In this task, you must classify if a given review is positive/negative, indicating your answer as P or N.
--------
Question: ready to rumble is not a masterpiece in film ; i have a problem even regarding it as a film .
it 's more of a show , a big commercial for ted turner 's world championship wrestling ( wcw ) .
the movie is almost entirely about and fully showcases the wrestlers of the wcw like diamond dallas page , goldberg , and sting .
the story is very minimal and basic .
there are these two guys , gordy ( david arquette ) and sean ( scott caan ) .
they are two twenty - something wrestling fans from wyoming .
when they go to a live event for the big match up , there favorite wrestler jimmy king ( oliver platt ) is defeated and his career is announced to be over by the mean commissioner titus ( joe pantoliano ) .
gordy and sean decide to go on a quest to find jimmy and bring him back to the top and defeat the evil titus ' plans .
on the way , they meet some people , have some fun , and clean up some port - o - potties .
sounds great huh
, well it 's not .
the movie makes many attempts at humor , only a few of them work .
the jokes that make you laugh , however , do not outnumber the film 's many duds .
there is a funny repertoire between arquette and a convenience store cashier played by ahmet zappa .
the cashier is very mean to arquette so arquette dreams of ways to get him back .
i especially enjoyed one version in which they have a wrestling match and arquette 's tag team partner is ' macho man ' randy savage .
they wrestle between the aisles knocking over cans and getting body slammed on the floor .
the other good part of the film is the sexual confrontation between arquette and rose mcgowan .
mcgowan plays sasha the head nitro girl , the cheerleaders of the wcw .
she becomes attracted to gordy and they have some nice , funny scenes together especially one scene in which arquette calls mcgowan 's breasts foreign objects than punches her directly into the face .
now what did n't work in this movie ?
that would be the rest of it .
the flick was filled with stupid potty humor about farts and toilets .
the two lead characters work for a port - o - potty cleaning company and when they crash the truck , the excrements spill all over the road .
it 's not funny ; it 's pathetic and brainless .
the film is giving homage to how blindly faithful of their wrestlers but not all wrestling fans are that way .
i watch it for entertainment
and i would think some people would take offense to what is said throughout the movie .
the main characters in the film actually get to wrestle , like that would happen to any fan , especially to 2 that stalk a wrestler and sneak him back onto set .
also , i wondered how they got into the backstage so easily ; they just walked right in .
i like wrestling .
i watch it at home and laugh .
it 's continuously funny and has great characters
otherwise i would n't watch it .
this movie was n't even funny or fun to watch like the wrestling on tv .
the only fun i had in the movie was pointing out the wrestlers i knew .
the funny thing was that many of the wcw featured wrestlers like saturn and chris benoit have left wcw for more money but are still featured in the film prominently .
the movie was too dim - witted to be funny .
it is possibly the most useless and under - developed film ever .
a recent film in this genre of fans would be the kiss fan film , detroit rock city .
that movie was interesting , well done and continuously funny unlike this film .
the acting was good plus the jokes had humor and made you laugh .
now that the scream trilogy is over , arquette has nothing else to do so
he has to do crap like this and be a spokesman in those dumb 1 - 800-call - att ads .
at least he has a hot wife in courtney cox .
he 's in the funny parts of the film but there are n't enough to make him look good .
the music was bad
also feature such overplayed tunes as kid rock 's " bawitdaba " and " cowboy " .
martin landau has a great cameo as a classic , hard - nosed wrestling trainer named sal that whips the king back into shape to regain his throne .
script is important to a film but this piece of crap could have been made with a couple of scribblings on a napkin .
a fan of the wrestlers who are featured in the film probably wrote it .
at times the movie even tries to show wrestling as real .
the wrestlers form alliances , go to people 's houses and beat them up .
it 's utterly ridiculous .
the whole film was a wasteful , dumfounding experience .
the movie was made to pay homage to the fans , telling them things that made wrestling , not the wrestlers .
the wrestlers are making more money to make a movie to thank the fans for begin fans by paying 5 dollars to see a potty - humor movie .
the wcw sucks and this movie is just a pathetic two - hour commercial to watch it .
if you 're going to watch wrestling watch wwf , it 's actually entertaining .
the wrestling is betters , they 're funnier , more diverse , and have better entrance themes .
oh and the girls are hotter .
is this what movies have become , 2 hour - long commercials that you have to pay to see ?
do n't waste your money .

Answer: N

Question: when i first heard that disney 's next animated feature was going to be tarzan , i was almost horrified .
i was worried that disney was going to make another hercules ( sorry , jerk - ules ) .
that effort was too overloaded with comedy ( and the hero was too boastful and pompous to be considered a sympathetic hero ) , and , after viewing it to this day , i find it a disgrace for disney animation .
when i saw the trailers , i was thinking " hmm . . .
this is n't bad at all .
this just might have potential .
"
when i bought the soundtrack , i was really quite surprised at how different it sounded from most disney features .
i have never really heard of phil collins , nor have i heard of mark mancina , so i was wondering , how would these two make this disney flick spin ?
i was pleasantly surprised : the music is top - notch .
phil collins ' songs are terrific , percussion - heavy pieces of work that seem to break the formula for typical disney songs .
the score from mark mancina was also neat
; it reminded me a bit of the lion king , but it was more original .
so , the soundtrack was n't bad at all , considering it was by two people i am not familiar with .
this film could be good . . .
but will it be ?
when i finally went to see it ( on opening day , as i tend to do with most disney animated features ) , my question was answered , in a complete turnabout of expectations for me : disney 's tarzan is surprisingly decent .
the story starts out with tarzan 's parents surviving a shipwreck and finding a home on an island where apes live in peace .
however , one day , a vicious leopard , sabor , attacks and kills tarzan 's parents , leaving him ( at this time , a baby ) alone - until kala of the apes rescues him .
kala wants to raise the child as her own ( she lost hers previously to sabor ) , but her mate , kerchak is not too sure .
"
it 's not our kind , " he says .
he agrees , though , to let her take care of little tarzan , but " that does n't make him my son .
" tarzan grows up , vowing to be " the best ape ever " , but no matter how hard he tries or what he does ( at the guidance of his hilarious ape friend , terk ) , he just ca n't convince kerchak that he is one of the apes , even when he defeats sabor in a battle .
one day , a new animal shows up : humans .
this is where jane comes into the picture .
she is on an expedition with her father ( professor porter ) , and a despicable hunter ( clayton ) searching for gorillas .
tarzan rescues her when she is chased by baboons , and soon they get to know each other .
even though tarzan falls in love with jane , this causes things to go wrong .
clayton tricks tarzan into taking him , jane , and porter to see the apes , who are convinced that he has betrayed them .
worse , clayton has plotted to send the gorillas to london for money .
will tarzan find out which family he belongs to and save the apes ?
i 'm not gon na tell you , sorry .
you 're gon na have to see for yourself .
and see it you should ; the animation is , as always ,
top notch , particularly when tarzan goes soaring through the trees
( read that , skateboarding ) .
the deep canvas computer generated effect adds an authentic feeling to the jungle which tarzan lives in .
in fact , it seems similar to the computer imagery / cel animation combination in rival disney animted films , such as fox 's anastasia and dreamworks ' prince of egypt .
could it be that disney was actually taking ideas from their rivals ?
the casting is fairly good .
tony goldwyn is emotionally believeable as tarzan ( and to my relief , the animators have succeeded in not making him another hercules .
nicely done ) , and glenn close is wonderful as kala ( she has a beautiful singing voice , too , by the way ) .
lance henrikson as kerchak somewhat reminds me of robby benson 's beast voice , which makes him all the more ferocious and gripping .
minnie driver had me a little worried at first as the voice of jane .
i thought she had the most annoying voice in the whole film ( when i first saw the trailers ) , but when i saw the film , i did n't have a problem with her .
i take back my insult on driver .
it 's nice to hear nigel hawthorne do another voice for a disney animated feature
( he was fflewdurr flamm in disney 's most underrated classic , the black cauldron ) ; he is funny and delightful as professor porter .
on the villiany side of the voices , brian blessed ( the guy who did boss nass in star wars : episode i - the phantom menace ) brings a pompous , and later on vicious , voice to the sinister clayton .
he might not be the strongest character in the film
( he 's just a plain bad guy , nothing else ) , but blessed 's vocal work contributes greatly .
but if there is any voice that i think steals the whole show , it should be rosie o'donnell , who is hilariously funny as terk .
she also has a fiesty attitude
( " i 'm gon na kill ya !
"
she says , more than once ) .
i almost sung along with her during one of the film 's best moments , where the apes make a mess of the human 's camp , via song , er , scatting " shoo - be - doo , da - be - dah " .
i can see why she wanted to have a rock song for the film
, she 's a good singer .
not that she was the only funny character in the film , though .
wayne knight ( who played stan in space jam ) gives a whimsically funny style to tantor , an elephant who is especially worried about stepping into " un - sanitary " water .
( thankfully , there is no real sound of flatuence -
that would have killed the picture ) .
the songs , as i said before , are decent , mostly sung by collins .
this sets a new standard for disney animated films because for the first time , the characters do not sing .
i tolerate musical numbers from characters a lot more than some other guys would , but i found this to be a nice change of pace .
the story does have elements of comedy in it , but they also load it with strong dramatic touches , which makes this film far better than the unbelieveably uninspired hercules .
if there is anything disappointing about tarzan , it might be the omission of the ' n sync version of " trashing the camp " from the film .
i heard it on the soundtrack , and wondered where it was going to be .
i was upset that it was n't , because i had thought of taking a few friends of mine who like ' n sync to see tarzan .
oh , well . . .
overall , i was enthralled with tarzan .
i would n't hold it high the way i do with mulan or the hunchback of notre dame ( my all - time favorite disney classics ) , but this film deserves a high place among disney 's greatest achievements .
i give a nod to disney for following up their spectacular
*
*
*
* * masterpiece , mulan , with this great animated adaption of egar rice burrough 's tarzan .

Answer: P

Question: contact is the 1997 movie i 've seen the most - five times to be exact .
four of those times were on the big screen , but even on a tv ,
it 's a very impressive film .
the same ca n't be said for films like independance day , but that 's because contact is a rare example in sci - fi filmmaking where the story is treated more importantly than the special effects , and all of us know looking back that id4 did n't offer much outside of some one - time delightful eye candy .
contact 's wonderfully presented story deals with ellie arroway ( jodie foster ) , a radio astronomer whose preference of study involves the outdated technique of " merely listening " to sounds out in space .
her interest in the field of astronomy developed at a very young age , encouraged by her loving father , ted ( david morse ) , who let ellie use a small ham radio to pick up on frequencies and communicate with people as far away as pensacola , fl ( that was , of course , before the days of internet chat rooms ) .
while everyone else uses modern technologies to aid them in the search for extra - terrestrial intelligence ( of which the program seti is an acronym for ) , ellie prefers to pop on a pair of headphones and see what she can pick up on , keeping the youthful magic and intrigue strongly alive .
ellie 's strong scientific basis essentially makes her an atheist , a belief likely influenced by the death of her father while she was still quite young .
in puerto rico , she meets palmer joss ( matthew mcconaughey ) , a writer examining the effects of technology on the world 's overall happiness ; a one- time seminary student who describes himself as " a man of the cloth , without the cloth " .
despite the vast differences in opinion regarding a " supreme being " , ellie and palmer hit it off , and even take the time to sleep together .
it 's a weak and hurried relationship , but director zemeckis needs it to add to the plot later on .
meanwhile , dr .
david drumlin ( tom skerritt ) , who has authority over seti but finds the program a frivolous waste of time and money , is ready to pull the plug on any and all seti funding .
this leaves the passionate ellie searching for new sponsors , eventually finding a setup in new mexico and leaving palmer with no explanation , and only a one night stand to remember .
it is in this nm city where , several months later , ellie finally picks up on a strong signal from outer space , perhaps the most profound discovery in the history of science .
when the signal is closely examined , many new developments spring up , and before long , drumlin is stepping in to take over the operation he once scoffed at .
eventually , it is concluded that information in the signal may be blueprints for a transportation device used to teleport an earthling to vega ( where the signal seems to have originated ) .
the media swarms , fanatics go further off the deep end , scientists clamor for new information , politicians huddle in discussion of appropriate actions to take , and presidents are morphed into a celluloid reality ( remember when zemeckis could n't get enough of this in forrest gump ? ) .
as if that were n't enough , ellie 's discovery leads her to the nation 's capital where she again runs into palmer .
contact is based on the novel by carl sagan and deals heavily with the subject of science vs . religion .
the impressive thing is how well both aspects are presented , with no signs of bias .
arguments for both sides are intelligent , solid , and thought - provoking .
when palmer joins a selection committee to choose an ambassador to vega ( of which ellie is a leading candidate ) , personal convictions play a more important role than love interests .
the question is , can a person who does n't believe in god truly be the best representative of earth when 90 % of the planet * does * believe in a higher power ?
even when the film wraps up , it 's uncertain whether it 's meant to play as an advocate for religion , science , both , or even neither , and in our modern day society where " right and wrong " is only opinion ( at least speaking " politically correctly " )
, the ambiguity is an incentive .
do n't get me wrong .
as much as it sounds like it , contact is n't merely a theology class rolled into a reel of film .
it 's a * highly * enjoyable two and a half hours .
despite its seemingly heavy issues , it 's not a tedious undertaking to watch this film .
the special effects are outstanding , though ( warning ! )
highly depreciated on the small screen .
even so , some of the subtle visual effects ( that will likely go unnoticed by many ) are even more impressive than ones more recognizable as " sci - fi " .
the storytelling is rich and complete , and although there are moments in the film that feel quite pretentious ( and at times , even hokey ) , it 's
easily one of the best 1997 films , and one of the best sci - fi films i 've ever seen
.
this is zemeckis ' best since back to the future , and for those of us who actually know that forrest gump was astronomically overrated , zemeckis now has real reason to boast .

Answer:
P