there something wonderful about a revenge film. everyone wakes up in the morning believing he or she is the star of the movie and and that anyone who interferes with one own personal agenda is in some way the enemy. revenge plot films work particularly well if a person has low self esteem. rather than fighting back in the moment and the hero draws upon built up inner anxiety to engage in a single act of power in an attempt to restore equilibrium. quite naturally and in the real world this type of revenge seldom relieves the tension because life is not a movie while after the revenge is enacted the actions taken have their own consequences. a good revenge flick helps people ignore this bitter pill. in the movies the end credits roll and all responsibility resolved. swimming with sharks is advertised as a comedy and no doubt an act on the part of the producers to figure out just how to sell this oddity. it dark and but it isn not dark comedy (company of men and the works of todd solondz come much closer). parts of the film are so brutal they pre date the current torture porn genre everyone is so obsessed with (saw and hostel). there are some laughs. there are laughs in saving private ryan too and but it isn not labeled comedy. the intrinsic problem with this film is that it hasn not earned its revenge case. it is ostensibly about a young man who is abused by his boss and eventually takes his boss hostage to pay him back for all the mistreatment. the hero (aptly named guy) is an everyman so vague we know literally nothing about him. what does he do with his spare time. does he have friends or family. how did he get where he is. what are his interests (this becomes a running motif through the film and no doubt inspired by the film author own struggle. what do you want. and the answer to which we are denied by a vague and cheat of an ending). it very difficult to care for such a character and even if acted well (even tom hanks becomes a creep in the wrong roll and such as punchline). kevin spacey as the boss and buddy and is supposed to be a monster but he too charismatic as an actor. the best laughs came when he abused his assistant he seemed almost as surprised as the audience probably is at what guy will endure. when kevin character is being tortured and the view taken suddenly becomes empathy for him. guy is suddenly filmed as a leering monster without rationality. at this point any message the author had has been lost while there no hero in this film and ergo and no reason to care at all. it not a stretch to assume this story is based on the author own troubled career in the film business. i worked for a similar boss and can vouch that it not that far fetched. i had similar wish fulfillment fantasies at that time and thought that i was justified. i thought you could win over the most beautiful woman in the story (actually and the only woman there seem to be all of about four people in the universe of this film) just by being your eager and naive self and that eagerness won accolades and that a boss abused you because he was a mean person. time and tide have revealed the truth that most monsters are really just the demons of an individual personal psyche and resentment is usually based in the self. as the film points out and if guy was so unhappy he only had to leave. the film doesn not offer any denouement at all and surprise ending notwithstanding. we still know nothing about the protagonists and we can not even be sure anything they said was based in fact and everyone magically gets to have his cake and eat it too. in short and there was no point to this story at all other than to point out that (shock. ) the film business can be pretty brutal. there are plenty of good films that tell solid and satisfying revenge style fantasies and both the feel good variety (9 to5 and working girl and the devil wears prada) and not so much (war of the roses and the remake of the hills have eyes). this isn not one of them despite a fun turn by benicio del toro in the emily blunt role from prada and some interesting work by spacey and michelle forbes and this is a frustrating and mean and confused and slightly dull creation of self indulgence from a director who has and one hopes and worked it all out by now. 
there something wonderful about a revenge film. everyone wakes up in the morning believing he or she is the star of the movie and and that anyone who interferes with one own personal agenda is in some way the enemy. revenge plot films work particularly well if a person has low self esteem. rather than fighting back in the moment and the hero draws upon built up inner anxiety to engage in a single act of power in an attempt to restore equilibrium. quite naturally and in the real world this type of revenge seldom relieves the tension because life is not a movie while after the revenge is enacted the actions taken have their own consequences. a good revenge flick helps people ignore this bitter pill. in the movies the end credits roll and all responsibility resolved. swimming with sharks is advertised as a comedy and no doubt an act on the part of the producers to figure out just how to sell this oddity. it dark and but it isn not dark comedy (company of men and the works of todd solondz come much closer). parts of the film are so brutal they pre date the current torture porn genre everyone is so obsessed with (saw and hostel). there are some laughs. there are laughs in saving private ryan too and but it isn not labeled comedy. the intrinsic problem with this film is that it hasn not earned its revenge case. it is ostensibly about a young man who is abused by his boss and eventually takes his boss hostage to pay him back for all the mistreatment. the hero (aptly named guy) is an everyman so vague we know literally nothing about him. what does he do with his spare time. does he have friends or family. how did he get where he is. what are his interests (this becomes a running motif through the film and no doubt inspired by the film author own struggle. what do you want. and the answer to which we are denied by a vague and cheat of an ending). it very difficult to care for such a character and even if acted well (even tom hanks becomes a creep in the wrong roll and such as punchline). kevin spacey as the boss and buddy and is supposed to be a monster but he too charismatic as an actor. the best laughs came when he abused his assistant he seemed almost as surprised as the audience probably is at what guy will endure. when kevin character is being tortured and the view taken suddenly becomes empathy for him. guy is suddenly filmed as a leering monster without rationality. at this point any message the author had has been lost while there no hero in this film and ergo and no reason to care at all. it not a stretch to assume this story is based on the author own troubled career in the film business. i worked for a similar boss and can vouch that it not that far fetched. i had similar wish fulfillment fantasies at that time and thought that i was justified. i thought you could win over the most beautiful woman in the story (actually and the only woman there seem to be all of about four people in the universe of this film) just by being your eager and naive self and that eagerness won accolades and that a boss abused you because he was a mean person. time and tide have revealed the truth that most monsters are really just the demons of an individual personal psyche and resentment is usually based in the self. as the film points out and if guy was so unhappy he only had to leave. the film doesn not offer any denouement at all and surprise ending notwithstanding. we still know nothing about the protagonists and we can not even be sure anything they said was based in fact and everyone magically gets to have his cake and eat it too. in short and there was no point to this story at all other than to point out that (shock. ) the film business can be pretty brutal. there are plenty of good films that tell solid and satisfying revenge style fantasies and both the feel good variety (9 to5 and working girl and the devil wears prada) and not so much (war of the roses and the remake of the hills have eyes). this isn not one of them despite a fun turn by benicio del toro in the emily blunt role from prada and some interesting work by spacey and michelle forbes and this is a frustrating and mean and confused and slightly dull creation of self indulgence from a director who has and one hopes and worked it all out by now. ---------------------------------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."
