You will be given a definition of a task first, then an example. Follow the example to solve a new instance of the task.
In this task, you must classify if a given review is positive/negative, indicating your answer as P or N.

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 )
Solution: N
Why? The phrases used in the review convey a negative sentiment (e.g. "presents it in a very bad package").

New input: note : some may consider portions of the following text to be spoilers . be forewarned .
to assess alex cox 's film the winner as a loser would be so indolent .
it would be derisive .
it would be glib .
it would be dismissive .
it would be entirely accurate .
rarely have i seen a film as excruciatingly annoying as the winner , a would - be comedy which quickly proves to be tedious , unfunny , and unengaging .
the film attempts to be fresh and quirky , utilising a myriad of colourful characters to weave its absurd tale , but appears to overlook the fact that nobody in the film is remotely interesting and that all of the characters are essentially preposterous
.
the film is set in las vegas , and the focus in the winner is on philip ( vincent d'onofrio ) , an aloof , naive young man blessed with the odd gift of luck ; he virtually can not lose at the tables .
despite this prodigious talent , philip is perpetually mournful and quite indifferent about his gambling fortunes , neither taking joy in his winnings nor having the foresight to mask his abilities .
consequently , he becomes an easy target for those who would ride upon his coattails and take advantage of his talent .
louise ( rebecca demornay ) , a sultry lounge singer , insinuates herself into philip 's life for the purpose of swindling him , while philip 's estranged brother ( and , conveniently , louise 's ex - beau ) johnny ( michael madsen ) arrives on the scene .
( to add some colour , johnny also happens to be toting their father 's corpse , sans one hand . )
meanwhile , philip is also befriended by a trio of low - rent , opportunists ( frank whaley , billy bob thornton , and richard edson ) , who have every intention of taking advantage of their new buddy 's gift with the dice .
serenely overlooking the chaos from behind the scenes is the casino owner ( delroy lindo ) ; it is probably not giving away much to reveal that his role in the winner is essentially that alluded to at the end of the flashy sequence in martin scorsese 's casino which details the organization hierarchy of a casino 's operations - he * is * the eye in the sky .
it could be maddening to endure a film whose central protagonist is so oblivious of the ongoing blatant manipulation , but fortunately this is not the case in the winner , if only because our sadsack hero is such a sap ;
not even remotely sympathetic or compelling , it becomes impossible to root for philip or even care about his fate , and the would - be swindlers of philip 's fortunes are all drawn out as such ludicrous , transparent buffoons with entirely unimaginative and uninteresting schemes that one watches the winner with a complete sense of disinterest .
it is a shame , as the winner features a talented cast - mr .
d'onofrio is an underrated and gifted actor with a huge range ;
mr .
lindo has a remarkable screen presence which infiltrates every film in which he appears ; mr .
madsen , ms .
demornay , and mr .
whaley have all done good work in the past .
none of the actors in the winner are in top form here , and this film wo n't likely be a prized addition to their respective resumes .
director alex cox does what he can with wendy riss ' screenplay , and it is to his credit that this film at no point feels like an adaptation of a stage play ; i was startled to learn that the winner was in fact based upon one .
while tedious , the film is well - paced and does not meander , but it would be near - impossible task for mr .
cox
( or , for that matter , virtually any other director that comes to mind ) to overcome the film 's widespread shortcomings in plot and characterization .
to his credit , my understanding is that he has chosen to distance himself from the project in acknowledgement of its deficiencies .
i caught the winner at its world premiere at the toronto international film festival in september 1996 , and in fairness it is entirely possible that the film has been extensively revamped since then due to the lacklustre audience reaction generated
- there were more walkouts on this film than any of the others
i screened .
to be honest , though , i could n't begin to isolate what could be done to this film to improve it - i assume that throwing the whole thing out and starting over is out of the question .
the winner has apparently played on cable television in the united states and is beginning a limited theatrical release at the time of this writing .
the film has a nice upbeat score by pray for rain , but i am honestly not being facetious when i state that the thing i treasured most about my screening of the winner was the bag of popcorn upon which i was munching .
Solution:
N