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

Example Input: every now and then , reviewers are faced with the films that are hard to be properly reviewed .
most of the time it happens with films that leave so overwhelming impact , either good or bad , that in the end reviewers must work hard to express his thoughts or feelings .
but , sometimes it can happen for rather trivial reasons .
i love trouble happened to be one of such occasions for the author of this review .
the impression left by the film was n't overwhelming - on the contrary , there were hardly any impression at all , since
i had real trouble keeping myself awake while watching it . which surprise me to this day , because the movie theatre was full , i was close to sound speakers , the show was n't late and i did n't lack sleep before the show .
such things happen very rarely to me , and , after many years , the closest thing to solution to this mystery is probably the quality of the film itself .
the plot revolves around two rival chicago reporters - old peter brackett ( nick nolte ) and young , aspiring sabrina peterson ( julia roberts ) .
two of them are assigned to cover the train collision . as soon as they meet , they start scooping each other , but during the process they both discover sinister plot involving cancerogenic milk , and also the romantic feelings they have for each other .
the plot in this film is rather secondary to its real raison d ' ?
tre - romantic pairing reminiscent of classical screwball comedies starring spencer tracy and katharine hepburn .
movie author , director and screenwriter charles shyer , who had some experiences with turning the screwball spirit into modern setting with father of the bride , tries again , this time pairing old nick nolte with young julia roberts .
however , although there is some chemistry between the two , soon it stops to arouse any interest .
it probably happens due to poorly executed genre mix , that collides light - hearted romantic comedy with
rather uninteresting plot suitable to pure action thrillers .
shyer as director fails to make the proper transition between the two , and fails in both areas , making the story cliched and predictable
.
the end result is rather forgettable effort , which convinced me not to watch movie again .
i 'll give it the benefit of the doubt , though .
Example Output: N

Example Input: everything about this ninth trek movie seems on the cheap , from the roger corman - grade special effects to its highly derivative and ugly ad campaign
( the poster is nearly identical to that of star trek
vi : the undiscovered country ) .
but piller 's not - quite - half - baked screenplay should ultimately claim responsibility for insurrection 's failure .
i 'm about to give the same advice to rick berman and co .
as i 've given to the financiers of james bond movies : it 's time to breathe life into this workhorse by hiring solid genre writers and a real director .
( while we 're at it , put that visor back on laforge ! )
for three hundred years , the ba'ku species ( who look just like humans ) have lived on a ringed - planet that might as well be called the fountain of youth .
six hundred of them occupy the briar patch , the area affected by metaphasic radition , a positive energy that reverses the aging process in the elderly .
but evil ru'afo ( this is probably abraham 's last stop before performing " amadeus " at a dinner theatre near you ) , leader of the son'a ( who look just like burn victims after reconstructive surgery ) , wants to relocate the ba'ku and movie his people onto the briar patch in their place , in order to replenish his dying breed .
the federation is all for this , but picard feels this is a direct violation of the prime directive : to not interfere with the development of an alien race .
( never mind that the ba'ku did n't exactly evolve - they went wandering in the universe one day and stumbled upon the magic world . )
every time frakes gives an interview lately , he seems to top whatever ludicrous statement he last gave regarding this installment .
he has called it a comedy , a thinking man 's picture , a throwback to the old series , and , most grievously , he has likened it to a john ford western .
( i presume that 's some john ford
he went to school with , not the director of the searchers . )
he has also gone on record as saying paramount recut the film from his version .
that 's no excuse -
someone generated this footage .
muddy cinematography and sitcom sets are the least of its problems ; star trek : insurrection appears to have been beamed in from the planet plotholia . consider such curiosities . . .
picard 's love interest , anij ( donna murphy ) , can slow things down by staring at them ( such as a waterfall or falling rocks ) -her scientific explanation for this ?
" do n't ask .
"
worf gets a pimple ( he 's re - experiencing klingon puberty thanks to the time - defying atmosphere ) , laforge regains his eyesight ( trust me , levar burton 's real eyes are scarier than those electronic lenses he wore in first contact ) and troi brags about her firm boobs , but picard remains as bald as an android 's butt .
most suspiciously , what exactly is the problem with letting this endangered race have a little fun in the sun ?
the filmmakers cloud the issue with some nonsense about a family feud of sorts , and they also turn ru'afo into a completely power - mad superfreak , just so the characters will have something to do in the climax .
( and if you 've seen return of the jedi , you 've seen the ending of this movie . ) did n't picard himself previously disobey the prime directive when he prevented the borg from assimilating millions ?
frakes lucked out with first contact , and repeat viewings of that film reveal the seeds of what went wrong in his direction of insurrection :
he has no sense of comic timing , and he mines for acting chemistry where none exists .
( take a look at the painful " troi gets drunk " scene in fc and you 'll get the general idea of insurrection 's unsuccessfully jokey and hollow tone . )
even the worst shatner and co .
treks , like the final frontier , maintained a watchability thanks to the effortless ,
charming comaraderie between kirk , spock , and bones .
neither first contact nor insurrection has any idea what to do with crusher ( gates mcfadden , whom i must say maintains a fabulous physique ) , troi , or laforge .
and all three next generation films spend too much time on data , who is the franchise 's answer to urkel .
need a cheap laugh ?
have data say something sexual , or start singing , or lift up a four hundred pound boulder as if it 's the hunk of styrofoam it really is .
here 's my proposed title for number 10 : data star data trek : data data data data data .
in this movie , data will become preoccupied with learning to blow his nose , while crusher and troi watch silently from 500 yards away and laforge points his sinister gaze at the android in doubly robotic observation .
star trek : insurrection had one nice , eerie , silent moment that hints at a better , darker film .
i 'm not saying all of them should be star trek
ii : the wrath of khan , but this one boldly went where no movie should go again .
Example Output: N

Example Input: i 'm not sure who the genius is who came up with the idea of comparing " disturbing behavior " with " scream .
"
maybe it 's because they 're both horror films ( kinda ) , both have hot young stars ,
both have an annoying alternative soundtrack , and both are aimed at the teenage crowd , which i guess includes me .
but this is not the next in line with the " scream " flicks as well as
the " i know what you did last summer " soon to be flicks .
it owes less to " halloween " and more to kafka and orwell , which , in my book , makes for a more interesting feature .
and it should have been .
this is basically a rehash of " the stepford wives , " the great 70s film i never saw starring katherine ross and dealing , as i 've been told , with a bunch of women who are programmed to be perfect housewives . or something like that .
" behavior , " starring katie holmes of " dawson 's creek , " deals with a bunch of teenagers , deep in angst , who are being programmed to be perfect teenagers .
suck - ups .
preppies .
it actually , at least to me , sounds like it would work , and with scott rosenberg , that witty penmen who has written stuff like " beautiful girls " and " things to do in denver when you 're dead " ( as well as " con air " ) , it actually sounds like it may be pulled off with the right amount of frights and satiric wit .
alas
, it 's not , and it plumets into that little group of movies known as " the movies with potential that blow it .
"
i remember a film called " white man 's burden " which dealt with a reversal of blacks and whites in society that did nothing with
it 's potentially brilliant premise .
here 's another one .
it could be a brilliant satire on how teenagers need to go through teen angst in order to find themselves .
it 's a stage , and this film does in fact realize that .
it gets its message across and it does it effortlessly .
now it just needs to work as a film .
which it does n't .
it 's too sloppy and too contrived .
it paints a bleak portrait of high school life . . .
then lets it lie .
it brings us a bunch of scary monsters who are all a bunch of disgustingly icky kiss - ups who do food drives and hang out at a 50s diner drinking milk shakes . . .
then gives it a cheap twist : when they get horny , they become homicidal .
is n't it scary enough that they 're like this , and ca n't the real terror in the town be that you could be next to be just like them - not that you could be next to die ?
the film introduces us two three different characters who , in the beginning , are considered outsiders because they 're not ( yet ) part of this clique : the new kid , steve ( james marsden - dull dull dull dull ) , who 's having trouble at home because he has n't gotten over his brother 's ( ethan embry , in quick flashes so you do n't recognize him - i did ) suicide ; the renegade girl , rachel ( katie holmes , from " dawson 's creek " ) , who 's chief personality
trait is her prominent nose ring ; and by far the most interesting kid , gavin ( nick stahl , the kid from " the man without a face " ) , who 's the most interesting because he 's the only character who 's given some dimension .
in the film 's best scene , he introduces steve to every single clique , nailing each one 's fetishes and hang - ups , and it 's the best scene in the movie because it 's witty , satirical , and interesting - something the rest of this film is n't .
gavin suspects there 's something awry with the preppie kids , known as the blue ribbons , and in the tradition of all conspirators , and even when he actually shows hard pure evidence to steve , he 's only treated as a typical raving conspiracy buff .
here , we have another case of " the idiot plot , " where not only could steve had done something about gavin and what happens to him , but he may have saved this film from being the dreary , dull film that it is without gavin , who gives it life and humor .
the only other half - interesting character is the school janitor , played by william sadler as a retarded , scary guy who may not be what he seems to be . . .
but really , we do n't care anyway .
i probably should n't mention that this was directed by david nutter , who 's works for " the x - files , " because that would probably tarnish his reputation .
like the show , he 's good at setting up weird conspiracies , and creating a general creepy feel .
most of this film is shot at night and with dark eerie shadows for the maximum creepy effect , and some of it works .
but what this film is not so good at is coming out with a good payoff .
he keeps too much inside , so much that when the characters journey to a mental institution in the third act , you wonder why they just do n't get the hell out of there .
i think what happens to gavin is proof enough that there 's something rotten in the state of teen angstdom .
what this film needs to be is a lot longer , a lot more colorful , and a lot creepier .
if the best villain they can come up with is a guidance counselor ( played by bruce greenwood , an atom egoyan regular obviously just trying to pay the rent ) who still thinks he can get away with it even when most is revealed , then they need to come up with a tougher , smarter villain .
if he 's so villainous , then why could two dense teenagers who could n't figure out there was something going on until it was way too late find information on him in a couple minutes ?
the film , which runs about 80 or so minutes , just needs to work on these things , and become a lot less sloppy .
at such a short running time and with such lame , boring characters as these , it 's pretty much obvious that leaving this film leaves a horribly unsatisfied taste in one 's mouth , especially mine .
Example Output:
N