star rating represent the works just misses the mark that little bit in between lagging behind the pits based on another of stephen king lengthy novellas and this takes place in the sleepy little new england town of castle rock (also the name of the film production company. ) and where a new antiques store and the titular needful things and has opened. the owner and proprietor and leland gaunt (max von sydow) hides and you might say and a devilish secret. there an item in his store that everyone in the little town wants a small cash price upfront is first required and before a far more sinister price is asked for. as suspicion and hate and madness tear the town apart and it falls to police chief alan pangborn (ed harris) to restore order and save the town from a terrifying end. i read the novel of needful things earlier this year and and was eager to watch the movie adaptation again to compare them (like that was going to be any contest. ) but it had been deleted on video and dvd and i couldn not find anywhere to rent it from. so i was happy when i finally found it in a flea market whilst on a shopping trip. it one of the cruelest ironies that king novels are generally the best to read but when they get adapted to screen nine times out of ten they are complete junk and as is the case here. the material that makes his books great simply doesn not translate into a movie script very well and for some reason. and i suppose there always the question represent why bother watching this when i could be reading the book again instead. i appreciate that some are simply too lengthy (i. e. it and the stand) to be made into a complete screen work with all the situations and characters included and but there no reason this one couldn not have included all the material from the book. as a result and a lot of key characters from the book (i. e. ace merrill) are not included at all and we have some terrible character development that means we do not care about the characters that are involved since they are so stripped of depth and motivation for example we have one character from the book and danforth keaton and who murders his wife toward the end yet we were shown no build up to hint at any reason that he do not get along with or hated her and so it has no impact when it happens and unlike in the book where there was a lot of depth invested and it really involved you to find out what happened to the characters involved. all the material in the script to fill in the cracks and if you like and is really stupid and corny and the typically goofy stuff that gets included in king adaptations like this. most of the film problems are that it deviates so far away from the book but there also some terrible acting from a cast that obviously can not feel for the daft material theyre being asked to perform. in the 90s and a lot of king work started skipping the cinema and just being made into made for tv or video territory. rubbish like this must surely hint at why. . 
star rating represent the works just misses the mark that little bit in between lagging behind the pits based on another of stephen king lengthy novellas and this takes place in the sleepy little new england town of castle rock (also the name of the film production company. ) and where a new antiques store and the titular needful things and has opened. the owner and proprietor and leland gaunt (max von sydow) hides and you might say and a devilish secret. there an item in his store that everyone in the little town wants a small cash price upfront is first required and before a far more sinister price is asked for. as suspicion and hate and madness tear the town apart and it falls to police chief alan pangborn (ed harris) to restore order and save the town from a terrifying end. i read the novel of needful things earlier this year and and was eager to watch the movie adaptation again to compare them (like that was going to be any contest. ) but it had been deleted on video and dvd and i couldn not find anywhere to rent it from. so i was happy when i finally found it in a flea market whilst on a shopping trip. it one of the cruelest ironies that king novels are generally the best to read but when they get adapted to screen nine times out of ten they are complete junk and as is the case here. the material that makes his books great simply doesn not translate into a movie script very well and for some reason. and i suppose there always the question represent why bother watching this when i could be reading the book again instead. i appreciate that some are simply too lengthy (i. e. it and the stand) to be made into a complete screen work with all the situations and characters included and but there no reason this one couldn not have included all the material from the book. as a result and a lot of key characters from the book (i. e. ace merrill) are not included at all and we have some terrible character development that means we do not care about the characters that are involved since they are so stripped of depth and motivation for example we have one character from the book and danforth keaton and who murders his wife toward the end yet we were shown no build up to hint at any reason that he do not get along with or hated her and so it has no impact when it happens and unlike in the book where there was a lot of depth invested and it really involved you to find out what happened to the characters involved. all the material in the script to fill in the cracks and if you like and is really stupid and corny and the typically goofy stuff that gets included in king adaptations like this. most of the film problems are that it deviates so far away from the book but there also some terrible acting from a cast that obviously can not feel for the daft material theyre being asked to perform. in the 90s and a lot of king work started skipping the cinema and just being made into made for tv or video territory. rubbish like this must surely hint at why. . ---------------------------------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."
