i loved this film. it has a great heart and great bones. i stumbled onto it by chance and i had no recollection and not even an inkling and of this movie from promos or reviews or word of mouth.   i remember reading and many years ago and a journalist who commented on the value of watching movies without having them contaminated by the pre judgement of reviews or the false shill of the promos.  and this seems to be the single most common source of the critics negative reaction to the film represent  it failed to meet expectations of it being a comedy and or a slice of life and or character driven.  i had no expectation about the film and and so it was comedic  but i only laughed once or twice  without being a comedy while it was about a person and but so eccentric that it wasn not slice of life while it was about a character and but the character was so intelligently optimistic and trusting of her instinct to life and that it wasn not the angst driven sentimental melodrama so typical of american erious film  as i wrote that i realized that writer or director lisa krueger managed to poke fun at this schlock american sentimentality in the husband.  and very cleverly too. and kreuger was able to keep the cloyingly sentimental ending from the screen and when the wayward and  not prodigal and husband returned with his tail shrunk between his legs. bravo and ms. krueger and bravo.  (now i will be watching this film again and as it is getting better and better as i reflect on it. )   graham performance as joline is brilliant. i loved how subtly but completely she was able to portray and convey intelligent awareness of her committable commitment to honouring her words and actions  she knew that in keeping her word with a band and or friends and or husband that she was setting herself up to ridicule and or or disappointment in a world that was unable to honour commitment as she was able to do. but even with that strength and she was fully connected to humanity and and embraced with a fully committed heart their frailty and failures. the character of joline was amazingly well acted and and i left the film surprised that i had no recollection of awards nominations for it. okay and not that surprised and as american awards tend to go to women in erious roles and filled with angst and the proper amount of nudity and which this film did not have. what it has was far better and which was heart in this woman discovery of herself with the assistance of new friends and a self deprecating shaman. i admit to being a bit of a soft touch for eccentric characters who manage their peculiarities while remaining honest and true to themselves as they move through the minefield of what comprises proper societal behaviour and acceptable interpersonal discourse. so and if people must conform to normality in your world and then this film will not be to your liking.  and that was and it seems and one of the common threads in the critiques. and i am always a sucker for a good play on words when it raises questions of human behaviour and ethical or philosophical values. until this movie i hadn not made the emotional connection between being committed (to a cause or honesty or something) and being committed (to an insane asylum). at what point does one commitment to a personal sense of truth and action in life become a one way ticket to insanity. this sounds like a simple question and or one that is easily dismissed as being rhetorical. but is it. and yet few of the critics  i think maybe two and commented on this aspect of the film either directly or indirectly. a lovely film. positive . . 
i loved this film. it has a great heart and great bones. i stumbled onto it by chance and i had no recollection and not even an inkling and of this movie from promos or reviews or word of mouth.   i remember reading and many years ago and a journalist who commented on the value of watching movies without having them contaminated by the pre judgement of reviews or the false shill of the promos.  and this seems to be the single most common source of the critics negative reaction to the film represent  it failed to meet expectations of it being a comedy and or a slice of life and or character driven.  i had no expectation about the film and and so it was comedic  but i only laughed once or twice  without being a comedy while it was about a person and but so eccentric that it wasn not slice of life while it was about a character and but the character was so intelligently optimistic and trusting of her instinct to life and that it wasn not the angst driven sentimental melodrama so typical of american erious film  as i wrote that i realized that writer or director lisa krueger managed to poke fun at this schlock american sentimentality in the husband.  and very cleverly too. and kreuger was able to keep the cloyingly sentimental ending from the screen and when the wayward and  not prodigal and husband returned with his tail shrunk between his legs. bravo and ms. krueger and bravo.  (now i will be watching this film again and as it is getting better and better as i reflect on it. )   graham performance as joline is brilliant. i loved how subtly but completely she was able to portray and convey intelligent awareness of her committable commitment to honouring her words and actions  she knew that in keeping her word with a band and or friends and or husband that she was setting herself up to ridicule and or or disappointment in a world that was unable to honour commitment as she was able to do. but even with that strength and she was fully connected to humanity and and embraced with a fully committed heart their frailty and failures. the character of joline was amazingly well acted and and i left the film surprised that i had no recollection of awards nominations for it. okay and not that surprised and as american awards tend to go to women in erious roles and filled with angst and the proper amount of nudity and which this film did not have. what it has was far better and which was heart in this woman discovery of herself with the assistance of new friends and a self deprecating shaman. i admit to being a bit of a soft touch for eccentric characters who manage their peculiarities while remaining honest and true to themselves as they move through the minefield of what comprises proper societal behaviour and acceptable interpersonal discourse. so and if people must conform to normality in your world and then this film will not be to your liking.  and that was and it seems and one of the common threads in the critiques. and i am always a sucker for a good play on words when it raises questions of human behaviour and ethical or philosophical values. until this movie i hadn not made the emotional connection between being committed (to a cause or honesty or something) and being committed (to an insane asylum). at what point does one commitment to a personal sense of truth and action in life become a one way ticket to insanity. this sounds like a simple question and or one that is easily dismissed as being rhetorical. but is it. and yet few of the critics  i think maybe two and commented on this aspect of the film either directly or indirectly. a lovely film. positive . . ---------------------------------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."
