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

Example Input: this movie about two dysfunctional families never really gets off the ground , despite some good performances from a basically competent cast .
eddie ( sean penn ) and maureen ( robin wright penn ) are a not - so - happily married couple down on their luck .
living in rented rooms in the seedier part of an unnamed city , they spend what little income they have at the local bar , owned by shorty ( stanton ) , eddie 's best friend , and his wife georgie ( mazar ) .
maureen and eddie share an odd relationship marked by eddie 's frequent disappearances .
on his return , he promises her the world and professes his undying love .
their manic reunions all too soon lead to new lows , as eddie disappears again .
like a junky craving the next high , maureen suffers through the lows to reach the next high .
their relationship is further complicated by maureen 's pregnancy .
she wants the baby and the father , but deep down seems to sense the inevitability of losing the latter .
during one of eddie 's absences , maureen is attacked by kiefer , her neighbor , who gets her drunk ( with her cooperation ) and then insists on intimacy .
she leaves badly bruised and in fear of what eddie might do -- not to her , but to kiefer .
she lies about what happens to ensure that no harm will come to eddie as the result of his inevitable rage .
he lashes out as she expects , and ends up in an institution for what he believes to be 3 months -- but in reality is 10 years .
during this decade , maureen divorces eddie and remarries a more solid and reliable individual , joey ( travolta , in a small role ) .
her life falls apart again when eddie is released from the institution and comes to find her .
joey insists on bringing eddie into his home and making his wife choose between her husband ( and father of two children ) and stability ( joey makes a good living , drives a cadillac , and they live in a large house in the suburbs ) and the love of her previous life .
she chooses her past , and sacrifices not only her new life but her old ( by giving up her and eddie 's daughter to joey ) .
but the eddie that she knew is gone , replaced by a mere shell of the man he was .
maureen is herself a mere shell , more an automaton than a woman -- as if she had gone through whatever therapy and treatment eddie was given along with him .
perhaps these two really do need each other and can find happiness ( or maybe the lack of sadness ) together , but the movie 's denouement was not convincing .
Example Output: N

Example Input: plot summary : the year is 2024 .
the ozone layer has long since gone and the earth is now protected from radiation by a shield invented by connor mccleod .
the shield , although saving lives , has made the atmosphere hot and humid .
connor is a mortal and a tired old man who has given up hope .
on returning from the opera one night connor is accosted by the leader of a " terrorist " organisation .
they have tried to find out what the company that now runs the shield unit are covering up .
connor is then attacked by two assassins sent by katana from the planet zeist ( like zeit -- get it ? ) .
they fail and connor becomes immortal again by chopping their heads off .
he then brings ramirez back to life in glencoe in scotland .
both ramirez and connor are rebel leaders back on zeist and have been sent to earth as punishment .
connor now has the option to return being the last one but opts to stay with his new found immortality and fight to find out about the company and the shield .
katana meanwhile , fearing connor would return , sets out himself to kill the highlander .
if you have never seen it . being a fan of highlander and mr .
connery , i was in the cinema as soon as i could to see highlander ii :
the quickening .
i wish it had been quicker .
i feel whatever else you can say about a film ( bad script bad music , etc . ) if you sit just plain bored through most of it then nothing much else needs to be said .
the film was short but in my opinion only twelve minutes or so
( the time mr .
connery is on the screen for ) is worth watching .
the plot sounds a little ridiculous but i was willing to give it a chance .
maybe they could pull it off .
instead , i find that the characters have completely changed from those in the first film .
it 's as if they are different people with the same names .
witness connor jumping into bed with the leader of the resistance -- where is the attitude of " who wants to live forever , when love must die " gone to ?
the love sub - plot
* must * have had footage cut out .
the highlander and ramirez both seemed aware of powers they had never mentioned before .
putting our heroes in deadly situations and then having them walk away because of some new power is very annoying .
i still want to know why connor 's coat becomes flame proof when he is immortal !
we are not given enough time on zeist to believe in it , nor are we told why advanced aliens still use swords to kill .
why not dynamite or laser saws or just plain bullets followed by a quick chop to the neck ?
i know the head needs to come off
but you could at least immobilise your opponent with laser rifles first .
to be fair one assassin tried this
but he must be the world 's worst shot .
meanwhile connor develops luke - skywalker - like powers of laser beam deflection .
as for " bad guys , " we see a rebellion on zeist , crushed easier than a grape and then the rest of the plot depends on katana being obsessed with killing mccleod in case he returns to zeist .
two assassins are sent , presumably they are meant to be good at killing but an aged connor kills them both with no problems .
no more assassins are sent .
katana , supposedly a very powerful man goes himself to kill connor .
has he no more assassins ?
has he no better ?
why was the rebellion crushed so easily then ?
michael ironside is totally unconvincing
( bring back the kurgan ) .
he seems like a cartoon character and really is n't that evil , just stupid and violent .
we see the hollywood trick of the chief nasty threatening a child again and killing lots of innocents .
yet he still seems like no threat -- perhaps because he seems too stupid to threaten connor , or maybe because his two best assassins would n't have been amiss with larry , curly and mo .
so much for plot and characters .
the music is atrocious .
it is at best intrusive and at worst annoying . bring back queen .
there was an audible sigh ( of relief ? )
when connor played a queen track in a juke box .
i believe this at least is to be corrected for the american release .
the acting is at best flat , except for mr .
connery .
lambert is uninteresting and when he delivered " there can be only one " this time around it
just made me wish there had only been one -- highlander .
michael ironside is unconvincing
; sorry , michael , i usually like you and everyone else was incredibly forgetable .
so why 2/10 ?
visually the film is interesting at all times .
it has a blade runner feel to it and some of the special effects are quite stunning .
add to this an irrepressible sean connery who smiles throughout the whole film -- or is he smirking to himself ?
his lines and delivery might make the film worthwhile
had it not been so obvious that he can not take the whole thing seriously at all
but hey
--
*
i 'd * have done it for 12 million .
oh , and i agree with a previous reviewer
, she * does * look like sharon stone but i believe it is her first film .
incidentally there is a line producer credited and i hear rumours of highlander iii : the wizard .
Example Output: N

Example Input: forgive the fevered criticism but the fervor of the crucible infects .
set in 1692 at salem , massachusetts , the crucible opens with a group of teenage girls passionately singing and dancing around a boiling cauldron in the middle of a forest under the glow of a full moon .
they beckon the names of men as the targets of their love spells .
then one of the girls lets her hair down and sheds her clothes .
not to be outdone in her quest to regain the attention of john proctor ( daniel day lewis ) , abigail ( winona ryder ) suddenly seizes a chicken , beats it against the ground and smears her face and lips with the fresh blood .
taking even adolescent hormone surges into account , surely this chicken - bashing bit is a bit excessive , especially for prim puritan sensibilities ?
surely to the puritan eye this is as close to a coven of witches as it gets ?
the crucible errs from the beginning and arthur miller 's name should be summoned for blame here for the addition of the above scene to his screen adaptation of his play .
this is far from a harmless event ,
a bad start to an already shaky morality tale .
the play describes the film 's opening scene during tense exchanges that makes one wonder about the veracity of both accusation and reply , and this adds to the play 's charged atmosphere .
in the film , the opening scene becomes an unintentional pandora 's box .
not only is credulity stretched but abigail 's obsession is unfortunately spotlighted .
it positions the crucible more as a cautionary fable about obsessive and malevolent women than against witch hunts ; it will bring back the memory of a rabbit boiling away in a pot .
not surprisingly , the nighttime forest frenzy does not go unnoticed and when two girls fail to wake the following morning , witches are invoked by those eager to blame .
when the girls are questioned , their confession of guilt is accompanied with an announcement of their return to god and they are thereafter converted to immaculate witnesses , led lustfully by abigail . with alarming synchronicity our hormonally - advantaged girls zealously gesture and point accusing fingers at innocents , constant reminders that abigail 's passion sets all this into inexorable motion .
abigail seizes on this opportunity to rid herself of her rival for john proctor 's love , his wife elizabeth ( joan allen ) , by including her among those accused of witchcraft . appropriately narrow - waisted and equipped with a distractingly white smile ( watch his teeth deteriorate much too quickly to a murky yellow ) , day lewis plays the dashing moral hero with an over - earnestness that longs to be watched .
director nicholas hytner is guilty of encouraging day lewis ' foaming - mouth fervour with shots where we stare up at proctor as if he was mounted on a pedestal for our admiration .
otherwise , hytner 's direction is unremarkable .
ryder 's performance as abigail is as consistent as her mood swings .
her fits of frenzy are energetic enough but
the quieter moments are less successful .
abigail supposedly revels in her newfound power , but ryder fails at being convincingly haughty although there is much haughtiness to spare here .
paul scofield is fine as the overzealous judge danforth , but the incessant moral posturings of all the characters along with the recurrent histrionics of the young girls pricks at the nerves .
probably because she is the only refuge of restraint amidst all the huffing and puffing , allen 's elizabeth comes out as the most sympathetic character .
a scene near the end featuring a private conversation between the imprisoned elizabeth and john is undeniably powerful because for once we are given a reprieve from the moral bantering and the human consequences are revealed .
unfortunately , when john 's audience again increases to more than one his urge to pontificate returns and the human urgency of his situation is lost .
it is clear that miller meant
well
but i do wish he did it with more delicacy and fewer diversions .
his screenplay is an imperfect creature with the distractions coming out as loud as the message .
the result is a clumsy muddle
- i felt like the chicken from the opening scene , head ceaselessly banged with piousness too heavy - handed to be wholly believable .
when the gallows beckoned , it was sweet release indeed .
far from bewitching , the crucible tests the patience .
Example Output:
N