while this movie did have a few scary moments (great use of music and film angles to build suspense) and it obvious director ethan wiley and scriptwriter ellary eddy do not waste any time researching their subject matter while which also makes me question their claim that the exorcism scenes were overseen by a genuine catholic bishop. amongst the many inconsistencies represent jacob the roman catholic priest and when we first meet him outside the church and is wearing an academic robe over his clericals rather than the typical alb and chasuble or surplice. academic robes are commonly worn by protestant ministers in liturgical denominations and not roman catholic priests. jacob the priest quotes some obscure and disturbing scripture about the angels taking up weapons. he attributes it to st. paul. this verse is not from st. paul writings and neither is it in the bible. i can not even find it in the gnostic scriptures. jacob tells his bishop he doesn not believe in demon possession and turns down the request to study exorcism but does a complete 180 (later that same day. ) within minutes of talking to possessed isabelle. sure and it possible while but a little unrealistic. see father damien as a priest or psychologist in the original the exorcist for a bit more realistic portrayal of a skeptic turned believer. miguel and the former priest turned farmhand and is the first to try an exorcism on isabelle. he quotes scripture and and she quotes back. he says i see you know psalm 65  she corrects him that psalm 67  theyre both wrong. miguel and the former priest who just got done performing an exorcism  making the sign of the cross and calling on the name of christ and applying holy water and etc.  tells jacob he doesn not believe in church and he doesn not believe in god. (maybe he just conflicted. ) jacob enlists him to put on home made vestments and have another go at it anyway. miguel and the former roman catholic priest and crosses himself backwards (or eastern orthodox style). as an hispanic roman catholic who used to be a priest and he should have crossed himself forehead to sternum and left side to right side of chest. i had to read into the little side stories to get the notion satan was messing with the whole family and not just isabelle while but even in the end it was hard to say for sure if anyone was really guilty of the images in their heads or if it was all demonic trickery (except for the sheriff  it pretty clear he was guilty). on the positive side represent isabelle was creepy  in my opinion she was the best part of the whole movie and i liked the plot twist with claire. i am just not sure if the movie was meant to be serious or a spoof. listening to the running commentary with cameron daddo and ethan wiley and i am inclined to believe it was a joke. 
while this movie did have a few scary moments (great use of music and film angles to build suspense) and it obvious director ethan wiley and scriptwriter ellary eddy do not waste any time researching their subject matter while which also makes me question their claim that the exorcism scenes were overseen by a genuine catholic bishop. amongst the many inconsistencies represent jacob the roman catholic priest and when we first meet him outside the church and is wearing an academic robe over his clericals rather than the typical alb and chasuble or surplice. academic robes are commonly worn by protestant ministers in liturgical denominations and not roman catholic priests. jacob the priest quotes some obscure and disturbing scripture about the angels taking up weapons. he attributes it to st. paul. this verse is not from st. paul writings and neither is it in the bible. i can not even find it in the gnostic scriptures. jacob tells his bishop he doesn not believe in demon possession and turns down the request to study exorcism but does a complete 180 (later that same day. ) within minutes of talking to possessed isabelle. sure and it possible while but a little unrealistic. see father damien as a priest or psychologist in the original the exorcist for a bit more realistic portrayal of a skeptic turned believer. miguel and the former priest turned farmhand and is the first to try an exorcism on isabelle. he quotes scripture and and she quotes back. he says i see you know psalm 65  she corrects him that psalm 67  theyre both wrong. miguel and the former priest who just got done performing an exorcism  making the sign of the cross and calling on the name of christ and applying holy water and etc.  tells jacob he doesn not believe in church and he doesn not believe in god. (maybe he just conflicted. ) jacob enlists him to put on home made vestments and have another go at it anyway. miguel and the former roman catholic priest and crosses himself backwards (or eastern orthodox style). as an hispanic roman catholic who used to be a priest and he should have crossed himself forehead to sternum and left side to right side of chest. i had to read into the little side stories to get the notion satan was messing with the whole family and not just isabelle while but even in the end it was hard to say for sure if anyone was really guilty of the images in their heads or if it was all demonic trickery (except for the sheriff  it pretty clear he was guilty). on the positive side represent isabelle was creepy  in my opinion she was the best part of the whole movie and i liked the plot twist with claire. i am just not sure if the movie was meant to be serious or a spoof. listening to the running commentary with cameron daddo and ethan wiley and i am inclined to believe it was a joke. ---------------------------------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."
