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 Q]: Vampires: Los Suckos . This brainless, low-budget attempt to cash in on the success of John Carpenter's Vampires was so foul and lame that the studios couldn't even bribe one of their lap-dog "reviewers" to crank out a glowing review for the DVD cover. Or maybe they couldn't afford the kickback--who knows? In any case, the bad casting and inept acting had a kind of narcotic quality like an over-the-counter sleeping pill and the movie had so many plot holes that I used the DVD later to drain my spaghetti. "John Carpenter Presents"--a piece of incredible crap!! Its general level of radioactive badness probably made me sterile
[EX A]: NEG

[EX Q]: swallow . The expectations for this film were high- a good cast and a promise of a remake of an old movie using today's technology.    Alas- the movie was disappointing. The characters were not developed and the were quite flat.  The action starts very soon in the movie (the wave striking the ship) and thus there was no opportunity for them to develop.  The course of the movie did not allow for any significant development.  Moreover, the special affects and all the action are not very well tied together or simply not believable. For example all the surviving passangers, including a young kid prove to be record swimmers that can hold their breath for a long period.    It is a pity as if the script was a bit better and more developed the film could have been enjoyable.
[EX A]: NEG

[EX Q]: Hollow. Terrible.  One Good Line Quoted Here. . The characters are not appealing and the story is not interesting. An effort to watch. Make-up, dyed hair, costumes poorly done. One man's eyebrows, the suitor's, are altered like a woman's! No scenery or homes of interest, except a glance at the sailing ships in the harbor. Not a pleasant pace, without humor, without intrigue. A lesbian undertone in one scene.     The only positive thing I can think of is this good line of Jane Austen, quoted. Fanny sums up in one sentence, why she will not marry him. Women who have spent hours within romance in uncertainty, will wish to sum up their certainty with Ms. Austen's line: "His sole interest is in being loved, not in loving". This line is an exception to a lifeless script.   There, now you do not need to endure the painful movie. Here are two lines re-written by me: For the woman dealing with a trifling man: "No man suffers pains of love on the stage." For dealing with the infatuated man: "You have wounded yourself, but not with love."     This movie should be re-made by someone sharing the ideals of Jane Austen. There is plenty to be mined from the novel to create a pleasant film, humorous, with singing, with interest. A movie can take the best of the book, in the spirit of the book, which this movie did not carry, and make a movie better than the book. This movie is bad any which way.     Well-made period romance films are: "Pride & Prejudice 2005, 1996, & 1940", "Wives & Daughters", "North & South". Fairly made is "Under the Greenwood Tree". I rated "Persuasion" at 2-stars for the wooden acting; however "Persuasion" is 5-stars compared to this "Mansfield Park". "Persuasion" has attractive scenery, costumes, beautiful singing, and an uplifting plot; though of interest only to women, preferably who have already read the book.
[EX A]:
NEG