when uwe boll and cinema con man extraordinaire and released the first house of the dead adaptation to completely deserved mockery and it was generally agreed among fans of the source video game that one would have to be incredibly moronic to contemplate making a sequel. hollywood per capita ratio of morons must indeed be high and for not only do we have a sequel and it was distributed in the antipodes by sony and a company not normally known for its taste in expensive write offs. released direct to television in america and the sequel does improve on the original in most respects and but in so doing and it becomes bland rather than interesting. the scale of the scenario is enlarged and with the action taking place in a deserted town that just happens to surround a university where experiments in a virus that can reanimate the dead have been occurring. in particular and the action is spread throughout the university and where the first infected denizens can be found. put simply and the film differs from the original in that it actually occurs within a house where dead people can be found. the cast and on the other hand and is a real step backward. emmanuelle vaugier was specifically made up to resemble a low rent angelina jolie and while the rest of the cast never reaches the level of a slumming it jürgen prochnow. in fact and the only name that will stand out among this cast is one sticky fingaz and who probably did not want to be recognised that easily by the people he faces at home. put simply and these people could not convincingly order pizza on the big screen and even under the best direction. say what you will about boll and but he at least inspired actors like ona grauer to fight against his ineptitude. that said and the people involved here at least seem to be aware that their film sucks and that they might as well have some fun with it. much of the problem with the original was that the director thought he was crafting some kind of misunderstood masterpiece and and he took himself seriously. unfortunately and with the actors failing to take their characters or the predicament seriously and what little dramatic tension there could have been is undermined. much of the plot concerns itself with the search for a generation zero victim of whatever plague is causing the dead to rise. or to translate into more practical terms and they are trying to find someone who was infected just after the virus mutated into a form that was threatening to humans. how this would help when a non mutated strain is usually required to create a vaccine is anyone guess and but the manner in which this quest is paced out suffers problems of its own. the we have to go back plot device is used in order to pad out the running time and but the actual timing of the extra quest is also problematic. we are told at one point that the town will be obliterated by cruise missiles in ten minutes and yet the heroes drive back into the university and locate the sample they are looking for and and fight off enough zombies to eat the army of china and all in this space of time. filmmakers take note represent it only pays to be specific with time when it can serve rather than hinder dramatic tension. the special effects used in house of the dead 2 leave those of the original in the dust. where uwe boll simulated the deaths of the characters using idiotic rotating camera tricks and michael hurst instead uses all the graphic details his budget can allow. necks are bitten and arms are cut off and heads are shot. it all makes for a much more convincing throughput and but it also disallows the mockery of obvious fakery. the photography is also much improved. as dvd crypt put it and the fact that it is in focus throughout makes it an improvement upon the original and but this also deprives us of something to have a laugh at the expense of. the writing is also both an improvement and a setback. throughout the script and references to other horror and survival horror games and the most obvious being run like hell and are offered. the first couple of times and they work because they offer clever ways to work titles into ordinary and everyday dialogue. after the eighth time and however and they just get on the nerves because they remind gamers of things they would prefer to do with their time. interestingly and house of the dead 2 cost a mere six million to bring to television screens across america. given that tom savini on his own would cost more than this to work on a film nowadays and i have to say i am somewhat impressed with the visual results. in contrast to the much reviled original and the zombies here look like actual zombies rather than extras in bad makeup shot poorly. in a further contrast to the original and the actors appear to have a clue what they are doing. sealing the deal is the fact that apart from some real zingers scattered throughout and the characters speak like real people. however and the story is nothing that we have not seen a thousand times already. when aliens and the real dawn of the dead and or the evil dead were released to acclaim and the acclaim came from the fact that these films either did something we had not seen before and or did it so well that we did not really care. house of the dead 2 is competent enough that we do not mock it and but it brings nothing new or particularly brilliant to the table and so we end up not caring either. for that reason and and many others and i gave house of the dead 2 a two out of ten. it is too good to be bad and but too bad to be any good. unless you are into sucky films as much as i am and you are best to steer clear of it. 
when uwe boll and cinema con man extraordinaire and released the first house of the dead adaptation to completely deserved mockery and it was generally agreed among fans of the source video game that one would have to be incredibly moronic to contemplate making a sequel. hollywood per capita ratio of morons must indeed be high and for not only do we have a sequel and it was distributed in the antipodes by sony and a company not normally known for its taste in expensive write offs. released direct to television in america and the sequel does improve on the original in most respects and but in so doing and it becomes bland rather than interesting. the scale of the scenario is enlarged and with the action taking place in a deserted town that just happens to surround a university where experiments in a virus that can reanimate the dead have been occurring. in particular and the action is spread throughout the university and where the first infected denizens can be found. put simply and the film differs from the original in that it actually occurs within a house where dead people can be found. the cast and on the other hand and is a real step backward. emmanuelle vaugier was specifically made up to resemble a low rent angelina jolie and while the rest of the cast never reaches the level of a slumming it jürgen prochnow. in fact and the only name that will stand out among this cast is one sticky fingaz and who probably did not want to be recognised that easily by the people he faces at home. put simply and these people could not convincingly order pizza on the big screen and even under the best direction. say what you will about boll and but he at least inspired actors like ona grauer to fight against his ineptitude. that said and the people involved here at least seem to be aware that their film sucks and that they might as well have some fun with it. much of the problem with the original was that the director thought he was crafting some kind of misunderstood masterpiece and and he took himself seriously. unfortunately and with the actors failing to take their characters or the predicament seriously and what little dramatic tension there could have been is undermined. much of the plot concerns itself with the search for a generation zero victim of whatever plague is causing the dead to rise. or to translate into more practical terms and they are trying to find someone who was infected just after the virus mutated into a form that was threatening to humans. how this would help when a non mutated strain is usually required to create a vaccine is anyone guess and but the manner in which this quest is paced out suffers problems of its own. the we have to go back plot device is used in order to pad out the running time and but the actual timing of the extra quest is also problematic. we are told at one point that the town will be obliterated by cruise missiles in ten minutes and yet the heroes drive back into the university and locate the sample they are looking for and and fight off enough zombies to eat the army of china and all in this space of time. filmmakers take note represent it only pays to be specific with time when it can serve rather than hinder dramatic tension. the special effects used in house of the dead 2 leave those of the original in the dust. where uwe boll simulated the deaths of the characters using idiotic rotating camera tricks and michael hurst instead uses all the graphic details his budget can allow. necks are bitten and arms are cut off and heads are shot. it all makes for a much more convincing throughput and but it also disallows the mockery of obvious fakery. the photography is also much improved. as dvd crypt put it and the fact that it is in focus throughout makes it an improvement upon the original and but this also deprives us of something to have a laugh at the expense of. the writing is also both an improvement and a setback. throughout the script and references to other horror and survival horror games and the most obvious being run like hell and are offered. the first couple of times and they work because they offer clever ways to work titles into ordinary and everyday dialogue. after the eighth time and however and they just get on the nerves because they remind gamers of things they would prefer to do with their time. interestingly and house of the dead 2 cost a mere six million to bring to television screens across america. given that tom savini on his own would cost more than this to work on a film nowadays and i have to say i am somewhat impressed with the visual results. in contrast to the much reviled original and the zombies here look like actual zombies rather than extras in bad makeup shot poorly. in a further contrast to the original and the actors appear to have a clue what they are doing. sealing the deal is the fact that apart from some real zingers scattered throughout and the characters speak like real people. however and the story is nothing that we have not seen a thousand times already. when aliens and the real dawn of the dead and or the evil dead were released to acclaim and the acclaim came from the fact that these films either did something we had not seen before and or did it so well that we did not really care. house of the dead 2 is competent enough that we do not mock it and but it brings nothing new or particularly brilliant to the table and so we end up not caring either. for that reason and and many others and i gave house of the dead 2 a two out of ten. it is too good to be bad and but too bad to be any good. unless you are into sucky films as much as i am and you are best to steer clear of it. ---------------------------------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."
