the relic for a particularly putrid example . )
perhaps it is simply too easy to forget the necessary binding ingredient : effort and ideas .
deep rising meets these two requirements part way , but not enough to salvage the film .
treat williams is finnegan , the leader of a small boat crew who hire out their services ( and their boat ) for any activity . . .
no questions asked .
this time , however , they may have gone too far .
their passengers , led by the ominous wes studi , are the type of multi - national terrorist squads usually only seen in die hard films .
and their cargo .
. .
let 's just say it has very high explosive potential .
what is the target of these thieves ?
why , the argonauticus , of course , a high tech luxury cruise yacht on its maiden voyage .
but something else is hunting the argonauticus . . .
something ancient and deadly .
by the time the thieves arrive , nearly everyone on board the ship has been killed .
and now the creature senses fresh meat !
so , you have the thieves and their mercenary boat crew , joining forces with the surviving passengers ( including the ship owner canton ( anthony heald ) , and a thief with less lofty goals , trillian ( famke janssen ) ) against the terror from the deep .
and the monster gets to pick them off one by one .
fortunately for the creature , this particular band of criminals happens to be the dumbest the world can offer .
why else would they indulge in petty squabbling while they watch their friends become fish food .
if there 's a more clarion call for unity , i do n't know what it might be .
it 's pretty easy to guess who will get killed off when .
there are no surprises in that the most interesting characters seem to last until the end .
for the most part , the watery tentacles seem to be acting on the audience 's impulses to get rid of the most boring characters first .
( although i wonder if the filmmakers might have extended djimon hounsou 's life a bit if they knew this would be released so soon after his acclaim for amistad .
) treat williams is a passable hero , and famke janssen does her best julia roberts impersonation .
but while wes studi and anthony heald are particularly slimy , very little of the rest of the company stand out in any way .
the biggest treat in the film , however , has to be pantucci , kevin j .
o'connor 's whining engine - boy , under finnegan 's employ .
his constant quips may be a bit over - written , but they manage to capture the same vein of nerve - addled humor that bill paxton delivered as hudson in aliens ( or todd graff as hippie in the abyss , for that matter ) .
it 's just a stock part ( the comic - relief character ) , but it almost makes this tired alien clone bearable . as far as the monster goes , although the cgi is done well , the creature has no logical consistency . think back to the great ( or even just good ) movie monsters .
they all had a set of " rules " about what they could do , and how and why they would do it .
part of the joy of those films was slowly discovering , along with the heroes , just what those rules are .
the tentacle monster in deep rising does n't have a set of rules . . .
or if it does , not a very good one .
it merely eats ( or drinks , as the case may be ) , and there is no rhyme or reason for what it does in order to do so .
the film never explains why the argonauticus is attacked in the first place .
it simply happens .
the action scenes are decent , but few are noteworthy .
the film definitely does suffer from its proximity to titanic .
deep rising 's peril in the water scenes pale next to cameron 's ( but can you really blame them ) .
unfortunately , deep rising 's efforts are more on par with speed 2 .
on the plus side , however , the film 's closing image shows some promise for a potentially interesting ( but unlikely ) sequel .
perhaps you 'd be better off waiting for that one .

Ex Output:

N