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

Example input: 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 )
Example output: N
Example explanation: The phrases used in the review convey a negative sentiment (e.g. "presents it in a very bad package").
Q: john sayles ' " men with guns " is about what happens to a society when brute force and constant threat of violence are the only means of gaining and maintaining power .
the film takes place in an unnamed central american country , where the men with guns are the rulers .
most of the country is divided into tiny segments - some are controlled by guerrillas with guns , some are controlled by army soldiers with guns , and all the spaces in - between are controlled by thieves , bandits , and terrorists .
all people not fitting one of those descriptions are defined only by their powerlessness .
however , like so many central american countries , this one also features modernity .
there is an unnamed capital city that bears all the hallmarks of contemporary civilization : skyscrapers , hospitals , televisions , highways , etc .
but , it might as well be in another country because those who live in the comforts of the city have either decided to ignore the violence ravaging the rest of the land , or else they are simply ignorant of it .
the film 's main character , dr .
fuentes ( federico luppi ) falls into the latter category .
one of his patients , an army general , describes him as the most educated man he has ever met , and also the most naive .
fuentes is a true liberal , a caring man who thinks he can cure the ills of his country by fighting bacteria and ignorance among the indigenous indians .
with government assistance , he has trained a large group of eager young medical students and sent them into the rainforest to cure and educate .
this program was to be his legacy , and he repeats over and over that it was a good idea .
however , when he ventures into that same rainforest to visit his prot ?
g
? s , he finds that things have not turned out as he has envisioned .
as he travels deeper into the forest , going from village to village , the story is always the same : the doctors were all killed by either the guerrillas or the army soldiers , usually for helping the other .
when dr .
fuentes asks a village woman why the army killed one of the doctors , she replies simply , " because they had guns , and we did n't . " rational science and all its attempts to cure have been wiped out by the men with guns , because others ' sickness and ignorance helps them maintain power .
dr .
fuentes picks up several companions during his journey , all of whom are characterized by their loss .
first , there is a young boy named conejo ( dan rivera gonz ?
lez ) , who has neither a mother nor a father .
next , fuentes crosses paths with a thief named domingo ( dami ? n delgado ) , who deserted the army because he was tired of being jeered into committing murderous atrocities .
through his ordeal in the army , domingo has lost most of his self - respect , and defines himself only by his pistol .
along the way , the group also picks up padre portillo ( dami ?
n
alc ?
zar ) , a priest who has lost his faith .
as domingo is running from the army , so is portillo - he has been labeled a guerrilla sympathizer , and ran away from the village in which he was preaching .
last , the group takes on a mute girl named graciela ( tania cruz ) , who has n't spoken since she was raped two years earlier , her innocence and even her will to live forcefully taken from her .
sayles two major strengths as a director - characters and setting - are abundantly evident in " men with guns .
"
( like many of his films , sayles might have tightened this one somewhat in the editing room , but a longer - than - necessary running time is a sin almost always committed when the director is also the editor . )
he creates fascinating , complex characters , especially dr .
fuentes and domingo .
their uneasy relationship is also somewhat humorous in context of the film 's overarching theme of violence as power - domingo 's attempts to control fuentes with his revolver are constantly undermined by fuentes ' belief that the revolver is unloaded ( at first it is , but later is is n't ) .
the setting is also as thick with detail as the rainforest itself .
sayles knows how to bring a location to life , whether it be an early twentieth - century coal mining town in " matewan " ( 1987 ) or a contemporary texas / mexico bordertown in " lone star " ( 1996 ) .
sayles is not a particularly inventive director - he likes to let his actors do most of the work - but he and cinematographer slavomir idziak ( " gattaca " ) successfully evoke both the beauty and the danger of the central american terrain .
sayles also maintains a strong sense of authenticity by filming everything on location in mexico , using all latin american actors , and having all the dialogue spoken in either spanish or native indian dialects .
the one exception is a couple of bumbling american tourists who work not only as comic relief , but as evidence of just how clueless the united states is about what is going on a few hundred miles south of the texas border .
it would not be a stretch to say that " men with guns " is a depressing film .
in fact , the two feelings it evokes most are hopelessness and failure .
in addition to loss , the main characters are also failures at something , whether that be dr .
fuentes failure to change anything through medicine , or padre portillo 's inability to stand up and be the martyr he always dreamed of being .
nevertheless , it is bleak material sayles has chosen , and he deals with it accordingly .
the last shot of the film does offer a hint of hope , even in a world where , as one character puts it , " nobody refuses the men with guns .
"
A:
P