In this task, you must classify if a given review is positive/negative, indicating your answer as P or N.
--------
Question: in one of my many videos i have attained from the local library , casablanca was my third classic in some weeks .
the others being citizen kane and vertigo ( yes , i am trying to see as many of afi 's greatest movies ever made as i can ) .
but , casablanca stood out from the rest for me : it was actually watchable .
what most hail as the greatest american film ever , casablanca is n't so much a love story as a political frenzy with a love triangle thrown in .
it seems that star humphry bogart spend about 85 percent of the movie with various leaders of the nation instead of with ingred bergman .
that annoyed me , as did the ending .
why did n't the plan turn around ? ! ?
surprisingly , i enjoyed the film .
i liked bogart 's character and his acting
( not over the top as most actors in his era ) .
i once read about if you had a choice to be in a movie , which one would it be , and a women said casablanca .
at first i was thinking to myself " why ?
" then , as i watched the film again , i understood why .
the movie is very well done and the script top - notch , although i doubt i understood more than half of the political mumbo jumbo .
casablanca is , in my mind , no classic ( like solaris ) , but it is a good film and stylishly shot
.
hey , hollywood , how about this : a remake with harrison ford and anne heche ?
now that would be a classic .

Answer: P

Question: being that it is a foreign language film with no known names with a select number theaters showing it , " shall we dance " wo n't be seen by that many people .
and that 's a shame
- this is a funny , enchanting , and goofy movie full of laughs , surprises , and wonderful dance sequences .
the surprising thing about " shall we dance " is the universal appeal of the story .
a us version is in the works , and it 's no wonder -
it 's not really all that culture specific .
although there is a narrated set - up that adds some extra resonance to the proceedings ( about the view the japanese culture has about ballroom dancing ) , the movie is so rich in character and appeal that this added layer is n't at all necessary to understand or enjoy the film .
the only important unexplained japanese - specific reference that may leave some a bit puzzled is that 1000 yen is roughly $ 10 ( when you see the film - and you should see this film - you 'll know why ) . a middle aged company man realizes that achieving all the goals he set for himself in life ( a house , a child , and good marriage ) still does n't translate into a fulfilled life .
after glimpsing a melancholy beauty looking out from a dance studio window while on the train home from work , sugiyana ( koji yakusho ) decides after some trepidation to take up ballroom dance lessons in order to meet the woman who has stirred something in himself .
after finding the weekly fees for private lessons from the elegant and beautiful mai ( tamiyo kusakari ) too rich for his blood , sugiyama opts for groups lessons simply to be near her .
we then meet the players in this gem of a movie , who all have their own reasons for joining the class .
later on , we meet aoki at the dance studio ( naoto takenaka ) , a co - worker and all out weirdo and one of the laugh riot highlights of the film .
the story , laughs , and touching scenes evolve as the movie goes along .
it 's a pleasure to watch such a wonderful film that is propelled almost solely by the characters and performances .
it 's difficult to explain the charms of the film without revealing too much - the movie abounds with little revelations that subtly shape the characters , and in the end , each one is that much fuller and more understood by the time you leave the theater .
it 's one of those movies that only the french seem to make anymore - no big plot , no special effects , no gunplay , no tragic consequences , no forced examinations of the nature of love , and no insights into the nature of evil .
just a warm , funny , endearing film that will charm the pants off of you .
when was the last time you left a theater feeling all warm and fuzzy inside ?
" shall we dance " will do that to you without any treacly aftertaste .

Answer: P

Question: i rented this movie with very high hopes .
this movie got praise as one of the best films of 1998 , and unfortunately , was not as good as i hoped , but was still very intriguing and thought provoking .
first of all , the casting for this film is great .
tobey maguire and reese witherspoon are the future of hollywood .
they play their roles as the parker brother and sister perfectly .
with a plot as unbelievable as this film , you need chemistry and honest acting from your cast .
tobey and reese ( bud and mary sue parker ) play their roles perfectly and display their characters with honesty and believability .
william h. macy , an actor i have grown to love over the past year , turns in another great performance as the tv dad who is torn over his wife , a " colored " person and his friends , the " non - colored " ones .
he also displays believability and must display a certain lack of chemistry with his wife .
he does this perfectly and yet again shows why he should be one of the top actors in hollywood .
joan allen is equally great as betty parker ,
the ideal tv mom .
her character is the most ambitious .
she is very na ?
ve , and must display this well to make her character believable
and she does just that .
her lack of chemistry with macy , which the role calls for , and her developed chemistry with jeff daniels is terrific , and if daniels would have been as stellar as the rest of the cast , then this film would even been even better .
as said before , jeff daniels gives a bad performance .
his character displays the change going on throughout the town , yet he does not display it with enough conviction .
his character is very confusing and he is not very believable .
this film could have been elevated to a whole new level had daniels been able to give a better performance .
the movie is very provocative .
it challenges the issues of racism that existed in the past and that still exist today .
i really was not expecting all of the elements they brought up ,
but they pulled them off with such flair that it was mind blowing .
they demonstrate the racism issue without a hitch , but do it in a slow pace .
the only major flaw in the film besides the performance by daniels is length .
some films are not meant to be that long .
pleasantville is one of those films .
this film could have been so much better had they not moved so slowly to it .
first , they are amazed by the implementation of color .
then they want to have it .
then they do not want to .
then the war ensues between the colored and non - colored .
this is all strung out over two hours , which was way too long .
some movies need a lot of time .
saving private ryan was a little bit under three hours long and i thought it could have used more time .
this film is only two hours long , and seems much longer .
length is everything in films .
if you can nail down the perfect timing and pace , you can win half the battle .
pleasantville can move at a good pace at times , but it is not consistent enough .
overall
, pleasantville is a very pleasant and provocative departure from the predictability of most films these days .
i went in expecting a light - hearted film about change .
i left learning an important lesson about racism and the way things change .
luckily
, pleasantville teaches this lesson in such a way to make it appeal to all audiences .
only if it could have done in a shorter amount of time .

Answer:
P