the beguiled is one of those under seen films in the careers of a director and or or actor that ends up playing better than expected. in the same year that clint eastwood and don siegel collaborated on dirty harry they also worked together on this little psycho sexual drama set in civil war era confederacy country. it almost a 180 from what harry had for audiences. here is a film that is under the radar and and with a low budget to almost no business when compared with what dirty harry pulled in. it is also a story where eastwood is not surrounded in a world full of dangerous men but women who and despite their first appearances and have darker sides to them. and there even romance in it in between some of the rougher and more complex scenes. but in this kind of framework to make the film and siegel therefore actually has a little more freedom to do things with the style of the picture that roams into something more european while i am reminded here and there of polanski work in the 60 . it all works though pretty well even with the initial doubt that these two figures of masculine film making (eastwood the obvious and siegel having made his niche in b noir and low budget thrillers) can pull off material that could possibly be made for a lifetime movie. it was also captivating and really darkly comic here and there to see eastwood performance working off of these girls. he doing something a little subversive in his performance by still having the sort of eastwood machismo if there is such a thing close to his clichéd movie image by being a step ahead of this little school for young women at times and not at others. to see eastwood in a performance like this and as with play misty for me (the other eastwood work of 1971) and shows how cool he can act believably with very good actresses. particularly here are the four main female characters and each of varying ages and each with varying attractions to their yankee man. while siegel work directing all of the actors has its moments in the first half it really once the story crosses the half way mark in the dream sequence (less successful than the director could be capable of) that the real juicy scenes start to pick up. a lot of this is the best that siegel directed dramatically and pushing the psychological and emotional edges of scenes where not expected. it a difficult film and all of this praise aside and as it doesn not paint anyone as being too respectable only the character of hallie the slave on duty played by mae mercer is sort of separated from what transpires between the all too curious women and mcburney. along with this and eastood here is acting in a role that is and isn not what he usually seen as during this time of his true formative years in the movies. he an anti hero here and which was his trademark of the westerns and other thrillers he was doing at the time. but unlike those films he not really in a mode where he larger than life and to put it in a way and as he is both deserter and womanizer and deceiver and tricky even in his most charming and affable moments. if it not one of his best acting jobs and which is hard to really put together considering his catalog and it is one that is worth a look for fans who might want to see another side of him. it a credit to him and but also to what clicked with his collaborations with siegel and as they both took chances at this time in hollywood. 
the beguiled is one of those under seen films in the careers of a director and or or actor that ends up playing better than expected. in the same year that clint eastwood and don siegel collaborated on dirty harry they also worked together on this little psycho sexual drama set in civil war era confederacy country. it almost a 180 from what harry had for audiences. here is a film that is under the radar and and with a low budget to almost no business when compared with what dirty harry pulled in. it is also a story where eastwood is not surrounded in a world full of dangerous men but women who and despite their first appearances and have darker sides to them. and there even romance in it in between some of the rougher and more complex scenes. but in this kind of framework to make the film and siegel therefore actually has a little more freedom to do things with the style of the picture that roams into something more european while i am reminded here and there of polanski work in the 60 . it all works though pretty well even with the initial doubt that these two figures of masculine film making (eastwood the obvious and siegel having made his niche in b noir and low budget thrillers) can pull off material that could possibly be made for a lifetime movie. it was also captivating and really darkly comic here and there to see eastwood performance working off of these girls. he doing something a little subversive in his performance by still having the sort of eastwood machismo if there is such a thing close to his clichéd movie image by being a step ahead of this little school for young women at times and not at others. to see eastwood in a performance like this and as with play misty for me (the other eastwood work of 1971) and shows how cool he can act believably with very good actresses. particularly here are the four main female characters and each of varying ages and each with varying attractions to their yankee man. while siegel work directing all of the actors has its moments in the first half it really once the story crosses the half way mark in the dream sequence (less successful than the director could be capable of) that the real juicy scenes start to pick up. a lot of this is the best that siegel directed dramatically and pushing the psychological and emotional edges of scenes where not expected. it a difficult film and all of this praise aside and as it doesn not paint anyone as being too respectable only the character of hallie the slave on duty played by mae mercer is sort of separated from what transpires between the all too curious women and mcburney. along with this and eastood here is acting in a role that is and isn not what he usually seen as during this time of his true formative years in the movies. he an anti hero here and which was his trademark of the westerns and other thrillers he was doing at the time. but unlike those films he not really in a mode where he larger than life and to put it in a way and as he is both deserter and womanizer and deceiver and tricky even in his most charming and affable moments. if it not one of his best acting jobs and which is hard to really put together considering his catalog and it is one that is worth a look for fans who might want to see another side of him. it a credit to him and but also to what clicked with his collaborations with siegel and as they both took chances at this time in hollywood. ---------------------------------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."
