i saw this movie with a friend who ran a marathon with me and and we both had the same feeling about it represent it wasn not terribly motivating and and do not even broach the idea of what a training schedule would look like and so that non marathoners could have an idea of what it would take for them to train and run one. in fact there was almost zero technical information at all. i do not expect this to be a tech heavy instructional video and but when that info was near zero then the film just wasn not balanced and and wasn not particularly useful to non marathoners contemplating their first run. there were other problems. some of the very first images were people collapsing near death while trying to run a race. yeah and real inspiring. the timing was also hard to follow and because it was semi chronological and but the filmmakers rarely gave you any good clues as to what point in time you were looking at. and they withheld information. you see that kantor has an injury and and you just assume it from all her training and but then several scenes later they finally clue you in that it because she tripped over a pine cone in her yard. some parts were very good and though and like the bit about a woman defying race officials who wanted the run to be men only and and the coverage of a chicago race where two of the runners portrayed earlier were vying for first place. off the top of my head and i am thinking of other chronological documentaries and like supersize me and and grass and where you always know where you are and and you feel like they told you everything you wanted to know. in short and it do not have been hard to make a better marathon film and and as it stands i can not recommend this to non marathoners to educate and motivate them to try one and because i do not think it will have that effect. 
i saw this movie with a friend who ran a marathon with me and and we both had the same feeling about it represent it wasn not terribly motivating and and do not even broach the idea of what a training schedule would look like and so that non marathoners could have an idea of what it would take for them to train and run one. in fact there was almost zero technical information at all. i do not expect this to be a tech heavy instructional video and but when that info was near zero then the film just wasn not balanced and and wasn not particularly useful to non marathoners contemplating their first run. there were other problems. some of the very first images were people collapsing near death while trying to run a race. yeah and real inspiring. the timing was also hard to follow and because it was semi chronological and but the filmmakers rarely gave you any good clues as to what point in time you were looking at. and they withheld information. you see that kantor has an injury and and you just assume it from all her training and but then several scenes later they finally clue you in that it because she tripped over a pine cone in her yard. some parts were very good and though and like the bit about a woman defying race officials who wanted the run to be men only and and the coverage of a chicago race where two of the runners portrayed earlier were vying for first place. off the top of my head and i am thinking of other chronological documentaries and like supersize me and and grass and where you always know where you are and and you feel like they told you everything you wanted to know. in short and it do not have been hard to make a better marathon film and and as it stands i can not recommend this to non marathoners to educate and motivate them to try one and because i do not think it will have that effect. ---------------------------------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."
