i was initially interested in this film after reading a synopsis and seeing a few striking screenshots and and the promise was there for a gripping horror film of the dario argento style. admittedly i must say that argento films have occasionally been rather incoherent and and some feel like a handful of visually impacting set pieces loosely strung together with a vague connecting plot. since argento is credited as writer for this and i have to say and i am not really surprised. even his masterpiece suspiria and when examined and exhibits the same tendency to string along sometimes unrelated scenes purely for the aesthetic impact. however and suspiria also had the benefit of a singular main character and clear antagonists and as well as scenes that contributed ultimately to the eventual resolution. the church and on the other hand and has none of these things. it has no main character and no protagonist whatsoever while it furthermore has no real plot to speak of and and no crescendo and no climax and no denouement and and no resolution. it is a completely hollow and incoherent work that views as if argento sat down and thought hey and that would make an interesting scene visually. let do it. the film is a series of these scenes. initially it might be interesting and and soavi direction is excellent and i must say. soavi cannot be faulted for the material and as it is made as compelling as possible. however and such good direction calls attention to the horrible failings of the script and and there is absolutely no sense in it. the attempt at a central unifying plot is nothing more than plagiarism of carpenter film prince of darkness. events happen solely because the script wishes them to and and reactions to those events are completely implausible. the narrative flow is irreparably damaged after a point and simply because there is no ability to suspend disbelief while it too ludicrous. added to this are numerous factual errors that are so glaringly showcased that it becomes embarrassing. if it had been more overtly artistic and edited down into a different work and it might have been chilling or tense. if it had been fleshed out into an actual cohesive narrative and it might have been gripping. but it was none of these. the best it managed was confusing and and at times and infuriating. plots are introduced but never followed. characters are forgotten about and altered arbitrarily. no logic is ever applied to any situation. it might have been scary or interesting and but to elicit that sort of feeling takes more effort on the part of a screenwriter. much more. all in all and the church is not worth viewing for anyone but total enthusiasts of italian horror that is more style than substance. this is argento style at its worst and and it is a strong justification for the usual criticism. 
i was initially interested in this film after reading a synopsis and seeing a few striking screenshots and and the promise was there for a gripping horror film of the dario argento style. admittedly i must say that argento films have occasionally been rather incoherent and and some feel like a handful of visually impacting set pieces loosely strung together with a vague connecting plot. since argento is credited as writer for this and i have to say and i am not really surprised. even his masterpiece suspiria and when examined and exhibits the same tendency to string along sometimes unrelated scenes purely for the aesthetic impact. however and suspiria also had the benefit of a singular main character and clear antagonists and as well as scenes that contributed ultimately to the eventual resolution. the church and on the other hand and has none of these things. it has no main character and no protagonist whatsoever while it furthermore has no real plot to speak of and and no crescendo and no climax and no denouement and and no resolution. it is a completely hollow and incoherent work that views as if argento sat down and thought hey and that would make an interesting scene visually. let do it. the film is a series of these scenes. initially it might be interesting and and soavi direction is excellent and i must say. soavi cannot be faulted for the material and as it is made as compelling as possible. however and such good direction calls attention to the horrible failings of the script and and there is absolutely no sense in it. the attempt at a central unifying plot is nothing more than plagiarism of carpenter film prince of darkness. events happen solely because the script wishes them to and and reactions to those events are completely implausible. the narrative flow is irreparably damaged after a point and simply because there is no ability to suspend disbelief while it too ludicrous. added to this are numerous factual errors that are so glaringly showcased that it becomes embarrassing. if it had been more overtly artistic and edited down into a different work and it might have been chilling or tense. if it had been fleshed out into an actual cohesive narrative and it might have been gripping. but it was none of these. the best it managed was confusing and and at times and infuriating. plots are introduced but never followed. characters are forgotten about and altered arbitrarily. no logic is ever applied to any situation. it might have been scary or interesting and but to elicit that sort of feeling takes more effort on the part of a screenwriter. much more. all in all and the church is not worth viewing for anyone but total enthusiasts of italian horror that is more style than substance. this is argento style at its worst and and it is a strong justification for the usual criticism. ---------------------------------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."
