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

[EX Q]: i 've never written a review for a movie i have n't watched all the way through , but i had to make an exception with powder .
i was about forty - five minutes into this one at a friend 's house when he and his brother got into a huge shouting match that would have ended in violence
had we not left the house .
so i never got to finish the movie
and i 'm sure as hell not going to pay three more bucks to watch half of a bad movie .
but i can at least get a partial review out of it , because i saw enough to know this one was n't worth finishing in the first place .
the movie centers around a freaky teenager who 's spent his entire life living in the cellar of his grandparents ' house .
when grandpa dies ( taking his department store down with him ) , social worker mary steenburgen has to take powder ( first and middle names ?
gold bond ) to a state home , where we find out he 's a different from the other kids .
actually , we find out he 's different when we first see him , because he 's the most pale individual we 've ever seen and moreover he has no body hair whatsoever .
when powder is born in the opening minutes of the movie , the father takes one look at him and says " he 's not my son . " obviously .
all i want to know is where the pillsbury dough boy was nine months ago .
so the white - faced freak leaves his neverland ranch for the state home and faces the ridicule of other kids .
that is , until they try to haze him during his first cafeteria lunch by making him " wear " his spoon ( " you can either wear it on your nose or up your ass .
" decisions , decisions . . . )
and he uses telepathic powers to draw all the silverware in the room into a giant pile in the middle of the table .
so if his father is the pillsbury dough boy , his mother must be sissy spacek 's carrie character .
and you have to factor in two more things from the subsequent scenes , as we find out powder
has some sort of
super - intelligence ( " your i .
q .
test went straight off the chart ! " ) and attracts electrical power .
this first shows up as powder visits the world of high school ( if he 's such a genius already , why would he need a high school education ? ) and sits through a demonstration in jeff goldblum 's science class .
goldblum plugs in a " jacob 's ladder " device that shows current running up two wires and immediately the current flows across the room and into powder 's chest .
but goldblum just stands there for about thirty seconds watching , instead of just unplugging the damn thing .
i guess he was too busy contemplating why he was appearing in his third bad movie in a row
( following hideaway and nine months ) .
that 's about all i saw before the big fight began and , let me tell you , that was twice as interesting as the movie itself .
but like i said , i saw enough to know this would be one of those terrible melodramas about the isolation of people who have superior abilities and how hard it is for those people to assimilate themselves into mainstream civilization .
none of these movies ever handle the subject properly , instead introducing the feeble beauty and the beast copout of having a beautiful woman fall in love with the guy 's personality , overlooking his personal appearance .
i already had the female character picked out ( the girl who was sitting next to him in the back of the room during the electrocution scene ) , but i guess i 'll never know for sure what happened .
from noraruth@aol .
com mon jun 10 15 : 04
: 03 edt 1996 article : 3654 of rec .
arts .
movies .
reviews path :
nntphub .
cb .
att .
com !
not - for - mail from :
noraruth@aol .
com ( andrew hicks )
newsgroups :
rec .
arts .
movies .
reviews , rec .
arts .
sf .
reviews subject : review : powder ( 1995 ) followup - to :
rec .
arts .
movies .
current - films , rec .
arts .
sf .
movies date : 10 jun 1996 18 : 16 : 03 gmt organization : university of missouri - columbia lines :
70 sender :
ecl@mtcts1 .
att .
com ( evelyn c . leeper )
approved :
ecl@mtcts1 .
att .
com
message - id : " > reply - to :
noraruth@aol .
com ( andrew hicks )
nntp - posting - host : mtcts2 .
mt .
lucent .
com summary : r .
a .
m .
r .
# 05425 keywords :
author = hicks originator :
ecl@mtcts2 xref : nntphub .
cb .
att .
com rec .
arts .
movies .
reviews : 3654 rec .
arts .
sf .
reviews :
710 status : ro powder a film review by andrew hicks
copyright 1996 andrew hicks / fatboy productions .
[EX A]: N

[EX Q]: i guess that if a very wild bachelor party had gone really bad , there would be broken furniture , traces of smack and cocaine on the floor , and a dead prostitute in the bathroom .
i guess that if a movie had also gone really bad , there might be the same elements present .
coincidence ?
poor kyle ( a meek looking jon favreau ) . . .
he is about to marry his radiant fiancee , laura ( cameron diaz ) .
but before he exchanges his vows , he embarks to las vegas with his friends for one last blowout .
but this bachelor party has gone about as bad as it could possibly get .
the prostitute has met a horrible , though accidental death , and drugs are everywhere .
the five friends agree that there is enough bad evidence here that will send them to jail for a very long time .
a surprisingly calm robert boyd ( christian slater ) , who looks like he was groomed to make nefarious decisions , ponders their dilemma for a few minutes before deciding that the best thing to do is to bury the body in the desert where she 'll never be found .
although they stomach the gruesome deed of getting rid of the body ( which also disturbingly involves dismantling the body using power saws in order to stuff it into suitcases ) , when they return from their trip , guilt and paranoia begins to set in which slowly consumes some of the five friends .
one is adam ( daniel stern ) he grows increasingly agitated .
whenever people look at his van or whenever a cop glances his way , his blood pressure increases .
or that just may be because of his dysfunctional family .
another is michael , who was actually responsible for her death .
he tries to bury his feelings , but the burden of guilt begins to affect his judgment as well .
boyd is the ?
doer ' of the group .
seemingly suffering from a long psychosis , when he feels as if his secret is about to be exposed , he is apt to take extreme measures to cover up his tracks .
kyle just hopes that his wedding will live up to laura 's demanding expectations .
then , there 's moore ( leland orser ) who speaks 5 lines and walks around with a puzzled look on his face .
the problem with this reprehensible movie is that it wants to be a cruel comedy , but it presents things in a manner that just are n't funny .
drugs , mutilation , and killing your own friends is n't something to be laughed at .
as a straight psychological drama , i could see how it might have worked , as each one tried to maneuver and overcome the weight of their own guilt in their own sometimes - sick ways .
but this movie insults us by assuming that we could simply discard our values for 2 hours .
if you do like this movie , i do n't think that i want to know you .
i did find slater a convincing leader who sways his friends to choose not the right thing
but the ? smart play . '
and diaz adds some brightness to this film as a wedding - needing fiancee .
but
her talents are essentially wasted here .
it 's obvious that the film maker is trying to strike a certain tone .
but the way that he chooses to do it is tasteless .
do not make a very bad decision by seeing this film .
[EX A]: N

[EX Q]: you do n't have to know poker to like " rounders , " but it might help .
that a great deal of this sharp little drama is set in the back rooms of new york 's cardshark underground astoundingly does n't limit its accessibility , even for those who ca n't tell royal and straight flushes apart .
" rounders " ' success , then , is owed to its proficient cast and intriguing portrayal of a world not many viewers will be familiar with .
the dialogue may be filled with terms that only true players will grasp , but you do n't have to speak the language to understand the words - a statement that pretty much sums up the effectiveness of the whole show .
matt damon , fresh off his " good will hunting " hot streak , is perfect for the role of mike mcdermott , a young law student with a tremendous gift for gambling .
but after losing all of his tuition money in a killer high - stakes match with russian poker aficionado teddy kgb ( john malkovich , deliciously hammy ) , he shifts his focus to scholarly matters , leaving his true area of expertise far , far behind .
things change , however , when mike 's old buddy worm ( edward norton ) re - enters his life - it seems worm , just out of jail , owes a hefty sum to nasty thugs , and is counting on his friend 's superlative skills to help him pay off the debt .
that " rounders " ' story quickly molds itself into a conventional , predictable tale of redemption does n't hinder its potency .
director john dahl , infamous for his neo - noirs " red rock west " and " the last seduction , " gets extremely convincing mileage out of the been - there , done - that plot mechanics by trumping up the relationship between mike and worm .
damon and norton bring so much to their roles that they 'd be worth catching even if " rounders " ultimately folded , but the movie ups its fascinating ante by contrasting their wildly different ways of winning .
any sequence where the two men sit at the table together is an unarguable highlight .
if only the other character interaction was as successful , " rounders " might merit consideration when it comes time to number the year 's best films .
current " it girl
" gretchen mol is sweetly appealing as mike 's girlfriend jo , aware and weary of his seedy past , but her scenes with damon number too few to be very effective .
john turturro 's aging mentor and famke janssen 's tempting siren , both interesting sketches , are hampered by the same limited screen time .
and as a wizened judge , the great martin landau makes memorable a role that 's mostly a plot device
- he 's on hand mostly to sort - of save the day and provide a voice for " rounders " ' moral .
that moral , by the way , is " our destiny chooses us , " and it 's something of a surprise when " rounders " supports this solemn proverb by eschewing the conclusion you might expect ; mike does learn from his mistake , but neither the mistake nor the way he learns from it is what it initially appears to be .
in the end , " rounders " sees gambling as less a mere addiction than a potential art form , but the poker itself is only a metaphor for a much larger picture .
the road to true fulfillment lies within the realization and exercising of your natural passions , the movie espouses , no matter what they might be .
here , low - rent lowlifes like worm just are n't cut out for the cards .
screenwriters david levien and brian koppelman entertain and educate in their quest to vividly render a culture that 's often generalized by movies ; even complete poker neophytes should cross the line from observers to participants when the movie gets to its concluding game scene .
inside every adventurous filmgoer , there is a desire to be taken someplace new and exciting , and
that 's the precise allure of " rounders .
"
it ultimately matters not that a few of our tour guides feel partially - realized or that the journey itself is cluttered with sites we 've seen before , because the final destination is a satisfying one
.
in the end , " rounders " holds a winning hand .
[EX A]:
P