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: one can not observe a star trek movie and expect to see serious science fiction .
the purpose of star trek is to provide flashy , innocent fun .
sometimes the stories are compelling .
sometimes they 're not .
but , with the exception of the first film in the series ( which provides little more than endless shots of amazed faces ) , i 've never been bored by any of the enterprise 's numerous missions .
star trek : insurrection is no exception .
the film has gotten some negative reviews ( a friend of mine actually thinks it 's the worst in the series ) , but i 'm not really sure why .
it 's an exciting , often hilarious movie that engaged me and left me ready for the next star trek film .
some say it 's a bit too light , and more of a long episode than a film .
others say the special effects are cheesy and that it 's boring .
i simply enjoyed the film .
insurrection , which is the second film to feature strictly the next generation cast , introduces us to a race of people called the ba'ku ; the ba'ku are very old ( most of them are about three hundred years old ) , but they actually appear younger with age due to strange radiation in the rings of their planet .
of course , these peaceful people ca n't horde this fountain of youth all for themselves ?
leave it up to their archenemies , the son'a , led by ru'afo ( f . murray abraham ) , to mess everything up .
the son'a , who are horribly disfigured and rely on daily reconstructive surgery to be aesthetically acceptable , strike a deal with the federation to move the ba'ku elsewhere and exploit the secret to keep their race from dying .
that 's when captain picard ( patrick stewart ) steps in : he realizes that moving the ba'ku would kill them
( it also helps that he falls in love with a ba'ku woman ( donna murphy ) ) .
so , with his trusty crew , picard defies the federation to keep the ba'ku in their natural habitat .
when dealing with a series with as much history as this , it 's not entirely necessary to re - introduce your characters with each episode .
this is why i believe non - fans have a hard time getting into star trek ; in order to enjoy it , one has to understand how to approach it .
insurrection , however
, does a surprisingly good job of us new aspects of the characters .
stewart is bold as always , a magnetic screen presence and perfectly capable of holding an entire film together .
jonathan frakes , who also directed , is funny as commander riker ; a subplot with data ( brent spiner ) discovering his lost childhood is fairly interesting ; and abraham makes a perfect star trek villain , overacting like crazy .
frakes showed similar aptitude for direction in first contact ; insurrection is an exciting film , with some really attractive special effects and a lot of good action .
this is apparently the first star trek film to utilize computer animation , and the result is very pleasing to the eye
: particularly in the climactic scenes , in which the son'a employ a giant space ship to suck up the rings of the ba'ku planet , the special effects have a clean , impressively sharp look .
if i have any complaint about the film , it 's that it tries to take a moral stance when it 's not very appropriate to do so .
i do n't think it 's that big of a deal that the federation wanted to move 600 ba'ku in order to save the lives of thousands .
better yet , why could n't they have co - existed ?
insurrection feels a little to light to spring these kinds of big moral questions on the audience .
with it 's inherent camp factor , the star trek series does n't seem well - equipped to deal with issues like this .
i prefer to just enjoy the spectacle .
A:
P