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

Example Input: what would inspire someone who can not write or act to pen and star in a movie ?
a better question , what would inspire a studio to produce said movie ? if you have an answer , let me know .
foolish , the new movie written by and starring master p is a jaw - droppingly horrible film , one with no redeeming value
socially , cinematically or otherwise .
comedically it has some potential , but only in its stand - up comedy moments , which i can turn on comedy central for .
master p stars as fifty dollah '
( beat that ! )
as a mobster ( i think ) who is trying to start a comedy club / act with his little brother foolish ( eddie griffin ) .
but the two of them have to deal with an angry mob boss ( played by andrew dice clay , for the very first time entertaining ) , a stubborn club owner and family problems ( the latter in foolish is a perfect example of roger ebert 's " idiot plot ,
" if everyone here was n't an idiot , there would be no problem ) so what does foolish have to offer beside a bunch of idiotic character names ?
not a hell of a lot .
as i have mentioned , master p can not act or write
.
he acts like the rapper that he is .
the occasional despair that his script requires him to exhibit is excruciatingly forced , as are his warm and fuzzy scenes with his little bro .
as for his script -- well , i suppose he delivers what one would expect from a musical artist with no previous screenwriting experience .
if you have n't yet figured it out , that is not saying much .
co - star eddie griffin ( really the star of the show ) is quite a different story .
the fact of the matter is that griffin , whose most significant screen outing to date is probably the mildly successful tv show malcolm and eddie on the fledgling upn network , is an extremely talented comedian , stand - up and otherwise .
he has much in common with chris tucker ( rush hour , money talks ) in how quickly and effortlessly his speech flows from his lips .
he spouts profanity with impressive dexterity ( to the extent which that can be done ) , and
while i hope that does not become his trademark it works in a few scenes in this movie .
and indeed , i laughed at a few stand - up scenes here , but from a feature - length movie i expect more .
foolish provided me with no reason to care for these characters .
every scene which has any potential for dramatic impact is effectively diffused by either a stupid joke ( in a scene where tension escalates between the two brothers , foolish blurts out towards his jewelry - sporting sibling " you lay one hand on me and this cemetary is going to be a gold rush " ) or something even more idiotic such as foolish smashing his own car ( to which i said , a bit too loudly for the occasion
" huh ?
" ) after getting slightly upset with his wife . believe me when i say that there is nothing in foolish that warrants parting with your hard - earned $ 8 .
you 'll get more laughs from watching 30 minutes of comedy central or any virtually any sitcom if you do n't have cable .
eddie griffin fans may enjoy this derivative ( although offensive ) yarn , but everyone else should stay the hell away . & # 137 ;
Example Output: N

Example Input: a movie like mortal kombat : annihilation works ( and must be reviewed on ) multiple levels .
first , there 's the rampant usage of randian subtext that pervades the entire movie .
but occasionaly , almost as if making an ironic , self - depreciating remark , the movie tosses in clearly marxist imagery .
no no . . .
just kidding .
had you going there for a moment , did n't i ?
in all seriousness however , and to be fair to the movie , it * is * necessary to provide two viewpoints : that of a movie watcher unfamiliar ( or only marginally familiar ) with the whole mortal kombat phenomenon , and that of a fan of the first movie and/or a fan of the games .
the first movie ( mortal kombat ( 1995 ) ) concerned itself with a martial arts tournament that would decide the fate of earth ( and it 's 5 billion inhabitants ) .
the mortals won , and in theory this should have prevented the emperor shao khan from taking over the earth .
unfortunately , shao khan was a poor loser , and the very final scene in mortal kombat showed him arriving anyway , ready to take over the planet , as our heroes assumed a fighting stance .
the first movie was extraordinarily entertaining for those ( like myself ) who are fans of the game .
i 'd even go so far as to say that many folks who did n't know about the game probably enjoyed the movie .
the writers and directors knew the limitations of both their cast and of the basic story itself , and they did n't try to overachieve .
there were a lot of really cool fight scenes ( with really cool accompanying music ) , intersperesed with some distracting ( but ultimately non - intrusive ) bits of fluff passing itself off as a plot .
and , as we know , the movie was a smashing success at the box office .
mortal kombat :
annihilation picks up precisely where that movie left off , with some introductory exposition to clue in those who may not have seen the first movie .
shao khan has decided that he 's going to take over the earth
* anyways * , and to hell with some silly rule about mortals winning the tournament .
thereafter follows approximately 85 minutes of film that alternates between being confused , being trite , being silly , and being just plain stupid .
one gets the general impression that the producers of the movie thought " hey , that last movie was such a success that we can get more money and make a * real * movie now . " too bad they did n't simply stick with the formula from the first movie .
i could write volumes about the things that are wrong with this picture , but here are the high points :
* the acting is truly bad .
sandra hess ( playing the sonya blade character ) is particularly execrable , especially in scenes where she tries to convince us that she loved johnny cage ( a character from the first movie who gets greased at the beginning of this movie ) .
* in one of the worst pieces of mis - casting
i think i 've * ever * seen , james remar plays raiden , the god of thunder .
in the first movie , christopher lambert played raiden and played his character as though he was in on the joke :
a french actor playing a japanese thunder god being revered by chinese mystics .
i generally like it when actors are cast against type ( tim " tiny " lister , jr . being cast as the president of the u . s .
in the fifth element , for example ) , and remar has always been one of my favorite " utility " actors but he 's so totally wrong for this part that he does n't even have the luxury of amused self - awareness .
*
there are too many characters that are introduced as being potentially important , but then never seen again .
* there are a number of completely meaningless story sidetracks , including a muddled scene where liu kang ( robin shou ) seeks out nightwolf ( litefoot ) , has a mystical hallucination , and then wanders off with jade ( irina pantaeva ) .
for these reasons ( and many others ) , i can only give the movie a 2 . . . . . . unless you 're a huge fan of the games and/or the first movie .
in that case , the following critiques also apply : * sandra hess , while being an even worse actress than bridgette wilson ( who played sonya blade in the first movie ) , is much more convincing as a fighter .
wilson looked like she was simply mimicing some movements taught to her by the fight choreographer .
hess looks like she actually knows some martial arts , and puts together a much more believable fight scene .
* in the fights , each of the characters does at least * one * thing they do in the game ( and often more ) .
sonya does her " kiss of death , " jax does his " earthquake , " liu kang does his " animality , " and so on .
a big bonus for those of us who were looking for similar moves in the first movie and found them only rarely .
*
there are n't as many fight scenes in this movie as there were in the first , because the folks making the movie mistakenly try to hang a more robust plot in between .
silly , silly folks .
and the lamest fight involved two of the women in what turns into a mud - wrestling match .
lame and so obviously sexist
even i ( politically incorrect , for the most part ) noticed and remarked upon it .
* the special effects are generally better , except for the final fight scene between the emporer and liu kang in which both perform their " animalities .
" motaro and sheeva are both more convincing and lifelike than goro was in the first movie .
for folks like myself who loved the first movie and enjoy the games , i give this a 5 .
you 'll probably like it , but not nearly as much as you liked the first one .
Example Output: N

Example Input: jessica lange is one of the most inconsistent actresses working today .
from time - to - time , she blows away audiences with powerful , intense performances .
on the other hand , this is the same woman who made her jaw - droppingly awful feature debut in dino delaurentiis ' king kong .
and , much as lange would probably prefer movie - goers to develop amnesia regarding that particular entry on her resume , every once in a while she does work that is reminiscent of it , if only in quality .
hush is one such example .
lange is so bad here that she might have been fun to watch if the rest of the film was n't such a prime example of motion picture tedium .
the film opens , as many so - called " psychological thrillers " do , by posing as a light drama .
we are introduced to jackson ( johnathon schaech , last encounter in tom hanks ' that thing you do ! )
and helen ( gwyneth paltrow ) , a picture perfect young couple who are very much in love .
jackson is taking helen home for the holidays so she can meet his mother , martha ( lange ) .
the moment i first saw martha , i started looking for fangs .
soon , the wicked witch of the east is plotting a way for her son to get helen pregnant ( this involves poking a hole in a diaphragm ) .
once that goal is accomplished , she manipulates events so that the expecting couple moves out of new york city to the horse farm where she lives . as long as she gets her way , martha is a perfectly amicable person , but when helen defies her , it 's a declaration of war .
hush has three very simple problems : it 's incredibly dumb , it 's incredibly boring , and it 's incredibly predictable
( at least up to the stupefying ending ) .
this film has absolutely nothing to recommend it , with the exception of a couple of nice shots of snow - covered fields and a quick glimpse of gwyneth paltrow 's bare buttocks .
frankly , it 's embarrassing to watch a respected actress of lange 's stature give a performance like this -- it 's like a bad blanche dubois ( the role she played in a 1995 tv version of a streetcar named desire ) .
meanwhile , paltrow does her best to get through her dialogue without gaping at the stupidity of some of her lines , and schaech attempts a passable imitation of an inanimate object .
as in all psychological thrillers , the battle lines are clearly drawn .
here , it 's mom and against wife , with jackson caught in the middle .
of course , since schaech 's character is poorly - developed and badly acted , it 's impossible to say how he feels about being in that situation .
maybe someone should ask him if he 's familiar with oedipus .
martha is , of course , the evil one .
how do we know she 's evil ?
she smokes cigarettes and drinks hard liquor -- two sure signs that the devil is at work .
on the other hand , helen is a good girl .
the evidence for this is that she 's nice to old ladies and treasures a locket with a picture of her dead parents .
that 's about it for character development .
beyond that point , hush is just a series of increasingly hard - to - swallow coincidences , contrivances , and moronic plot twists .
however , the first 85 minutes are just a warm - up for the ending , which is as anticlimactic as it is profoundly dissatisfying .
i ca n't imagine anyone , no matter what they thought of the movie as a whole , liking this conclusion .
either there was some serious last - minute editing or someone left out a few pages of the script .
before the climax , i disliked hush ; by the time the end credits started ,
i hated it .
viewers invest something in every movie they watch , no matter how good or bad it is . cheating them like this is offensive and unpardonable .
most entries into this worn - out , worm - eaten genre are n't especially good .
films like consenting adults , the hand that rocks the cradle , and single white female rely on stock plots and predictable twists to propel the narrative along .
in general , however , they 're directed with a degree of competence that assures a level of sustained tension .
that 's not the case with really bad thrillers like this , which fail to generate even a momentary heart palpitation -- the characters are too bland and the plot is too uninvolving for anyone in the audience to care .
indeed , the title of this movie probably refers to what the producers hope viewers will do in lieu of telling their friends what they really think of this sorry piece of celluloid .
Example Output:
N