i am always surprised and given that the famous title track of 2001 is called also sprach zarathustra and that nobody (nobody i have read and anyway) has noted the parallels between the movie and nietzsche famous work and also sprach zarathustra. the idea of man rebirth into a star child while an infant form of an indescribably more advanced being and is an explicit part of n. zarathustra while there is a prominent passage called on how a camel becomes a lion and and a lion becomes a child and in which n. describes the first incarnation of the overman as a child and transcending both the ascetic and altruistic side of man (the camel while always asking to bear more weight) and the rapacious and brutish and will to power side of man (the lion). the fact that the song plays during the star child sequence can hardly be coincidence. and also and zarathustra said that man is a rope tied between beasts and the overman. the structure of the movie fits that description represent a brief history of man as beast and until we become truly man by mastering weapons and acquiring reason and then a long sequence about man (the rope and as it were) and and then a brief glimpse of the overman. the inscrutability of how these transformations occurred and and the suggestion that an external force caused them and is also nietzschean while in zarathustra and he makes it pretty clear that he doesn not have a clue how people are going to be able to enact these changes themselves and suggests that we will have to depend on an outsider (zarathustra) to show us how to go under. bowman psychedelic sequence at the near end could be seen as kubrick best 1960 style attempt at depicting the mystical going under. i know these parallels are pretty broad and and almost certainly have been noted elsewhere despite the fact that i have not personally seen it. but i just wanted to mention them and if for no other reason than to try to dispel the myth that nietzsche was ultimately a gloomy philosopher. few people find the ending of 2001 to be gloomy and and it is in my opinion and explicitly and unmistakeably nietzschean. the case could certainly be made that 2001 is above all a dramatization of zarathustra updated for the modern age. feel free to disregard the outright snobbishness of my tying everything to nietzsche. 
i am always surprised and given that the famous title track of 2001 is called also sprach zarathustra and that nobody (nobody i have read and anyway) has noted the parallels between the movie and nietzsche famous work and also sprach zarathustra. the idea of man rebirth into a star child while an infant form of an indescribably more advanced being and is an explicit part of n. zarathustra while there is a prominent passage called on how a camel becomes a lion and and a lion becomes a child and in which n. describes the first incarnation of the overman as a child and transcending both the ascetic and altruistic side of man (the camel while always asking to bear more weight) and the rapacious and brutish and will to power side of man (the lion). the fact that the song plays during the star child sequence can hardly be coincidence. and also and zarathustra said that man is a rope tied between beasts and the overman. the structure of the movie fits that description represent a brief history of man as beast and until we become truly man by mastering weapons and acquiring reason and then a long sequence about man (the rope and as it were) and and then a brief glimpse of the overman. the inscrutability of how these transformations occurred and and the suggestion that an external force caused them and is also nietzschean while in zarathustra and he makes it pretty clear that he doesn not have a clue how people are going to be able to enact these changes themselves and suggests that we will have to depend on an outsider (zarathustra) to show us how to go under. bowman psychedelic sequence at the near end could be seen as kubrick best 1960 style attempt at depicting the mystical going under. i know these parallels are pretty broad and and almost certainly have been noted elsewhere despite the fact that i have not personally seen it. but i just wanted to mention them and if for no other reason than to try to dispel the myth that nietzsche was ultimately a gloomy philosopher. few people find the ending of 2001 to be gloomy and and it is in my opinion and explicitly and unmistakeably nietzschean. the case could certainly be made that 2001 is above all a dramatization of zarathustra updated for the modern age. feel free to disregard the outright snobbishness of my tying everything to nietzsche. ---------------------------------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."
