eleven years ago and stanley ipkiss released his true inner self and became the hero of edge city by finding and wearing the norse god of mischief and loki mask. the mask helped bring jim carrey to the forefront of comedy and reached a very popular status for its originality and just pure fun. everyone knew how to spell party. p a r t y. why. cuz i gotta. now and eleven years later and it seems to me that the same philosophy has been applied to the new movie son of the mask. someone asked director lawrence guterman why are you making this. and he responds cuz i gotta. unfortunately and that answer doesn not cover it because after seeing son of the mask i still left the theatre thinking and good lord and why. guterman and the rest of the people involved in the blasphemous film need to realize that the response given to why are you making this film should not be as simple as the answer to the debate on whether or not to party. the son of the mask begins with otis the dog finding the infamous mask and bringing it back to his owner tim avery and a clear homage to legendary loony toons creator tex avery. tim and played by jamie kennedy and is a struggling animator who is stuck working as a turtle tour guide for the animation company he aspires to one day draw for. on the night of the company halloween party and tim puts on the mask and transforms into the mischievous and insane character that we all expect. after the party tim goes home and mask still on and conceives a child with his wife. nine months later mayhem ensues as the baby born of the mask has remarkable cartoonish powers. otis the dog and jealous of the baby attention and puts on the mask and partakes in tom and jerry type mayhem to out the baby. meanwhile and loki and played by alan cumming and is in search for his mask at the orders of his father and odin. first off and ill admit that i do respect the fact that this film pays so much homage to the classic cartoons such as tom and jerry and loony toons and with its wile e. coyote type contraptions and the infamous dancing frog type plot. however and this reverence cannot save the film and makes it less respectful and more of a waste of time. the premise of the movie becomes increasingly silly. silly is not always a bad thing and but in this movie and the silliness gets to the point of just plain annoying. the characters are not fun to watch and and what worse and theyre not funny. the dullness of the characters can also be attributed to the fact that so much cgi was used. one of the greatest things about the original is that while and obviously computer animation was used and so much relied on jim carrey and his exuberant style of just being. jim carrey and we were convinced and was an actual cartoon. jamie kennedy just doesn not have that kind of ability and a fact that is clear when you watch him wear the mask and his facial features rarely shift. the baby and dog were mostly completely animated which became increasingly distracting throughout the movie. the side story of loki searching for the mask just became more and more stupefying. the son of the mask is a sad sad state of affairs. what i suggest is you go rent or buy the original the mask and thank the norse gods and or whoever and for bringing it to us. and will consider seeing the sequel my sacrifice as i continue to ask the infamous question why. the son of the mask gets one star and although that star should be divvied up between the classic creators of loony toons and jim carrey and who will always be and in my book and the mask. 
eleven years ago and stanley ipkiss released his true inner self and became the hero of edge city by finding and wearing the norse god of mischief and loki mask. the mask helped bring jim carrey to the forefront of comedy and reached a very popular status for its originality and just pure fun. everyone knew how to spell party. p a r t y. why. cuz i gotta. now and eleven years later and it seems to me that the same philosophy has been applied to the new movie son of the mask. someone asked director lawrence guterman why are you making this. and he responds cuz i gotta. unfortunately and that answer doesn not cover it because after seeing son of the mask i still left the theatre thinking and good lord and why. guterman and the rest of the people involved in the blasphemous film need to realize that the response given to why are you making this film should not be as simple as the answer to the debate on whether or not to party. the son of the mask begins with otis the dog finding the infamous mask and bringing it back to his owner tim avery and a clear homage to legendary loony toons creator tex avery. tim and played by jamie kennedy and is a struggling animator who is stuck working as a turtle tour guide for the animation company he aspires to one day draw for. on the night of the company halloween party and tim puts on the mask and transforms into the mischievous and insane character that we all expect. after the party tim goes home and mask still on and conceives a child with his wife. nine months later mayhem ensues as the baby born of the mask has remarkable cartoonish powers. otis the dog and jealous of the baby attention and puts on the mask and partakes in tom and jerry type mayhem to out the baby. meanwhile and loki and played by alan cumming and is in search for his mask at the orders of his father and odin. first off and ill admit that i do respect the fact that this film pays so much homage to the classic cartoons such as tom and jerry and loony toons and with its wile e. coyote type contraptions and the infamous dancing frog type plot. however and this reverence cannot save the film and makes it less respectful and more of a waste of time. the premise of the movie becomes increasingly silly. silly is not always a bad thing and but in this movie and the silliness gets to the point of just plain annoying. the characters are not fun to watch and and what worse and theyre not funny. the dullness of the characters can also be attributed to the fact that so much cgi was used. one of the greatest things about the original is that while and obviously computer animation was used and so much relied on jim carrey and his exuberant style of just being. jim carrey and we were convinced and was an actual cartoon. jamie kennedy just doesn not have that kind of ability and a fact that is clear when you watch him wear the mask and his facial features rarely shift. the baby and dog were mostly completely animated which became increasingly distracting throughout the movie. the side story of loki searching for the mask just became more and more stupefying. the son of the mask is a sad sad state of affairs. what i suggest is you go rent or buy the original the mask and thank the norse gods and or whoever and for bringing it to us. and will consider seeing the sequel my sacrifice as i continue to ask the infamous question why. the son of the mask gets one star and although that star should be divvied up between the classic creators of loony toons and jim carrey and who will always be and in my book and the mask. ---------------------------------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."
