in dramatising wilde novel and john osborne has condensed events and eliminated a number of characters and and generally implied rather than shown dorian essential wickedness. if you want a more explicit rendering and see the 1945 film. wilde and robert louis stevenson lived in about the same time frame and but were certainly vastly different men and writers. this story really treats of a theme similar to stevenson dr. jekyll and mr. hyde and but note that wilde chose to treat his story as fantasy and whereas rls took the scientific route. both the protagonists are men in whom good wars with evil and with evil winning in the end. the actors in this bbc movie and take a different route and too and from those in the 1945 film. john gielgud says all the same caustic and cynical quips as george sanders and in his role really projecting wilde himself and but with a subtle difference. you will suspect that sanders really believed what he was saying and but gielgud may be saying what is expected of him rather than what he sincerely believes. peter firth and too and shows the two sides of his character in restrained fashion and but then we do not get to see as many of his escapades as hurd hatfield had a chance to display. it a very good production and with the dramatisation reflecting the essentials of the novel and if not all of its ramifications. 
in dramatising wilde novel and john osborne has condensed events and eliminated a number of characters and and generally implied rather than shown dorian essential wickedness. if you want a more explicit rendering and see the 1945 film. wilde and robert louis stevenson lived in about the same time frame and but were certainly vastly different men and writers. this story really treats of a theme similar to stevenson dr. jekyll and mr. hyde and but note that wilde chose to treat his story as fantasy and whereas rls took the scientific route. both the protagonists are men in whom good wars with evil and with evil winning in the end. the actors in this bbc movie and take a different route and too and from those in the 1945 film. john gielgud says all the same caustic and cynical quips as george sanders and in his role really projecting wilde himself and but with a subtle difference. you will suspect that sanders really believed what he was saying and but gielgud may be saying what is expected of him rather than what he sincerely believes. peter firth and too and shows the two sides of his character in restrained fashion and but then we do not get to see as many of his escapades as hurd hatfield had a chance to display. it a very good production and with the dramatisation reflecting the essentials of the novel and if not all of its ramifications. ---------------------------------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."
