In this task, you must classify if a given review is positive/negative, indicating your answer as P or N.
--------
Question: another formula ' feel good ' quirky comedy from the british isles , much like " waking ned devine , " and a host of other popular low budget movies that turned a nifty profit off a thin story line .
it is filled with likable establishment types living in a quaint town , such as tolerant vicars and policemen , plenty of eccentrics , and of locals who stick together through thick and thin .
the strength of this film lies in its rational theme , that smoking pot should be legalized since it is even less dangerous than drinking alcohol .
the film is tolerable until after its first hour , it then falls completely apart , becoming just too absurd to consider as anything but
sitcom fluff gone completely bananas .
but its long overdue message of decriminalization for certain drugs is on target and allows the film to , at least , be viewed as containing a pertinent message .
its message is especially appropriate nowadays considering the ' war on drugs '
is about to be escalated into colombia .
the drug war has been a total failure so far and with no hope of it being won by law enforcement methods in the future , it has so far just ended up causing america 's jails to be overcrowded with non - violent drug prisoners and offers zero hope of curtailing america 's drug usage and drug supply .
billions of dollars have just been allocated by congress to get officially involved in the colombian civil war , by backing a corrupt government ( remember vietnam ! )
with the idea that military might could stop the cocaine and marijuana harvests in that country .
everything about this proposed action smacks of vietnam , with this scenario closer to home , so
what probably awaits such an effort is a more futile result than the other war .
the film 's mild theme of showing squares getting into the weed business and finding it acceptable by the public , something that should have been accepted some 40 years ago , is a theme long overdue for public acceptance , but one that is better received late than never .
there has to be some common sense in distinguishing what drugs should be legalized and how to educate the public on this , rather than making it a police matter altogether .
the film opens in a quaint cornish seaside village at the funeral of the husband of a middle - aged woman , grace ( brenda blethyn ) , who fell out of an airplane , evidently committing suicide .
the widow soon finds out her husband was a bigger bastard than she imagined .
he left her with a stack of enormous bills and put up , without her knowledge , their comfortable 300 year old house as collateral for a failed business venture by taking out a second mortgage .
the widow finds herself bankrupt and with no marketable skills to pay back her husband 's enormous debts and prevent her from losing the house and becoming homeless .
she also knows that he was having an affair with a sophisticated woman from london , honey ( quick ) .
what makes the affair doubly unsatisfying , is that when conferring with honey , she finds out that he was a tiger with her in bed but refrained from having sex with her .
even though the locals try to help the bankrupt widow out as best they can , the creditors swoop down on her like vultures .
her gardener and handyman , matthew ( ferguson ) , decides to stay on with her , despite his last check bouncing . since she is an expert amateur horticulturist , he convinces her to help him revive his hemp plants , which he grows for private use .
the two soon see this as a possibly big business opportunity , as grace works miracles with the plants which turn out to be high - quality stuff .
for grace , this is a way to save her house and get her out of debt ; for the scotsman , matthew , it offers a chance for him to continue to live in this beautiful village and earn enough money to marry his fisherman girlfriend nicky ( valerie ) .
the locals all let the illegal activities go on undisturbed :
the police sergeant ( campbell ) pretends not to notice what the bright lights in grace 's greenhouse is for , the friendly vicar ( phillips ) counsels about the wisdom of not taking action over something that you ca n't control , and the doctor ( clunes ) enjoys smoking the weed for recreation .
the story becomes incredulous when grace decides to go to london and score with a big - time drug dealer instead of having matthew go , because she finds out nicky is pregnant and does n't want matthew to end up in jail .
it is interesting to note , that no one thinks smoking grass is bad for you , only that one can go to jail .
the scene with grace on portobello road in the notting hill section of london , trying to find a drug dealer , while dressed out of place , in a white dress and hat one would wear to a tea party in cornwall but not on the streets of notting hill while looking to make a drug deal , was completely hokey and the film descended into a huge black hole , whereby it never recovered its dignity .
the film moves into the formula mode , whereas grace beats the odds against her failing to survive , as she meets an international drug dealer , a frenchman ( tcheky karyo ) , who is first seen threatening to cut off her fingers but later becomes her business partner and husband as she becomes a millionaire and writes a best selling fiction book about her experiences , thereby becoming a celebrity .
things work out in a ridiculous way , where there is a total breakdown in the character development of grace , where this matronly figure suddenly becomes merely a cartoon figure instead of live flesh and blood .
there are a lot of silly giggles that come forth and the film has just enough of an acting performance by brenda blethyn to breathe air into it before it comes to its belated finale , as it drones on with its transparently gratuitous upbeat tone , until it makes the audience feel good that the sweet old lady succeeded .
this ' unhip ' film leaves one with the impression that smoking and growing pot is silly , but should be tolerated as something
naughty middle - aged widows screwed by their terrible former husbands must do in order not to remain destitute .
ummm !

Answer: N

Question: capsule : trippy , hyperspeed action machine from hong kong 's accomplished tsui hark .
van damme and rodman have nice chemistry
, the stunts are eyepopping , and stuff gets blowed up real good ; what more do you want ?
i admit i was all set to loathe double team ; it reeked of cheapjack timing - oriented marketing ( stick dennis rodman in a movie , quick , while he 's hot , and do something about jean - claude van damme 's flagging career while we 're at it ! ) .
surprise -- double team transcends its dumb roots and turns out to be a mess of fun
.
bring some friends , get some pretzels , and have a blast .
van damme is jack quinn , an ex - agent who is brought back in for " one last mission " -- you 'd think any spy worth his shoe phone would run like hell when he hears those words .
but van damme 's character has a pregnant wife who 's also a sculptor , and some unpleasant pressure gets used to get him to come through on this mission .
he 's been assigned to take down an old enemy , a terrorist named stavros ( mickey rourke , looking oddly subdued ) , who may be back up to his old tricks .
in the first showdown between quinn and stavros , the movie wears its ambitions proudly on its sleeve : nonstop action .
an amusement park , a hospital , a private " retired spy " 's retreat , most of rome , various houses , planes , cars and other modes of transport , and the coliseum ( ! )
all become arenas for some of the most bone - rattling shoot - outs and punch - outs filmed .
they are better seen than described and are reason enough to see the film : one jaw - dropping scene has van damme taking on a man who uses a switchblade with his * feet * .
( van damme is a good , dextrous athlete and fighter , but he is often upstaged . )
there are other nice touches .
stavros and quinn both want the same thing : to retire in peace with their families .
that ambition ties them together in various ways , and also humanizes them a bit .
one of the things about hk action movies is that there 's always some form of human element , and that 's carried over into this movie as well .
it gives weight to scenes that would otherwise be forgettable .
also good is dennis rodman , playing a weapons dealer named yaz -- a character who sticks out like a fistful of broken fingers and who is funny just standing there .
rodman is natural on screen ; he 's fun to watch , especially when slinging bad guys like basketballs , and deserves to get a movie of his own , based on what 's seen here : a lightweight , fast - moving entertainment
that showcases all of its pieces excellently .

Answer: P

Question: the first in a very long list of things wrong with " i still know what you did last summer " is the title .
think about it for a second .
if the last movie was called " i know what you did last summer " , would n't the next movie have to be
" i still know what you did two summers ago " ?
if anyone working on this movie had an i .
q .
greater than five would have thought about it logically and said , " hey . . .
wait a minute " .
but alas , the people behind this film are obviously idiots , so i wo n't hold them to that .
what i will hold them to is the fact that they have a pretty bad movie on their hands , even for a teenage slasher flick .
i guess i 'm one of the few critics who actually kind of liked the original film ( emphasis on the " kind of " ) .
it was n't great or anything and maybe not even necessarily good , but at least it did n't have me glancing at my watch every minute
or so
like it 's sequel did .
there are just so many problems with this movie that it 's hard trying to figure out where to start .
first of all , i guess , is the setting .
the movie offers no rational reason why the film had to take place in the bahamas , other than the fact that the producers wanted a seaside setting .
exactly why does the fisherman want to go through all the trouble of faking a radio contest to get julie james ( jennifer love hewitt , one of the only survivors of the first film ) and her new college buddies out to the islands before he hacks them up ?
the movie suffers from this kind of logic all the way through .
in one scene , julie is in a tanning booth at a deserted gym when the hooked fisherman with the slicker comes in and seals up the booth so the damsel in distress ca n't get out , no matter how hard she tries .
when julie discovers she 's going to slowly fry to death , she screams for help and her friends come to her rescue .
now , this is all fine and dandy except for one thing ; instead of spending five minutes trying to bust open the booth , why not just turn the freakin ' thing off ?
in another scene , one of the characters , after having their significant other all but decapitated by the man in the slicker , says to julie , " just do n't tell anybody it rained the whole time .
"
oh yeah , i 've just been terrorized by a hook wielding sociopath and had some of my best friends gruesomely slaughtered , but hey , i 'll crack jokes anyway .
after all , it is in the script .
the film 's only saving graces are a few well - executed suspense sequences and a really cool cameo by the " re - animator himself , jeffrey combs .
he brings some good comic relief and life to an otherwise limp movie .
way to go , jeffrey .
i have a hunch that the reason this film fizzles while the first one at least kept it 's head above water is the recent absence of writer kevin williamson .
with " scream " and even it 's sequel , he displayed a real talent as a screenwriter .
his ear for dialogue and the terrific endings he puts on all his films make him a standout from all the rest of the horror writers , and i think " i still know " has really suffered by not having him on board .
the cool atmosphere is still there this time around , but i just did n't like the characters or the writing as much as i did in the first one .
even though the movie does n't have williamson , it still has a hacky ending , trying to do what kevin did with the first two " scream " s by ( some may consider this a spoiler , but if you have seen any horror movies whatsoever , then you should be able to guess the identity of the madman within twenty minutes ) having two killers and , this time , having one of them being a family member to the other .
i think someone in the audience put it best when , after the movie had ended with another " the killer is back !
" cliffhanger , he said " who is this time , the grandma ?
" all in all , " i still know " tries to be as successful as the first the film was , but
really fails in the attempt .
i mean , it 's okay when slasher movies rip - off each other , but
when they start copying themselves . . .

Answer:
N