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

Input: Consider Input: it should have been a classic .
a great cast of respected supporting actors .
an interesting premise of loser comic book characters .
however , " mystery men " proved to be one of the great disappointments of 1999 .
the jokes were bland and hackneyed from talents who have previously made audiences laugh with their unique rituals .
the number of cliches and shallow characters made the film difficult to sit through seriously hurting its attempt of having a fast paced premise .
the script tried to deliver a series of small jokes throughout the film but without a big laugh - out - loud joke and mediocre small jokes , it failed miserably at being entertaining at all .
the jokes were not funny for a number of reasons .
they had been used a number of times before in previous films , the best ones , which were mediocre to begin with , were ruined in the trailer , and the expectation of laughing at clever , unique gags from clever unique comedians when there were none to laugh at greatly damaged the film .
" mystery men " might have worked if it was an ensemble cast of newcomers trying to break into the business .
but with veterans doing this kind of junk , it really questioned whether their other work was as funny as originally thought .
thankfully most actors in this movie will appear in five other movies before the new year arrives to help viewers forget this little movie .
the film follows a band of wannabe superheroes living in a wannabe gotham city who are ridiculed by their fellow citizens and villains because of their clumsiness and failure to save they day and capture the bad guy .
the fact is these pathetic losers are not needed because their city already has a successful superhero , captain amazing , who has recently captured every evil - doer in the city .
captain amazing ( played terribly by an uninspired greg kinnear ) , because of his success in the past , is worried that he will lose popularity .
after freeing one of the most notorious bad guys in the city ( geoffrey rush , overacting just a bit too much ) to keep himself busy , things get out of hand when captain amazing is captured .
it is up to the wannabe superheroes to save the day .
by the time this section of the plot is finished , the interest for what happens ( if you have n't already figured it out ) is very low .
there are very few scenes which catch the viewers complete attention .
the first scene in the film , which shows the wannabes trying to save the day , feels like it was seriously edited down .
right when it was beginning to become slightly funny seeing these actors get humiliated at an old folk 's home by some masked goons , captain amazing comes in and saves the day ? or ruins the movie .
instead of editing this scene , more editing should have been done in areas such as the unnecessary romance between mr .
furious ( ben stiller ) and monica , a waitress ( claire forlani ) or the vast majority of the film , which is the heroes talking at a coffee table about how their day was .
a simple rule : more silly action is needed in order to make a silly action movie work .
another major problem with " mystery men " is that every actor in it seemed very uncomfortable and consequently gave terrible performances .
the film depended on its cast to work fluently together , like a bunch of old friends working together in an amiable reunion .
however , most characters seemed like they did not even want to be in this film or at least the script made it seem this way .
to pull one of the actors in this film randomly out of a hat , paul reubens , who disappeared from acting to everyone 's joy , returns here leaving very little to be impressed about .
as a wannabe who uses flatulence for a weapon , all of his jokes must therefore be fart jokes .
fart jokes that have all been heard before and will inevitably be heard again in future films thanks to the success of " american pie " and " there 's something about mary . "
" mystery men " drags on towards the end to a point where anything else in the world is more entertaining .
anyone with a brain knows each one of the heroes is going to be successful at their talent in the end and each one is going to contribute in a helpful way .
so why continue to watch ?
this film is far from a worthy guilty pleasure .
" mystery men " indeed does this and every time a character succeeds another one congratulates him and says " i knew you could do it ! "
" mystery men " fails in every category it attempts to pass .
what makes this film so bad is that it had the potential to be wonderful and unforgettable .
terrible acting , terrible script , and a terrible waste of time
changes opinions about all of these actors .
"
i 'm unpredictable ! " an overexcited ben stiller shouts out .
no ben , you 're the complete opposite .

Output: N

Input: Consider Input: the haunting , a film so confusing that it forgets the true meaning of a horror film : to scare us .
if you 've ever seen a movie , which you probably have considering you are on this website , you should know about all of the trivia they post before a movie .
they have things like illustrations and you have to guess the movie or facts about the film .
but , the one i always like are the & quot ;
other name&quot ; joke that try and rename a particular film .
for instance , the one playing before the haunting had different titles for the film , small soldiers .
they had titles like little infantry and can i get those fatigues in a smaller size ?
well , after seeing the haunting , i had a few particular names for it as well .
unfortunately , i can only post one of them , otherwise , i 'd be getting some pretty angry e - mails from overprotective mothers .
that title would be the confusing .
ok , that is a pretty bad title , but it fits this film perfectly .
it basically serves up no purpose , and
combined with dry dialogue and a boring and confusing plot , it completes the formula for a cinematic bomb .
liam neeson once again gets wrapped up in a film without any depth , but at least the phantom menace was exciting and had some depth .
the haunting is nothing but trash , but unfortunately , will still make a boatload of money .
before i rant and rave about how bad this film is , let me point out the few , and i stress the word few , bright spots in this film .
first , the house is great- looking .
it looks beautiful , but this is also a dark spot .
it looks so great that it is hard to be frightened by it .
this is something that rears its ugly head at all points of the film .
things look so great , that you are looking on in awe instead of being scared straight .
haunted house films have to contain one element to even be slightly successful and that is being eerie .
the hill house is not eerie .
it is beautiful , but not the least bit frightening .
ever heard of lili taylor ?
before this film i did not , but i am glad that i do now .
she gives the only satisfactory performance in the film . despite the dry dialogue and boring / confusing concept
, she manages to light up the screen every time she appears , but unfortunately , her co - stars are usually following right behind .
owen wilson , who plays luke , is the only other cast member even close to giving an admirable performance , other then taylor .
he is basically there for the comic relief , and his character development is poor in all other areas .
all of the characters are desperately underdeveloped .
wilson had potential as luke , but it seems they just needed him to add a few laughs .
liam neeson and catherine zeta - jones suffer from the dialogue and plot and should not have been in this film .
their characters must suffer from wicked mood swings because in each scene they turn from ruthless to compassionate to scared to brave and whatnot .
they just are not believable and this is the final nail in the haunting 's coffin .
the plot is terrible .
the opening scene of the film is very important , but the director makes it too obvious by getting close - ups of all the things that will play a major role in the end of the film .
as i sat through the film , i kept wondering what this film was trying to accomplish .
nell , lili taylor 's character , goes from the hunted to the savior .
it makes no sense and the director gives the audience no reasoning for the ridiculous changes that take place in the film .
he forces the viewer to make various assumptions and does not give any in - depth information .
for instance , the beginning of the film gives us a sense of why nell is getting involved in the program .
but , we get zilch for the other four .
plus , two of them get wiped out in the first ten minutes .
and the worst part :
most horror films have killings .
for some reason , they kill off luke at the end of the film .
no reason whatsoever , just off with his head , literally .
overall , the haunting is the epitome of a bad movie
. bad plot , confusing storyline and a waste of good talent .
hopefully , liam neeson can rebound and get into a good film and be used to his full potential .
hopefully , lili taylor will be recognized for doing such a great job in such a bad film .
and hopefully , other horror films , such as the blair witch project and the haunting of hill house , will not be as bad as this one .

Output: N

Input: Consider Input: synopsis : sonny koufax ( adam sandler )
is a rich , childish , angry man who has just been dumped by his girlfriend vanessa ( kristy swanson ) .
in a bid to impress vanessa sonny impersonates his friend kevin ( jon stewart ) and adopts a 5 year old boy named julian ( cole and dylan sprouse ) while kevin is on an overseas trip .
under sonny 's supervision julian soon learns to lie to women , tell people how he " wipes his ass , " throw tantrums , and scream for his " god damned " treats .
self centered , julian breaks a school classmate 's arm without apologizing or even realizing he has done anything wrong .
meanwhile sonny bribes julian with sugary talk , food , toys , and flashy promises in order to get the kid to perform .
not surprisingly the government takes julian away from sonny 's incompetent supervision , and this leads to a custody battle .
opinion : it 's a movie about an embittered creep teaching a little kid to be a jerk , and we all get cheap laughs
because for 90 minutes the innocent kindergartner never finds out what it means when he mimics all the bad boy behavior .
that 's the essence of big daddy .
but there 's a bigger issue
involved :
marketing .
movies that are rated pg and pg-13 are heavily marketed towards children of preteen age and below .
on tv , film clips advertise these movies as family - friendly hit comedies .
then when you go see them they turn out to be either raunchy sex acts like austin powers with characters named fat bastard - - or big daddy where adult characters get their jollies by buddying up to naive five year olds and encouraging them to experiment with drugs and mistreatment .
folks in hollywood are trying to develop a preteen market for raunchy stuff , but i think most american parents would agree that early childhood is a time of mental innocence that should be protected from uncaring media market exploitation .
to many american mothers
there 's probably nothing more pathetic and unsettling than the sight of a theater full of unsupervised little eight year olds laughing raucously as movie character father adam sandler jokes about a woman 's " ice cold tits . "
Output: N