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

Ex Input:
synopsis : blond criminal psychologist sarah chooses to copulate with greasy tony the mysterious puerto rican rather than bearded cliff the wisecracking neighbor upstairs .
in the meantime , someone sends sarah rotting flowers , puts her name in the newspaper 's obituary column , and kills her cat .
comments : never talk to strangers ,
a colossal waste of time , moves slower than molasses in winter to arrive at a conclusion which should be obvious to the audience 20 minutes into the film .
one would n't think that two genuine movie stars , antonio banderas ( evita ) and rebecca de mornay ( hand that rocks the cradle ) , and the acerbic comic genius dennis miller ( " saturday night live " ) would be involved in such a celluloid backfire as this turkey .
not only are they in it , however , but de mornay executive produced it .
what was she thinking ?
never talk to strangers centers upon sarah , a psychologist examining the ill - tempered max , a murderer soon to stand trial .
she receives a sudden visit from her father which elicits flashbacks of some tragedy in her early childhood .
two men woo her ; tony the " security consultant " wins her over ( so they have passionate sex replete with cheesy saxophone music ) .
a lot of psychobabble is thrown around about multiple personality disorder , but the movie asks its audience not to derive the obvious conclusion between mpd and sarah , and instead offers several male characters as red herrings .
86 minutes , the running time of this cinematic mess , thus , seem like 86 hours .
a good chunk of never talk to strangers is spent upon sarah and tony .
why would the career - minded , professional sarah feel attracted to the walking steroid with a black hat called tony ?
that 's one of the film 's mysteries which are never answered .
regardless of motive , de mornay and banderas strip down and have sex several times in what passes for eroticism .
they also manage to go out before copulating occasionally -- in one of the stupidest scenes of the film , tony takes sarah to a carnival that 's * right outside *
his dingy apartment (
that way , they can hurry back and have sex quickly ) .
also , apparently , the weather changes quickly in their locale : they 're at this outdoor carnival one day before having sex ;
the next day , they 're out playing in the snow before having sex .
the filmmakers attempt to produce a suspenseful plot interspersed with tony and sarah 's " character development .
"
someone is out to get poor sarah ( though most of the audience should have figured out who before any of this starts ) . rotting flowers , a writeup in the obituary , and a beaten neighbor are just a few of the bad things which happen to her .
suspense cliche number one also occurs : whenever someone is stalked in thrillers , by any means , if the stalked has a pet , that pet will die . oftentimes , to even further the cliche
, the murdered pet is a cat ( suspense filmmakers , for some reason , just do n't like cats ) .
sarah
, in never talk to strangers , receives a package and , lo and behold , discovers her mutilated cat within .
suspense at its very derivative !
as stated before , never talk to strangers is a poor excuse for a film whose sole purpose seems to be exploiting banderas and de mornay 's bodies as often as possible .
comedian dennis miller is completely wasted here
( he 's not given lines that are suitable for his persona ) and does n't even appear all that much .
maybe , in a way , he 's lucky for that .
early on in the movie , sarah tells tony , after meeting him in a supermarket , that she had been advised to never talk to strangers .
allow me to advise that you never watch this stinker .

Ex Output:
N

Ex Input:
one of these days , i 'll make good on my promise never to rent another abel ferrara movie .
king of new york and body snatchers notwithstanding ( and
bad lieutenant is only fit for a single , emotive viewing ) ,
his exploitation flicks have fallen into a rut of hoary art - house trappings .
it 's a perfume - drenched , coke - addled visit to the seedy pornography shop , where beautiful models ( no , hookers -- no , courtesans ) usher you through the silk curtains .
ferrara 's only consistently smart move has been casting
christopher walken over and over again , since walken can make a good movie great and a loathsome movie durable whenever he 's onscreen .
his 8-minute scene in the addiction is the saving grace of that otherwise abysmal , unwatchable , and pretentious failure .
when he starts talking about his vampiric bowel movements , or questions whether lili taylor has ever read naked lunch , there 's a much - needed dose of humor in an otherwise terminally unfunny affair .
you know those gothic club kids who are too cool to smile and let you know they 're actually having fun ?
the addiction is that movie .
walken , sadly , does not appear in the blackout .
the central role of matty , a junkie film star whose lightning paced hollywood life among the beautiful people is inevitably leading to his destruction , is played by matthew modine ( who takes what he can get after cutthroat island ) .
much like the protagonists of michelangelo antonioni 's terminally bored cultural elite , matty is involved in a bitter pill " relationship " with high fashioned model annie ( at least i think she 's a model . )
matty 's lady is played by french actress b ? atrice dalle , arrested twice for cocaine possession during filming of the blackout -- not that you needed to know that , but it lends credence to the idea that ferrara 's entire oeuvre has been filmed in a fucking blackout .
no kidding .
requiem for a dream has nothing on the junkie presentations seen in ferrara 's movies and his controversial urban lifestyle .
matty and annie struggle over her decision to have an abortion without consulting him .
no doubt , he was off chasing the dragon .
in his despair , matty indulges in a chemical induced weekend of debauchery , tooling around the streets of miami with video filmmaker mickey wayne ( dennis hopper , in full " dirty ol' man " mold smacking models on the ass and telling them to spread their legs .
wider ! )
toward the end of the night , they pick up a teenage waitress also named annie ( sarah lassez ) , start shooting a hastily improvised sexual scene , then matty thankfully blacks out .
something happened that night which haunts him throughout the rest of the movie , and it 's exactly what you think it was .
suffice to say , there 's some confusion over whether he killed annie one or annie two , or anyone at all .
the blackout is typical ferrara :
no plot to speak of , plenty of raunch , and horribly vogue images of matthew modine downing a bottle of jack daniels and a beer while wrapping himself in a see - through curtain in his hotel room by the sea , by the sea , by the beautiful sea .
cinematographer ken kelsch finds inconsistent glory in alternating gorgeous painterly sunsets with docu - style sleaze ( and we 're back to dennis hopper leering at girls in bathing suits .
"
yeah ! ! !
yeah ! ! !
arrrghhh ! " says mr .
hopper .
dirty old sod . )
it 's compulsive viewing in a tacky sort of way , leading to a ridiculous climax where modine seizes control of his destiny .
how 's that for cryptic ?
never fear -- ferrara finds time for some female full frontal nudity to remind us what he 's all about .
i can picture it now .
" take off yer clothes , kid -- it 's essential to depict the inner maelstrom of my central protagonist , and you 're his visual
i
d .
you 're the soul , the heart , the bloodstream of the picture .
take it off !
take it all off ! ! !
ha ha ha !
" friggin ' vampire .
yeah , you , ferrara .
a final word about matthew modine : he 's actually a fine actor when properly cast , but there 's something too squeaky - clean in his demeanor .
he 's ideally suited for sarcastic men in tightly controlled situations , such as his private joker in full metal jacket or the time - bomb nebbish in short cuts ( who is every bit as superb as julianne moore in that famous scene , though no one seems to notice him ) .
[ he was in that scene ?
-ed . ]
here , he 's asked to let it all hang out , sporting a three - day stubble and oily bangs .
he throws around furniture like stanley kowalski , but it 's somehow lacking .
modine lacks the feral intensity of brando , entirely miscast in ferrara 's flesh fair .
better luck next time
, matt .
someday , you 'll be forgiven for cutthroat island , which was n't really your fault in the first place .
maybe atom egoyan will find a place for you somewhere , and all will once again be well in your world .

Ex Output:
N

Ex Input:
the tagline for this film is : " some houses are just born bad " .
so i did n't expect too much from this .
but i had preserved a little spark of ope as i entered the theatre .
i thought : liam neeson , cathrine zeta jones and jan de bont .
i thought , mabe it will be fun ?
and in fact the beginning was rather intriguing .
but by the end of it i thought :
why liam neeson and cathrine zeta jones , jan de bont ? .
these great actors are basically helpless with this muddled mess that defies any rationality .
here is the story : in the monstrously over - decorated mansion known as hill house , visitors are tricked by an unknown doctor ( liam neeson ) into being guinea pigs in a fright experiment under the guise of an insomnia investigation .
among them is a sophisticated bisexual ( cathrine zeta jones ) , a cynical dope ( owen wilson ) and a gentle and emotional lady ( lily taylor ) .
actually , the doctor is researching the " primordial fear reaction " and intends to plant disturbing ideas in his subjects and watch what happens .
but he gets unexpected help from the house itself .
it rumbles , hums and belches forth remarkable sights .
portals become veiny stained - glass eyeballs .
a fireplace guarded by stone lions gapes like a sinister mouth .
filmy cherubic spirits take shape under sheets and billowy curtains .
but the computerized spooketeria rarely feels real , placing an emotional wall between audience and screen .
the second half of the film is basically about the main heroine running back and forth from the sinister lamps and evil furniture .
is that exciting or what ?
the worst thing about it is that it did n't have to be bad .
it 's based on a great book , ' ' the haunting of hill house , '' by shirley jackson .
a 1963 adaptation of the book was scary and intelligent .
it played with the greatest fears of our sub conscience .
" the blair witch project " , that cost less than an old car , managed to shock and terrify the audiences from their senses .
and with a $ 70 mill .
budget , de bont and screenwriter david self make hash out of a perfectly lovely piece of terror .
de bont has a style of filmmaking so out of line with the material that it is , in itself , frightening .
he is the master of the extravagant special effect and the big visual adrenaline rush .
but why give him a more serious material ?
in the end " haunting " will only haunt its fledgling studio ( dream works skg ) and de bont 's career as a director .
yet it would n't be fair to say that everything is bad .
the effects are truly impressive and the house is wonderfully decorated -- beautiful , mysterious , magical and spooky .
but this is where the good things end .
the music is blaring , the floors moving , the ceiling morphing and the pictures on the walls screaming -- and all of this , every second , every moment of screen time , is absolutely without life .
it 's nothing more than a special effects - extravaganza ; visually impressive , but intellectually hollow thriller that simply does n't engage
.
at first you do not know what 's going on .
is this part of the experiment ?
are these hallucinations ?
projections of the subconscience ?
paranoia ?
but in the end it shows out that this is actually happening .
the house is actually possessed .
it is at that point when all your hopes for a good entertainment disappears out of the window
.
for ever , i sat in anticipation for a decent climax and
that 's what i got ?
i believe hichock once said that " it 's better to wait for a climax , than to see one " .
this may be true , and it might actually work , but there is only one problem -- jan de bont is not hichock and the things that he shows are not scary , only stupid .
they are impossible to take seriously .
any paralells that you might have heard before , linking this picture to kubrick 's " the shining " , are absolutely baseless .
" shining " had class , style , story , acting , but most of all talent and originality .
" haunting " has only special effects and art direction to boast of .
and those elements alone are not enough to make it a good film .
casting good actors for small , pale parts only makes things worse .
but i guess that no matter what i or other critics say or write , most of you will see this film anyway , even if the tagline would say : " some films are just born stupid " .

Ex Output:
N