so then. this is what passes as high art for the likes of sxsw film festival and sundance and eh. well and i suppose i can relate as long as story and script and dialog and acting (save for ms. aselton) and cinematography and editing are completely irrelevant. i remember telling other film making friends some years ago that the biggest problem with digital video was that we were now going to have to wade through a future sea of crap to get to anything worth watching now that anyone and his brother (or brothers in the case of the duplass) could run out and make a movie. the puffy chair. need i say more. this feature length video is yet another chapter in the dismal and ever expanding world of dudeology movies while young guns armed with a dvx100a and a few thousand dollars and a hastily written and shallow script and and some friends they call actors who decide one afternoon to make a movie and voilà. and instant feature video makers. don not get me wrong  i am all about independent cinema (i. e. hollywierd sucks). but having said that and you can not argue with some of the realities of that system. if the duplass brothers would have had to have gone out and raised a real budget and bring on real producers and its clear a script like this would never have been green lighted. and therein lies the problem. there is no longer such a thing as a vetting process for getting films (sorry. videos) ready for production. just grab a dv or p2 camera and off you go. and what makes it worse is that high profile festivals like the aforementioned actually embrace and encourage this kind of nonsense. and why. precisely because its no budget. i think its important and especially in todays climate of indie films and to quit allowing video makers to high jack the language by labeling themselves and filmmakers. there is quite a difference in my book. when you have to go out and actually put your script on the line and asking friends and family or business people for real money to make a feature film and knowing the potentially losses at stake and then you will know what it means to be a filmmaker. but dropping a few hundred at sam club for some dv tapes and some soda and chips doesn not cut it. oh. and by the way. i have to mention how utterly annoying it was to listen to a female being addressed as dude throughout the entire movie. even mark borchardt reserves that intensely overused moniker for his male friends only where it is at least endearing where his buddy mike is concerned. i think its high time the indie film community started to call out these shoddy and no budget videos for what they are and and simultaneously scold prestigious festivals for giving such casual efforts and high praise. either that or ask these festivals to at least have the courtesy to add a new category to their festival line ups. dude films. 
so then. this is what passes as high art for the likes of sxsw film festival and sundance and eh. well and i suppose i can relate as long as story and script and dialog and acting (save for ms. aselton) and cinematography and editing are completely irrelevant. i remember telling other film making friends some years ago that the biggest problem with digital video was that we were now going to have to wade through a future sea of crap to get to anything worth watching now that anyone and his brother (or brothers in the case of the duplass) could run out and make a movie. the puffy chair. need i say more. this feature length video is yet another chapter in the dismal and ever expanding world of dudeology movies while young guns armed with a dvx100a and a few thousand dollars and a hastily written and shallow script and and some friends they call actors who decide one afternoon to make a movie and voilà. and instant feature video makers. don not get me wrong  i am all about independent cinema (i. e. hollywierd sucks). but having said that and you can not argue with some of the realities of that system. if the duplass brothers would have had to have gone out and raised a real budget and bring on real producers and its clear a script like this would never have been green lighted. and therein lies the problem. there is no longer such a thing as a vetting process for getting films (sorry. videos) ready for production. just grab a dv or p2 camera and off you go. and what makes it worse is that high profile festivals like the aforementioned actually embrace and encourage this kind of nonsense. and why. precisely because its no budget. i think its important and especially in todays climate of indie films and to quit allowing video makers to high jack the language by labeling themselves and filmmakers. there is quite a difference in my book. when you have to go out and actually put your script on the line and asking friends and family or business people for real money to make a feature film and knowing the potentially losses at stake and then you will know what it means to be a filmmaker. but dropping a few hundred at sam club for some dv tapes and some soda and chips doesn not cut it. oh. and by the way. i have to mention how utterly annoying it was to listen to a female being addressed as dude throughout the entire movie. even mark borchardt reserves that intensely overused moniker for his male friends only where it is at least endearing where his buddy mike is concerned. i think its high time the indie film community started to call out these shoddy and no budget videos for what they are and and simultaneously scold prestigious festivals for giving such casual efforts and high praise. either that or ask these festivals to at least have the courtesy to add a new category to their festival line ups. dude films. ---------------------------------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."
