it is high time that american critics and fans alike start to debunk their unquestioned and sloppy veneration of films like sergio leone once upon a time in america. the checkered history of this opulent film (and the grand and fanciful myth associated with it production and many versions) belies its mediocrity on a narrative level. the film lurches backward and forward in fits and starts and its central figures adrift and seemingly out of place surrounded by the ersatz decadence of towering sets and the minutia of production detail and the and by 1984 and cliche would but gorgeous cinematographic confection on offer to the audience. the plot time frame is confusing and gimmicky and laboured and leading some critics to imagine the noodles figure opium binging to be the antecedent of some future wouldream reality as well as the sepia toned remembrances. this ham handed and overly fan boy apologetic interpretation glosses over the glaring narrative irregularities on display. even at this full (. ) running time and figures appear and disappear with alarming suddenness represent the deborah character is fleetingly established in child form and a cold and unattainable trophy female and not even hinting at the gravity with which she will re establish her relationship with a post prison noodles and the said re union henceforth rings completely false. the deadening pace is somewhat to blame and certain sequences drag along stagnantly for far too long and signifying very little and hinting at a director with so little restraint and narrative economy that he often feels obligated to usurp every iota of screen time possible in order to show off his production and fatal for a film that contains figures so sullen and aloof. the trajectory of the figures lives is presented to us as a microcosm mirroring the historical trajectory of america teens through prohibition and its spoils and ending with the (arguable) ruin of its moribund central figures (save deborah a make up department fumble or intentional one wonders). this notion is commonplace and even banal. the cast of characters as imagined in the one note script (written by seven italians no less) are flatly and awkwardly played by all but the younger actors and who at least venture a few variant facial expressions. this is understandable given the almost unworkable material. some critics state that the characters may seem so impenetrably self absorbed and but actively seek their own goals and assuming the compliance of others (e. g. when noodles gets out of prison and max picks him up and offers him a hooker without asking him whether or not this is what he desires and later makes deals assuming noodles will comply). this explanation of their abrupt and abrasive dispositions is unsatisfactorily extraneous and merely serves to highlight the complicated ends the films unwavering supporters will go to to defend their positions regarding a film unfortunately short on sense. although ennio morricone score is much revered and it is undeniably schmaltzy and repetitive and it gushes with an emotional redolence that the scenes themselves and many violent and just do not warrant. at points it is questionable whether or not morricone was watching the same film i was so incongruous is his work. as a paean to american filmmaking and it succeeds in terms of mood (helped by a few strokes of masterful editing segueing between time periods) and visuals (not helped by said score) but lacks narrative cohesion and fluidity. 
it is high time that american critics and fans alike start to debunk their unquestioned and sloppy veneration of films like sergio leone once upon a time in america. the checkered history of this opulent film (and the grand and fanciful myth associated with it production and many versions) belies its mediocrity on a narrative level. the film lurches backward and forward in fits and starts and its central figures adrift and seemingly out of place surrounded by the ersatz decadence of towering sets and the minutia of production detail and the and by 1984 and cliche would but gorgeous cinematographic confection on offer to the audience. the plot time frame is confusing and gimmicky and laboured and leading some critics to imagine the noodles figure opium binging to be the antecedent of some future wouldream reality as well as the sepia toned remembrances. this ham handed and overly fan boy apologetic interpretation glosses over the glaring narrative irregularities on display. even at this full (. ) running time and figures appear and disappear with alarming suddenness represent the deborah character is fleetingly established in child form and a cold and unattainable trophy female and not even hinting at the gravity with which she will re establish her relationship with a post prison noodles and the said re union henceforth rings completely false. the deadening pace is somewhat to blame and certain sequences drag along stagnantly for far too long and signifying very little and hinting at a director with so little restraint and narrative economy that he often feels obligated to usurp every iota of screen time possible in order to show off his production and fatal for a film that contains figures so sullen and aloof. the trajectory of the figures lives is presented to us as a microcosm mirroring the historical trajectory of america teens through prohibition and its spoils and ending with the (arguable) ruin of its moribund central figures (save deborah a make up department fumble or intentional one wonders). this notion is commonplace and even banal. the cast of characters as imagined in the one note script (written by seven italians no less) are flatly and awkwardly played by all but the younger actors and who at least venture a few variant facial expressions. this is understandable given the almost unworkable material. some critics state that the characters may seem so impenetrably self absorbed and but actively seek their own goals and assuming the compliance of others (e. g. when noodles gets out of prison and max picks him up and offers him a hooker without asking him whether or not this is what he desires and later makes deals assuming noodles will comply). this explanation of their abrupt and abrasive dispositions is unsatisfactorily extraneous and merely serves to highlight the complicated ends the films unwavering supporters will go to to defend their positions regarding a film unfortunately short on sense. although ennio morricone score is much revered and it is undeniably schmaltzy and repetitive and it gushes with an emotional redolence that the scenes themselves and many violent and just do not warrant. at points it is questionable whether or not morricone was watching the same film i was so incongruous is his work. as a paean to american filmmaking and it succeeds in terms of mood (helped by a few strokes of masterful editing segueing between time periods) and visuals (not helped by said score) but lacks narrative cohesion and fluidity. ---------------------------------Answer Question Below----------------------------------

Judge the movie review above, you need to make a function call:
    If you feel the movie review is positive
        print "This is a semantically positive review."
    Otherwise, if you feel the movie review is negative
        print "This is a semantically negative review."
