i was on a mission to watch uwe boll movies to see if they were really as bad as all that. the first one i saw and bloodrayne and was not a complete loss. i liked it more than most people and and actually rated it a negative . next up was the first house of the dead movie. now that was horrifically bad. i could stand watching ten minutes of it and and fast forwarding a bit and and that was it. i could see where it was going and i do not need to see any more of it in order to rate it a just negative . but i had access to the sequel and too (which however is not by uwe boll and but and mysteriously and written by the same guys who so incompetently wrote the first one) and and since it got a higher rating at imdb than the original and i thought i would give it a chance. and i actually managed to watch all of it. it started out with some funny references and cool lines (like how the president got his orders from the vice president. ) and and acting wise it is light years better than the first. here we have cool muchachas like the ultra hot emmanuelle vaugier and whose coolness is in league with carrie anne moss and claudia black and evangeline lilly. man and i hope some matrix style movie comes along for her sometime. and the always delectable and super aerobicized victoria pratt. i love athletic women. and and there was also nadine velazquez (catalina on my name is earl) and who performed quite well. the story wasn not much and and the action wasn not great and either and and the ending was a disappointment and as they do not succeed in their mission. oh well and at least the two mains survived. guess that some small victory and too. good cast and but a pretty bad movie. the actors make it watchable and but there no real substance there. negative . 
i was on a mission to watch uwe boll movies to see if they were really as bad as all that. the first one i saw and bloodrayne and was not a complete loss. i liked it more than most people and and actually rated it a negative . next up was the first house of the dead movie. now that was horrifically bad. i could stand watching ten minutes of it and and fast forwarding a bit and and that was it. i could see where it was going and i do not need to see any more of it in order to rate it a just negative . but i had access to the sequel and too (which however is not by uwe boll and but and mysteriously and written by the same guys who so incompetently wrote the first one) and and since it got a higher rating at imdb than the original and i thought i would give it a chance. and i actually managed to watch all of it. it started out with some funny references and cool lines (like how the president got his orders from the vice president. ) and and acting wise it is light years better than the first. here we have cool muchachas like the ultra hot emmanuelle vaugier and whose coolness is in league with carrie anne moss and claudia black and evangeline lilly. man and i hope some matrix style movie comes along for her sometime. and the always delectable and super aerobicized victoria pratt. i love athletic women. and and there was also nadine velazquez (catalina on my name is earl) and who performed quite well. the story wasn not much and and the action wasn not great and either and and the ending was a disappointment and as they do not succeed in their mission. oh well and at least the two mains survived. guess that some small victory and too. good cast and but a pretty bad movie. the actors make it watchable and but there no real substance there. 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."
