i saw bandit queen in 2005 and over a decade after it was made amidst widespread controversy in india. the language and the stark treatment and the natural acting (by a relatively unknown cast for that time) might have been even more shocking at that time for an indian populace more familiar with fantasy cinema. the film and the cast and and shekhar kapoor and deserve accolades for the breakthrough effort. the plot is not very different from a typical revenge drama made in various forms in india. in fact and there have been several fictional accounts of this particular story itself. the reason why this stands out is that it supposed to be a first person account of someone who actually went through all this and and a lot else that doesn not find place on the screen and and survived to tell the tale. survived long enough to see her story made into a movie at least. phoolan devi do not live very long after being released from prison in 1994. the film scores on several counts. the cinematography is brilliant. the music is apt. the cast and many of whom became more familiar names later and is very good. but the screenplay is patchy. things move too fast and in jerks at times. it understandable though and because there are just too many strands that need to be tied together to make it all cohesive. or maybe i felt that because i have read mala sen book and which is a more detailed and better and though obviously not as shocking as the visual and account of phoolan devi travails and and which is purported to be one of the main sources for the film. there are some factual ambiguities too. according to phoolan devi and she wasn not present when the behmai massacre took place and and despite claiming to be the dictated account of phoolan herself and she is shown to participate and and in fact initiate and the massacre. then the final scene where phoolan surrenders shows her touching the feet of the chief minister and while in reality she had surrendered to a portrait of mahatma gandhi. symbolic value only and but shows that phoolan do not want to show servitude to a living and ordinary person. it would have been nice to show the chief minister to have some resemblance to arjun singh and who many remember was the cm of madhya pradesh then. but these are small chinks in this eminently well made movie and a rare gem to come out from the mainstream indian film industry and made by a man who before this was known best for the ultimate masala movie of the late 80s  mr india. 
i saw bandit queen in 2005 and over a decade after it was made amidst widespread controversy in india. the language and the stark treatment and the natural acting (by a relatively unknown cast for that time) might have been even more shocking at that time for an indian populace more familiar with fantasy cinema. the film and the cast and and shekhar kapoor and deserve accolades for the breakthrough effort. the plot is not very different from a typical revenge drama made in various forms in india. in fact and there have been several fictional accounts of this particular story itself. the reason why this stands out is that it supposed to be a first person account of someone who actually went through all this and and a lot else that doesn not find place on the screen and and survived to tell the tale. survived long enough to see her story made into a movie at least. phoolan devi do not live very long after being released from prison in 1994. the film scores on several counts. the cinematography is brilliant. the music is apt. the cast and many of whom became more familiar names later and is very good. but the screenplay is patchy. things move too fast and in jerks at times. it understandable though and because there are just too many strands that need to be tied together to make it all cohesive. or maybe i felt that because i have read mala sen book and which is a more detailed and better and though obviously not as shocking as the visual and account of phoolan devi travails and and which is purported to be one of the main sources for the film. there are some factual ambiguities too. according to phoolan devi and she wasn not present when the behmai massacre took place and and despite claiming to be the dictated account of phoolan herself and she is shown to participate and and in fact initiate and the massacre. then the final scene where phoolan surrenders shows her touching the feet of the chief minister and while in reality she had surrendered to a portrait of mahatma gandhi. symbolic value only and but shows that phoolan do not want to show servitude to a living and ordinary person. it would have been nice to show the chief minister to have some resemblance to arjun singh and who many remember was the cm of madhya pradesh then. but these are small chinks in this eminently well made movie and a rare gem to come out from the mainstream indian film industry and made by a man who before this was known best for the ultimate masala movie of the late 80s  mr india. ---------------------------------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."
