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

Example Input: chris tucker is one of those guys you immediately get a reaction from -- you either find his helium voice , crazy eyes and jerky mannerisms funny or annoying .
i think i fall into the former category ( i 'm one of the few who thought his turn in " the fifth element " as a prancing , prince - like deejay was complete inspired lunacy and not the least bit aggravating ) , but his new vehicle " money talks " just does n't do him service
.
tucker is good in the movie -- and this is the kind of film that , if people see it , could make him a big star -- but he 's also really the only thing good about the movie .
in fact , if you see " money talks , " it should shock you beyond recognition that two of " toy story " 's writers penned the sloppy script .
tucker 's role here is that of franklin hatchett , a petty los angeles con artist whose carwash scams get him dogged by investigative reporter james russell ( charlie sheen ) .
after being busted on the job for some illegal business involving counterfeit passports , franklin finds himself on a bus to the county jail and handcuffed to slick international jewel smuggler raymond villard ( gerard ismael ) .
but villard 's thugs blow up the bus in an attempt to free their leader ( never mind that the explosion could have instead killed him ) , and because he and franklin are joined at the wrist , franklin is allowed to escape as well , but not before overhearing some important information regarding a diamond stash that -- for some reason or another -- is being hidden in a vintage roadster waiting to be auctioned off at an upcoming auto expo .
the local media mistakenly puts the prison break - out blame on franklin , which is where james comes back into the picture .
he makes a deal to protect franklin if , in turn , franklin gives him an exclusive interview .
this means james must present his new " friend " in the stickiest of situations -- a formal dinner party for he and fiancee grace ( heather locklear ) , also attended by her uber - rich parents ( veronica cartwright and nicely game paul sorvino ) .
and of course the bad guys track franklin down and try to knock him off , all the while he spars and forms an unlikely bond with james .
"
this ai n't no buddy movie , " claim the print ads .
yeah ,
right .
actually , for the better part of , oh , 20 minutes , it appears " money talks " has the momentum to cover entertaining ground , and this is mostly due to the presence of spastic motormouth tucker .
this is tucker 's first leading role , and if you imagine a slightly lankier , african - american jim carrey with a reliance on wild r - rated raunch rather than pg-13 physical comedy , you have a good idea of the conviction with which he assaults the role .
but you realize all too quickly that tucker 's overstated liveliness is the only thing " money talks " has going for it .
and a lively actor alone does not a successful movie make .
it 's all too easy to pick out everything wrong with " money talks .
" the plot is recycled buddy - buddy comedy - thriller tripe that seemed overused even when " nothing to lose " employed it last month .
everything is paint - by - numbers , especially the los angeles coliseum finale , which finds not one , not two , but three separate enemy factions firing at franklin as they pursue him through the bleachers .
the villains , as many as there are , are dull .
certain story elements are too coincidental .
and too much of the film 's dramatic agenda is played too straight .
a scene where grace confronts james after learning franklin 's true identity ( " you brought a killer into my parents ' house ! " ) is extremely silly .
you get the picture .
obviously , i did not have a pleasant experience at " money talks .
"
but the people around me appeared to be having a rip - roaring good time ( one gentleman several rows behind me chortled with such expressive conviction
i began fearing for his health ) .
but tucker , at least for me , is a pretty funny guy , and aces the movie 's best scene , where franklin passes himself off as vic damone 's son at james and grace 's engagement bash and toasts the couple with barry white lyrics .
tucker 's audience -- and he does have one -- will probably like " money talks .
"
those who he irritates , however , will have a more productive day staying home and scraping the gook out from under their toenails .
Example Output: N

Example Input: arriving in a barrage of hype , the blair witch project is one of the biggest box office success of the year .
however , like the golden child , although blair witch has made a lot of money , it 's not very good .
donahue , williams and leonard play themselves as three students who set out to make a documentary about the blair witch myth .
the film is made up of the camcorder footage they recorded , which means grainy footage and woozy camera angles .
although events start of normal , they get weird pretty quickly , while the threesome argue more and more as the journey goes on .
although an interesting premise , the blair witch project amounts to nothing more than a missed opportunity .
the biggest mistake the film makes is to let three mediocre actors the chance to improvise .
most of the dialogue is ad - libbed , and still manages to sound like a poor b - movie .
the ' script ' eventually degenerates into shouting matches , with the f - word included a lot to sound like students .
there are breaks in these arguments where some creepy events occur , but then it 's back to the shouting and swearing , which gets very tiresome very quickly .
if i wanted to see three people get lost in the woods , shout a lot and swear , i 'd go on scout camp .
but no , the audience is meant to get some entertainment factor out of this , but i 'm not quite sure how .
the supernatural parts of the film are actually interesting , especially if close attention is paid to the story developing first twenty minutes .
with no music and no budget to work with , the film has to depend on natural , psychological scares , which are sometimes well delivered , sometimes not .
i never really felt truly scared during any part of the film , although there is a small sense of fear underlying throughout the film .
however , because the actors are so irritating , the scares are lost when it eventually reverts back to heather saying ' what the f * ck is that ? '
a lot , and mike giggling like a loony .
there 's also the niggling fact that these student filmmakers do some really stupid things .
the main problem is the fact that even though these hapless bunch could be killed at any moment , and are hopelessly lost , heather still insists on filming it all .
the film gives a half hearted reason why she should want to do this , but it is n't very convincing .
also , the students have no idea how to survive in the woods , such as following a large river flowing through the woods to civilisation .
there are also some parts where the ' amateur ' camcorder footage is obviously staged , heather 's apology being a major one .
the blair witch project , in the end , just fails to deliver .
i suppose if you 've been lost camping before , the film may deliver some chills , but this is no use for the other 99 % of the paying audience who have n't been lost in the woods .
apart from the final minutes , the film is mind boggingly unscary , and the shouting matches get hideously dull .
the spook scenes are short and far between , and any other horror movie could probably achieve the same amount of fear that these scenes provide .
although a good idea ,
it 's not executed well enough to be a fun , scary cinema experience .
it 's a worrying fact when the website ( http : //www . blairwitch .
com ) is better than the film .
Example Output: N

Example Input: when i ponder childhood memories past , one of the things that always springs immediately to mind is watching the " inspector gadget " tv show with my older brother .
truth be told , we were rabid fanatics ; our version of cowboys and indians was chasing each other around our coffee table to the theme tune , alternating who would get to be gadget and who would be stuck playing the part of dr .
claw , the inspector 's arch nemesis .
i was never a biggie on nostalgia , but you just ca n't help but have fond memories of something like that .
sometimes i even find myself up at 4 am watching re - runs of my favorite episodes , trying to recapture some of that sense of wonder i felt as a kid .
at the very least , i was expecting the new film version of the classic television series to have at least some kind of similar effect on me .
despite how horrid a film may be , the simple task of rekindling even a slight feeling of nostalgia is pretty tough to screw up .
so back i sat , with minimum expectations of what the movie would deliver ( let 's face it ; exactly how good can a live - action disney film really be ? ) .
i was wise enough to steer clear from the likes of mr .
magoo and george of the jungle ( two previous disney adaptations ) ,
and i wish to god that i had been sharp enough to skip gadget as well
.
rarely has a movie left me with such an utter feeling of emptiness .
as everyone else was getting up to exit the screening room after the movie had completed its assault on mankind , i was left sitting there , absolutely speechless and totally dumbfounded at what i had just seen
.
can something this awful
truly exist in such an evolved world ?
right from the beginning , i knew i was in trouble .
in the opening scenes , each character is introduced as if their sole purpose is to just be , to simply serve as real - life duplicates of their cartoon clones .
when referring to them , people almost yell in fear that the audience will not catch on as to who a certain character is supposed to be ( " oh , hi penny !
is brain with you ? " ) . creating one - dimensional replicas is one thing ; having mere names take the place of them is quite another .
the " plot " , shall we call it , stays fairly in tune with the original series .
matthew broderick stars as john brown ( how creative is that ? ) , a security guard who is horribly injured by a pack of ruthless businessmen headed by scolex ( why , rupert everett ,
for the love of god
why ? ? ? ! ! !
) , who himself is transformed into claw by an unfortunate chain of events .
brown is then rescued and used as a prototype for a new law - enforcement technology wherein he 's joined with various machine parts and some nifty gadgets to form ( drumroll , please ) . . .
inspector gadget !
> from here on out
, the movie becomes a hodgepodge of stupid dialog and confusing situations
( although , to be fair , my confusion could have been caused by the virtual concussion the film was inflicting upon my fragile mind ) .
there 's something about an evil gadget taking over the city ( his first crime must have been swiping matt dillon 's dentures from there 's something about mary ) and it all ends with ( what else ? )
a bunch of post - credit nonsense and a cameo by don adams himself .
to be honest , i was n't much paying attention to these " treats " .
i was just glad that it was over .
Example Output:
N