You will be given a definition of a task first, then an example. Follow the example to solve a new instance of the task.
In this task, you must classify if a given review is positive/negative, indicating your answer as P or N.

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 )
Solution: N
Why? The phrases used in the review convey a negative sentiment (e.g. "presents it in a very bad package").

New input: people who enjoy science fiction are often faced with unpleasant surprises due to the improper labelling of novels , stories , comic books or movies .
often science fiction aficionados find material , previously labelled as science fiction , to be pure fantasy or supernatural horror , or rather simple techno - thriller .
in such cases , mistakes are understandable - genre boundaries are never clearly marked .
but , i believe there are really few cases when a movie labelled as science fiction actually happens to be straight historical epic .
such thing occurred in former yugoslavia some fifteen years ago , when national distributors gave such treatment to the right stuff , 1983 film directed by philip kaufman .
the mistake of the distributors could be explained with the fact that the official poster of the film features men in space suits .
but the right stuff film is n't even fiction .
it was based on the non - fiction book by tom wolfe , covering the early years of american space program .
the plot of the film begins in 1947 when few people heard of edwards air force base , major test site for experimental planes .
the major aim of test flights is to determine ability of manned aircraft to reach 1 mach speed and thus break the sound barrier .
many pilots tried to achieve that goal and many paid with their lives for such bravado .
but one quiet pilot , chuck eager ( played by sam shaped ) succeeds and thus gives example for whole new generation of test pilots , determined to enter history books by breaking new speed records .
ten years later , soviets have launched " sputnik " marking the beginning of the space age .
in order to regain national prestige , us government decides to be the first to send man into space .
best air force , navy and marine pilots are recruited into program , but not yeager , because he lacks college education and desired all - american image .
in one of critics ' polls the right stuff was named as one among top 10 films made in 1980s .
such high position could be explained with the fact that kaufman 's film looks quite atypical for its time .
with more than three hours of length and epic scope it looked more suitable for 1950s and 1960s - age when hollywood used to make films larger than life .
but the real reason lies in the fact that it was made by truly remarkable and talented filmmaker .
philip kaufman created reputation in 1970s by using all the opportunities of that golden age in order to create original , memorable movies .
the right stuff was the last of them , swan song of an era when producers allowed directors to spend big bucks on unusual , risk - taking " artsy " projects .
the right stuff is unusual because it lacks many standard elements of hollywood film .
the plot is almost non - existent and not very coherent ; the story , featuring many interesting incidents and anecdotes , shifts focus from the old generation of test pilots , embodied in yeager , to new generation of the astronauts .
the film also lacks conventional protagonist - yeager ( who also appears in small cameo ) remains the true hero of the film , but equal time and exposure is also given to other astronauts and their wives , making this movie into ensemble piece .
that gave opportunity for kaufman to use multitude of great acting talents , until that specialised only for bit or character roles .
sam shepard is great as yeager , war hero
whose greatest achievement - breech of the sound barrier - remained obscured in history books , probably due to his own modesty .
on the surface , he lacks personality compared with his hyped and more fortunate astronaut colleagues , but shepard gives texture to this character with subtle gestures and phrases .
shepard 's performance is followed with great acting by ed harris as clean - cut marine ( and future politician ) john glenn .
young dennis quaid is more than fine as arrogant fighter jock gordo cooper , and this arrogance is mirrored in his friend and most tragic figure of virgil grissom , superbly played by fred ward . always reliable character actor scott glenn provides some comic relief as navy aviator and ( arguably ) first american man in space alan shepard .
kaufman left room for female talents to excel too - barbara hershey , pamela reed , veronica cartwright and mary jo deschanel are great as pilots ' wives .
royal dano is also impressive as menacing figure of preacher , but the most memorable performances belong to donald moffat as vice - president lyndon b . johnson and jane dornacker as nurse murch .
great acting talent assembled for this film was mirrored with kaufman 's superb direction .
most notable of all is the methods kaufman uses in order to suggest the passage of time .
the beginning of the film shows test pilots living in the middle of desert , as virtual unknowns , far away from strict rules and discipline .
everything seems natural -yeager can indulge himself in horse riding just few yards away from the fastest and most precious aircraft in the world .
in that setting , it 's quite normal for important technical problems to be solved with simple chainsaw and for the test pilots not to report their ribs being broken before most important flights .
but the times are changing ; ww2 alliance with ussr is replaced with cold war , and " natural " pilots like yeager must be replaced with more disciplined , conventional pilots .
their entire lives become focus of media frenzy , and their job is subjected to strict rules , meticulous plans and they must fight the bureaucrats , publicity - seeking politicians and uncaring scientists ( like former nazi rocket expert werner von braun , played by scott beach ) only to preserve their most basic human dignity .
this contrast is underlined with the beautifully edited sequence - while yeager conducts his final and most spectacular test flight in absolute obscurity , " mercury " astronauts receive fame and fortune , although some of them even before going in the space . those contrasts and similar effects are achieved with kaufman 's superb use of poetic movie language .
editing is great , and photography by caleb deschanel provides many memorable scenes like the funeral in the desert or astronauts in their suits walking in slow motion ( the same image would be copied in many latter films ) .
although kaufman enjoyed support of nasa and american military , which provided authentic locations and period equipment , he still had to use special effects in order to simulate space flights .
those effects are excellent and they can still fool the audience accustomed to cgi and real footage of earth from outer space .
another fine contribution of this film is " oscar " -awarded musical score by bill conti ; i still tremble from excitement
every time i hear it .
it is accompanied with the use of holst and debussy .
some of the songs used in the background also provide authentic atmosphere of the historical period .
this film is great , and its cult status is well deserved , but there are some minor flaws .
some of the " mercury " astronauts are n't fleshed out enough ( although being played by fine actors , like lance henriksen ) .
film also lacks proper closure .
on the other hand , most logical conclusion of the film - landing on the moon - would require this film to be more than six hours long .
also , some critics were prone to attack this film as too amerocentric and hard on russians , who were portrayed as evil monsters , just in line with most virulent cold war rhetoric of reagan 's america .
in some of contemporary interviews , kaufman defended that approach by claiming that he wanted to make film as authentic as possible , and in order to do that , he portrayed russians not as they were in real life , but as they were perceived by americans in early 1960s .
time has passed ; now we do n't see astronauts as heroes .
in this age of widespread satellite communications and routine space missions , those men and women in space suits are seen as mere maintenance workers .
few young boys want to be astronauts when they grow up .
but this film , sentimental reminder of the times " when future began " , perhaps could encourage at least some of them to follow " mercury " astronauts ' footsteps seek new frontiers in the sky .
and even if they decide to stay on earth , they could still appreciate the right stuff as an extraordinary piece of cinema .
Solution:
P