Instructions: In this task, you must classify if a given review is positive/negative, indicating your answer as P or N.
Input: it seems that i 've stopped enjoying movies that should be fun to watch .
take payback , for example , a movie that most people seem to like . however ,
it 's horrible schlock , straight out of hollywood 's vast talent for sucking creativity out of movies .
it was written and directed by a guy who should have done better ; however , maybe he did do better , after all , 30 percent of the movie is n't his own .
mel gibson ,
that hollywood zombie
, decided he did n't like the ending and had another director reshoot it .
what a crock . if you sign on to do a movie , then do it the way the script calls for .
why film a movie and then look at it later and say , - no , i changed my mind , i do n't like the ending .
you 're fired .
let 's get someone else to do it .
- i suppose honor is dead in hollywood .
the end of the film is , of course , hollywoodized . which is to say that it 's happy and the guy you root for beats impossible odds to win his prize .
in this case , as is most victories in hollywood movies , gibson 's prize is a blond and money .
i miss originality in film , i really do .
i think audiences are so starved for it that they 'll flop down a lot of money in hopes that a movie will be original .
payback 's tagline - get ready to root for the bad guy - promised an original idea , but it was far from the truth .
while gibson 's character certainly broke the law , he was a character that had honor ( odd that gibson himself seems to have very little of it ) , would n't kill in front of children and protects his blond woman .
there 's nothing bad about him - he 's a hollywood character , a person who could never exist in real life .
and gibson knows it - he spends his time trying to act like a " bad guy " , and instead comes off as pretentious and arrogant .
the story involves gibson being double - crossed by his partner ( who is a real bad guy , which made me wish that we could root for him ) over $ 70 , 000 .
gibson recovers from multiple gunshots , is pissed ( naturally ) , and will do whatever it takes to get the exact amount of money back - no more , no less .
he makes a point of it that it 's strictly 70 grand .
a real bad guy would have made his ex - partner pay 25 % interest .
this idea is completely stretched out .
gibson ends up going after his partner and the chicago mafia that his partner is affiliated with .
what i did n't understand -
this is the chicago mafia .
$ 70 , 000 is like spare change to them .
they 'd probably just pay the guy rather than go through the trouble of dealing with him .
i think they 'd respect a guy going through this much trouble for a simple $ 70 , 000 .
maybe i 'm being too hard on the movie .
perhaps the filmmakers were just trying to make a simple popcorn movie .
i read roger ebert 's review and he liked gibson in the role because he is a comic at heart playing a bad guy .
that 's why we 're allowed to root for him .
and it 's true - gibson walks the movie as if he 's smiling at a joke he just heard .
but he 's wrong here .
i wanted a lee marvin or old - time clint eastwood or somebody who was n't a comic , just an ass kicker .
as a side note , i 've just checked the internet movie database and discovered that i am the 38th person to post a newsgroup review of payback .
after this many reviews , why would anyone want to read this ?
really , i do n't care .
i 'm just trying to gain membership into the on - line film critics society by posting as many reviews as i can .
Output:
N