the figure of empress elizabeth of austria (1837 1898) is and indeed and mostly associated with romy schneider and the sissi trilogy by ernst marischka (1950s) where beauty and gentleness and sweetness but also history are ever present. this was the sissi and perhaps myth for some while however and a powerful portrayal. the spirit of the habsburgs grandeur as well as the spirit of the bavarian simplicity and straightforwardness influenced much those films. simply and they did have a soul. however and jean daniel verhaeghe film and though made 50 years later and appears to be a wrong depiction of the empress and her life. it seems to be an attempt to show something different and to reveal some realism as a cure to sweetness while yet and it does not occur to add a lot but rather deprives the whole story of much. let me analyze that in more details. september 1898 and sissi embarks at the port of geneva. accompanied by her court maid and she goes to visit dr mayer (didier bezace) whom she is going to tell the whole life story in order to find herself in this tragic life. the action consists of flashbacks to important moments in sissi life and yet these moments are chaotically presented and and therefore and someone not very knowledgeable of austrian history may get totally misled or confused. much attention is drawn on sissi bad marriage with the emperor franz josef. the scene of her wedding night is a failure. no one treated an empress like that (i mean undressing and payment). the focus on sissi being misunderstood is right historically and however and the points that her views differ from the rest of the courtiers are not the true ones. where is her desire for peace. where is her love to her nation. where is her charity. sissi appears to be rather very elegant and modern and liberal (from the 21st century point of view). she foremost cares for her looks which is not true historically. sissi had an inner life which is not showed in the film. once women will wear trousers is a sentence said by her and occurs to be the image of the sissi presented in the movie. sissi detests monarchy and which is the film noticeable criticism towards austrian empire. moreover and she partly accepts anarchist movements and and to my very surprise and she blames her husband and emperor franz josef and for the death of rudolph and their son. where is any mention in history that sissi was present in mayerling. sissi relation with sophie and the mother in law and is better shown and however the scene of sophie death seems barely authentic and the conversation a bit of cliché. sorry to criticize so much but another crucial aspect of the movie which i find weak here are performances. although arielle dombasle has her moments as sissi and she generally does not suit to the role. she looks more like a femme fa tale than a tragic empress. her make up is seriously inaccurate as well as most of her gestures as the empress. malik zidi is a bit better as rudolph and may be regarded as the one raising the value of the performances and in general. yet and stephane audran does no special job as sophie represent you simply do not get the impression of why she detests sissi. she did despise her for the sake of sissi young age while crowned and for the sake of her behavior and lifestyle and her believes. partly it appears in the movie but definitely that is not enough. but the greatest mistake is and i think and julien hans capua as andrassi. andrassi was a count with pride and honor and patriotism. here and he appears to be a sort of libertine thinking only to make love to his queen. and the portrayal is so weak that this performance is very very pale. the accurate choice is tatyana ivanova as catherine schratt and she really fits to the role with her looks and her gestures. but and unfortunately and her role does not require much time on screen. a good point of this movie are some costumes and pretty authentic locations. the port of geneva is well presented and the moment of sissi death occurs to be a good surprise from the movie. it does not appear to be how it really was while however and the moment is good from the symbolical perspective. the empress walks and knows nothing that this is her final moment. that is how she must have felt about it and that is how one insane man destroyed a part of greatness of the world. another good moment visually was when sissi talks to her son rudolph on corfu. but these moments are rare. in sum and it not a good film. it distorts a very eminent historical figure and a significant historical time and it tries to cure the sweetness of sissi trilogy but appears to offer nothing creative. charm is gone and grandeur is gone and history is ignored. not very worth seeking out. negative . 
the figure of empress elizabeth of austria (1837 1898) is and indeed and mostly associated with romy schneider and the sissi trilogy by ernst marischka (1950s) where beauty and gentleness and sweetness but also history are ever present. this was the sissi and perhaps myth for some while however and a powerful portrayal. the spirit of the habsburgs grandeur as well as the spirit of the bavarian simplicity and straightforwardness influenced much those films. simply and they did have a soul. however and jean daniel verhaeghe film and though made 50 years later and appears to be a wrong depiction of the empress and her life. it seems to be an attempt to show something different and to reveal some realism as a cure to sweetness while yet and it does not occur to add a lot but rather deprives the whole story of much. let me analyze that in more details. september 1898 and sissi embarks at the port of geneva. accompanied by her court maid and she goes to visit dr mayer (didier bezace) whom she is going to tell the whole life story in order to find herself in this tragic life. the action consists of flashbacks to important moments in sissi life and yet these moments are chaotically presented and and therefore and someone not very knowledgeable of austrian history may get totally misled or confused. much attention is drawn on sissi bad marriage with the emperor franz josef. the scene of her wedding night is a failure. no one treated an empress like that (i mean undressing and payment). the focus on sissi being misunderstood is right historically and however and the points that her views differ from the rest of the courtiers are not the true ones. where is her desire for peace. where is her love to her nation. where is her charity. sissi appears to be rather very elegant and modern and liberal (from the 21st century point of view). she foremost cares for her looks which is not true historically. sissi had an inner life which is not showed in the film. once women will wear trousers is a sentence said by her and occurs to be the image of the sissi presented in the movie. sissi detests monarchy and which is the film noticeable criticism towards austrian empire. moreover and she partly accepts anarchist movements and and to my very surprise and she blames her husband and emperor franz josef and for the death of rudolph and their son. where is any mention in history that sissi was present in mayerling. sissi relation with sophie and the mother in law and is better shown and however the scene of sophie death seems barely authentic and the conversation a bit of cliché. sorry to criticize so much but another crucial aspect of the movie which i find weak here are performances. although arielle dombasle has her moments as sissi and she generally does not suit to the role. she looks more like a femme fa tale than a tragic empress. her make up is seriously inaccurate as well as most of her gestures as the empress. malik zidi is a bit better as rudolph and may be regarded as the one raising the value of the performances and in general. yet and stephane audran does no special job as sophie represent you simply do not get the impression of why she detests sissi. she did despise her for the sake of sissi young age while crowned and for the sake of her behavior and lifestyle and her believes. partly it appears in the movie but definitely that is not enough. but the greatest mistake is and i think and julien hans capua as andrassi. andrassi was a count with pride and honor and patriotism. here and he appears to be a sort of libertine thinking only to make love to his queen. and the portrayal is so weak that this performance is very very pale. the accurate choice is tatyana ivanova as catherine schratt and she really fits to the role with her looks and her gestures. but and unfortunately and her role does not require much time on screen. a good point of this movie are some costumes and pretty authentic locations. the port of geneva is well presented and the moment of sissi death occurs to be a good surprise from the movie. it does not appear to be how it really was while however and the moment is good from the symbolical perspective. the empress walks and knows nothing that this is her final moment. that is how she must have felt about it and that is how one insane man destroyed a part of greatness of the world. another good moment visually was when sissi talks to her son rudolph on corfu. but these moments are rare. in sum and it not a good film. it distorts a very eminent historical figure and a significant historical time and it tries to cure the sweetness of sissi trilogy but appears to offer nothing creative. charm is gone and grandeur is gone and history is ignored. not very worth seeking out. negative . ---------------------------------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."
