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

Let me give you an example: plot : two teen couples go to a church party , drink and then drive .
they get into an accident .
one of the guys dies , but his girlfriend continues to see him in her life , and has nightmares .
what 's the deal ?
watch the movie and " sorta " find out . . .
critique : a mind - fuck movie for the teen generation that touches on a very cool idea , but presents it in a very bad package .
which is what makes this review an even harder one to write , since i generally applaud films which attempt to break the mold , mess with your head and such ( lost highway & memento ) , but there are good and bad ways of making all types of films , and these folks just did n't snag this one correctly
.
they seem to have taken this pretty neat concept , but executed it terribly .
so what are the problems with the movie ?
well , its main problem is that it 's simply too jumbled
.
it starts off " normal " but then downshifts into this " fantasy " world in which you , as an audience member ,
have no idea what 's going on
.
there are dreams , there are characters coming back from the dead , there are others who look like the dead , there are strange apparitions , there are disappearances , there are a looooot of chase scenes , there are tons of weird things that happen , and most of it is simply not explained .
now i personally do n't mind trying to unravel a film every now and then , but when all it does is give me the same clue over and over again , i get kind of fed up after a while , which is this film 's biggest problem .
it 's obviously got this big secret to hide , but it seems to want to hide it completely until its final five minutes .
and do they make things entertaining , thrilling or even engaging , in the meantime ?
not really .
the sad part is that the arrow and i both dig on flicks like this , so we actually figured most of it out by the half - way point , so all of the strangeness after that did start to make a little bit of sense , but it still did n't the make the film all that more entertaining .
i guess the bottom line with movies like this is that you should always make sure that the audience is " into it " even before they are given the secret password to enter your world of understanding .
i mean , showing melissa sagemiller running away from visions for about 20 minutes throughout the movie is just plain lazy ! !
okay , we get it .
. .
there are people chasing her and we do n't know who they are .
do we really need to see it over and over again ?
how about giving us different scenes offering further insight into all of the strangeness going down in the movie ?
apparently , the studio took this film away from its director and chopped it up themselves , and it shows .
there might 've been a pretty decent teen mind - fuck movie in here somewhere , but i guess " the suits " decided that turning it into a music video with little edge , would make more sense .
the actors are pretty good for the most part , although wes bentley just seemed to be playing the exact same character that he did in american beauty , only in a new neighborhood .
but my biggest kudos go out to sagemiller , who holds her own throughout the entire film , and actually has you feeling her character 's unraveling .
overall , the film does n't stick
because it does n't entertain , it 's confusing , it rarely excites and
it feels pretty redundant for most of its runtime , despite a pretty cool ending and explanation to all of the craziness that came before it .
oh ,
and by the way , this is not a horror or teen slasher flick . . .
it 's just packaged to look that way because someone is apparently assuming that the genre is still hot with the kids .
it also wrapped production two years ago and has been sitting on the shelves ever since .
whatever . .
. skip it !
where 's joblo coming from ?
a nightmare of elm street 3 ( 7/10 ) - blair witch 2 ( 7/10 ) - the crow ( 9/10 ) - the crow : salvation ( 4/10 )
- lost highway ( 10/10 ) - memento ( 10/10 ) - the others ( 9/10 ) - stir of echoes ( 8/10 )
The answer to this example can be: N
Here is why: The phrases used in the review convey a negative sentiment (e.g. "presents it in a very bad package").

OK. solve this:
" knock off " is exactly that :
a cheap knock off of an action movie .
it 's also the worst movie i have seen thus far this year .
i figured it would be at least a couple of months before i saw the worst film of 1998 , but alas , it has already been found .
jean - claude van damme stars as ( i think ) a designer jeans executive who discovers his half - brother has been supplying him with cheaper goods .
rob schneider plays van damme 's partner , and rochon plays . . .
actually , i have no idea who rochon was supposed to be .
she just sort of popped up halfway through without an explanation as to why she was there .
many things are not explained in this film , but i do know that for some bizarre reason , van damme seemed to be doing a jackie chan impression throughout the flick .
where chan comes off as endearing in his " normal guy " character seen in many of his films , van damme
just comes off as a wimp .
we 're never given any clear explanation as to the basis for many of his actions .
to be more clear : i did not even know who he was supposed to be until about an hour into the movie , and even then , it was not made too clear .
the film has been directed in the style of some strange film experiment gone horribly wrong .
tsui hark ( who directed van damme 's last movie , the bad , but not nearly as bad as this , " double team " ) never lets the camera rest for a second , and that 's no exaggeration .
we are even treated to a five second shot from the point of view of van damme 's foot entering a shoe .
fabulous !
seriously , though , i have no problem with directors who want to play around with film conventions , as long as they do n't get carried away .
for example , look at sam raimi .
" army of darkness " , one of his best movies , features some of the most inventive camera work i have ever seen , but raimi never lets the special effects get in the way of story .
that 's a concept that tsui ca n't seem to grasp .
the special effects and outrageous camera angles * rule
* " knock off " to the point where the audience does n't have a clue as to what 's happening any more .
another problem with the film is that it looks cheap .
the film stock used is of such low caliber
that i thought i was watching one of those chinese films shown really late at night .
and for some inexplicable reason , everyone 's voice seems to have been dubbed .
even the stars .
and even the special effects , seemingly the only aspect of the film the director actually cared about , are inconsistent
.
for example , there is a scene in which van damme drives a car out of a window .
the car slams into the ground , and the left wheel is completely destroyed .
seconds later , the car drives off at full speed .
hey , i have no problem suspending my disbelief in an action movie , but a line must be drawn somewhere .
finally , the acting .
nobody gives a good performance in this film .
van damme , an actor i usually like , is way off the mark playing " everyman " . and schneider , here to provide comic relief
i assume , is totally unfunny and over acts his way through every scene .
even the usually solid paul sorvino gives a terribly over - the - top performance
as . . .
once again , i have no idea who he was supposed to be .
in case i have n't yet made it clear enough , " knock off " is the worst movie of van damme 's career and possibly the worst movie of the decade .
and it 's not even one of those movies that 's so bad
it 's funny .
it 's too inept to be funny .
there are no redeeming factors in " knock off " and i seriously hope that every print of this film is burned to a crisp and that somehow my memory of watching the film can be erased .
Answer:
N