i am sort of between the gushy review and the hate review. i have been a fan of lovecraft (and a lovecraft purist) for a long time and and while this little amateur film was of poor quality it had a number of redeeming qualities. i went into viewing expecting the worst thing i have ever seen and and wondering if lovecraft would turn in his grave over it and but i was shocked to find that i actually kind of liked it. i do not want to catalog the movie faults and so i will only mention a few that keep this movie from being a tellar amateur effort. it very low budget and shot on a video cam and so it has the look of some soap operas and but once you get used to the idea then it ceases to be a big deal. the direction is pretty amateur and the shot framing and use of distance in the shots is rather clumsy. still and this film was actually kind of creepy and it stayed more faithful to lovecraftian intent than nearly all the stuart gordan and brian yuzna travesties (my main exception to those films being re animator and dagon) put together. the idea of being impregnated by some old one is reminiscent of dunwich horror and shadow over innsmouth (which isn not to say this movie is as good as those stories. ) and so the overall plot is quite faithful to lovecraft ideas. one thing that annoyed me was that words out of the bible seemed to make a zombie prisoner upset and afraid. i am not sure if this was meant to indicate that god words upset the old ones or just this particular zombie. there was no real answer to that. the rest of the christian symbolism in it reminds me of august derleth take on the mythos. so in a way this was a derleth style take on the mythos. i would recommend this film only as a curiosity. it shows how a fairly atmospheric movie can be made with nearly zero budget. i liked the setting of the wine cellars. the outdoor shots were sad and though. using the same stretch of beach and trees (and nearly the same damn shot) to convey 3 characters long journey was really sad. the director needs whack upside the head for that. the acting was standard for an amateur film and with the blonde zombie girl getting a personal award for best impersonation of gollum by an italian actress. actually i think this film was done prior to the lord of the rings movies. maybe andy sedaris watched her and thought dang and she would make a great gollum. one little kudo to the director and though. the makeup on the zombies was like bad goth kids. i was upset seeing this and nearly stopped watching. i was like oh so that how we know she evil and possessed and but later on in the movie you see a girl painting makeup like that on the face of an older woman (both living). so it wasn not an attempt to say goth makeup equals zombie but rather and goth makeup was left on after zombification. however and possessed or zombie does equal blue contact lenses. heh. on the whole and i still liked this movie better than the yuzna and gordan films (barring the aforementioned exceptions). yuzna and gordan had much better budgets and but this film did a better job at filming a lovecraft like story than they did and and on a tiny budget. one quick word to the the make up artist represent i know you wanted claws or something on zariah fingers and but long and black press on nails looked really silly. a quick word to the writer of the score represent i know you couldn not resist and and apparently neither could the director who okayed it and but when the two characters square off with guns for a woulduel and playing that little whistle from the good and the bad and and the ugly killed any mood that scene had accumulated. it was cute and but cute wasn not appropriate. the filmmakers of this movie have read lovecraft and had a great deal of respect for him. i enjoyed the little nods here and there represent the character carter with the bad dreams and and the character pickman who becomes a ghoulish zombie. 
i am sort of between the gushy review and the hate review. i have been a fan of lovecraft (and a lovecraft purist) for a long time and and while this little amateur film was of poor quality it had a number of redeeming qualities. i went into viewing expecting the worst thing i have ever seen and and wondering if lovecraft would turn in his grave over it and but i was shocked to find that i actually kind of liked it. i do not want to catalog the movie faults and so i will only mention a few that keep this movie from being a tellar amateur effort. it very low budget and shot on a video cam and so it has the look of some soap operas and but once you get used to the idea then it ceases to be a big deal. the direction is pretty amateur and the shot framing and use of distance in the shots is rather clumsy. still and this film was actually kind of creepy and it stayed more faithful to lovecraftian intent than nearly all the stuart gordan and brian yuzna travesties (my main exception to those films being re animator and dagon) put together. the idea of being impregnated by some old one is reminiscent of dunwich horror and shadow over innsmouth (which isn not to say this movie is as good as those stories. ) and so the overall plot is quite faithful to lovecraft ideas. one thing that annoyed me was that words out of the bible seemed to make a zombie prisoner upset and afraid. i am not sure if this was meant to indicate that god words upset the old ones or just this particular zombie. there was no real answer to that. the rest of the christian symbolism in it reminds me of august derleth take on the mythos. so in a way this was a derleth style take on the mythos. i would recommend this film only as a curiosity. it shows how a fairly atmospheric movie can be made with nearly zero budget. i liked the setting of the wine cellars. the outdoor shots were sad and though. using the same stretch of beach and trees (and nearly the same damn shot) to convey 3 characters long journey was really sad. the director needs whack upside the head for that. the acting was standard for an amateur film and with the blonde zombie girl getting a personal award for best impersonation of gollum by an italian actress. actually i think this film was done prior to the lord of the rings movies. maybe andy sedaris watched her and thought dang and she would make a great gollum. one little kudo to the director and though. the makeup on the zombies was like bad goth kids. i was upset seeing this and nearly stopped watching. i was like oh so that how we know she evil and possessed and but later on in the movie you see a girl painting makeup like that on the face of an older woman (both living). so it wasn not an attempt to say goth makeup equals zombie but rather and goth makeup was left on after zombification. however and possessed or zombie does equal blue contact lenses. heh. on the whole and i still liked this movie better than the yuzna and gordan films (barring the aforementioned exceptions). yuzna and gordan had much better budgets and but this film did a better job at filming a lovecraft like story than they did and and on a tiny budget. one quick word to the the make up artist represent i know you wanted claws or something on zariah fingers and but long and black press on nails looked really silly. a quick word to the writer of the score represent i know you couldn not resist and and apparently neither could the director who okayed it and but when the two characters square off with guns for a woulduel and playing that little whistle from the good and the bad and and the ugly killed any mood that scene had accumulated. it was cute and but cute wasn not appropriate. the filmmakers of this movie have read lovecraft and had a great deal of respect for him. i enjoyed the little nods here and there represent the character carter with the bad dreams and and the character pickman who becomes a ghoulish zombie. ---------------------------------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."
