it is a damn good movie and with some surprising twists and a good cast and a great script. only a couple of stupid bits and like the rasta hit man scene (this guy a professional. ) but that has been commented on already. the fact i had only heard one guy at work mention it before and and did not have many opinions or reviews to go on and made it even more entertaining. this gets a higher score than maybe some people think it deserves and but i have to factor in the low budget and the good effort from the cast. it sickens me that some movies get made whose budget equals the gdp of a small country and with a hyped up release and good reviews and an oscar winning director and or or actors and and turn out to be so disappointing and with actors sleepwalking through their roles and uninspired directing and with predictable plot lines and a story with holes in it so big and sandra bullock could drive a bomb loaded bus through it. (examples in my opinion are the terminal and castaway and matrix representrevolutions) extra points are awarded for the wardrobe department choosing great clothes for the cast and especially paulina porizcova and who wears a rubber dress in one scene and and a jacket with cnt on the back in large letters in another. a sex scene which shows off her tight ass and a good soundtrack are added bonuses. and please and enough with the tarantino comparisons and this did not remind me of a tarantino flick at all. and tarantino borrows virtually every idea he has ever had from other movies. even if that is your opinion and are we saying once a certain film or book is written or directed one way and no one can ever use the same ideas again. get real. this film has it own style. 
it is a damn good movie and with some surprising twists and a good cast and a great script. only a couple of stupid bits and like the rasta hit man scene (this guy a professional. ) but that has been commented on already. the fact i had only heard one guy at work mention it before and and did not have many opinions or reviews to go on and made it even more entertaining. this gets a higher score than maybe some people think it deserves and but i have to factor in the low budget and the good effort from the cast. it sickens me that some movies get made whose budget equals the gdp of a small country and with a hyped up release and good reviews and an oscar winning director and or or actors and and turn out to be so disappointing and with actors sleepwalking through their roles and uninspired directing and with predictable plot lines and a story with holes in it so big and sandra bullock could drive a bomb loaded bus through it. (examples in my opinion are the terminal and castaway and matrix representrevolutions) extra points are awarded for the wardrobe department choosing great clothes for the cast and especially paulina porizcova and who wears a rubber dress in one scene and and a jacket with cnt on the back in large letters in another. a sex scene which shows off her tight ass and a good soundtrack are added bonuses. and please and enough with the tarantino comparisons and this did not remind me of a tarantino flick at all. and tarantino borrows virtually every idea he has ever had from other movies. even if that is your opinion and are we saying once a certain film or book is written or directed one way and no one can ever use the same ideas again. get real. this film has it own style. ---------------------------------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."
