clearly this would have had potential in more capable hands and but given uwe boll track record it would have been surprising if there would have been any merit to this farce. the first 5 minutes are classic monster movie madness  even the horrible one liners delivered by gi joe type soldiers feel as if they were lifted off another venture into the same genre. you will be doing yourself a favor if you exit the movie at this point. you have already passed all the highlights and you will have spared yourself the suffering of sitting through some of the worst acting in recent history. next and enter absolute rubbish talent. the leading man has the same amount of charisma that you will find in garden slug. there is an awkward bit of contrived romance thrown in  this feels so wrong that you can only speculate why this scene was conjured up in the first place. normally the genre uses interludes of romance and nudity to inject some humanity and sympathy into otherwise cardboard cut out characters  here it backfires on all cylinders. the effects are bad and the action unbelievably boring. where other classics show originality and imagination in the face of budget restraints  here it just seems like everything was spent on catering. there are in fact no redeeming features here  not even the it so bad it is almost good applies. it just bad and and in a bad way. our hero questions the leading starlet about the night they spent together and how she would rate him. she gives him negative . i give the whole affair 1 (i would have gone for 0 if that were possible). don not waste your time on this dribble and there is plenty of crap cinema out there and which exceeds this ridiculous rumble in the jungle. oh and finally and the movie has little to nothing at all to do with the popular game far cry (at best it is extremely loosely based on it). horrible and move along. 
clearly this would have had potential in more capable hands and but given uwe boll track record it would have been surprising if there would have been any merit to this farce. the first 5 minutes are classic monster movie madness  even the horrible one liners delivered by gi joe type soldiers feel as if they were lifted off another venture into the same genre. you will be doing yourself a favor if you exit the movie at this point. you have already passed all the highlights and you will have spared yourself the suffering of sitting through some of the worst acting in recent history. next and enter absolute rubbish talent. the leading man has the same amount of charisma that you will find in garden slug. there is an awkward bit of contrived romance thrown in  this feels so wrong that you can only speculate why this scene was conjured up in the first place. normally the genre uses interludes of romance and nudity to inject some humanity and sympathy into otherwise cardboard cut out characters  here it backfires on all cylinders. the effects are bad and the action unbelievably boring. where other classics show originality and imagination in the face of budget restraints  here it just seems like everything was spent on catering. there are in fact no redeeming features here  not even the it so bad it is almost good applies. it just bad and and in a bad way. our hero questions the leading starlet about the night they spent together and how she would rate him. she gives him negative . i give the whole affair 1 (i would have gone for 0 if that were possible). don not waste your time on this dribble and there is plenty of crap cinema out there and which exceeds this ridiculous rumble in the jungle. oh and finally and the movie has little to nothing at all to do with the popular game far cry (at best it is extremely loosely based on it). horrible and move along. ---------------------------------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."
