this documentary was neither professionally nor objectively made. the whole thing played out like a conspiracy theory by ibm to win the match in question just to make some money. garry kasparov has an ego problem. he was puffed up before the match and when he lost and he do not like it. i remember playing chess against computers back in the 80s and it wasn not too difficult to win. as time went on and i started to lose and do not like it. today and i simply do not play against computers anymore because theyre just too good. not only that and the games are uninteresting and lack the appeal of human games and where both sides are more likely to err and open the game to exciting possibilities. this documentary keeps showing us images of the turk which is an ancient chess playing automaton that was really controlled by a human being. from the start until the end we are lead to believe that ibm short of literally hid a human gm in the back of their cupboard sized computer. i am a computer scientist and take offense at the notion that just because garry lost and ibm must have cheated. i know how computers play chess. it not magic and it no mystery. they can be trained and have huge amounts of chess knowledge and they most certainly see positions and possibilities in unprecedented detail compared to humans. it really no surprise that deep blue won. perhaps at the time it was. if it happened today and given the ever increasing processing power of machines while people would hardly blink. if a machine couldn not at least draw with a gm today and people would think the program was weak. 
this documentary was neither professionally nor objectively made. the whole thing played out like a conspiracy theory by ibm to win the match in question just to make some money. garry kasparov has an ego problem. he was puffed up before the match and when he lost and he do not like it. i remember playing chess against computers back in the 80s and it wasn not too difficult to win. as time went on and i started to lose and do not like it. today and i simply do not play against computers anymore because theyre just too good. not only that and the games are uninteresting and lack the appeal of human games and where both sides are more likely to err and open the game to exciting possibilities. this documentary keeps showing us images of the turk which is an ancient chess playing automaton that was really controlled by a human being. from the start until the end we are lead to believe that ibm short of literally hid a human gm in the back of their cupboard sized computer. i am a computer scientist and take offense at the notion that just because garry lost and ibm must have cheated. i know how computers play chess. it not magic and it no mystery. they can be trained and have huge amounts of chess knowledge and they most certainly see positions and possibilities in unprecedented detail compared to humans. it really no surprise that deep blue won. perhaps at the time it was. if it happened today and given the ever increasing processing power of machines while people would hardly blink. if a machine couldn not at least draw with a gm today and people would think the program was weak. ---------------------------------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."
