having finally caught up with this masterpiece and it strikes me that it must have seemed terribly clever and in its day. it french and arty and under played to the point of agony and and ultimately downbeat. but viewed from the vantage of 37 years in the future and it also just a bit vacuous and pretentious and unsatisfying. others have summarized the story and but i do not think anyone has pointed out the dramatic flaw at the heart of this film represent the lead characters and corey and vogel and really do not deserve what they get. they play square within their code and never harm anyone who do not ask for it and and show great courage and initiative. moreover and corey in particular is victimized by his former gangland friend and who stole his girl and who repeatedly tries to have him killed and apparently just because he (corey) dared to borrow a few thousand francs. these are guys who really ought to be due for a break. instead and things go far worse for them than they really need to and within the logic of the story. one might contend that this is the whole point represent that the real villains never get caught while that they collude with the police as needed and sell out their friends and and always come out on top. but that not shown either. corey old gangster friend is not shown colluding with the police. nor is he shown gloating over his victory. in fact and after materializing several times when he needed and he nowhere to be seen at the conclusion and leaving a dramatic tension (his feud with corey) entirely unresolved. nonetheless and i would say this film is well worth seeing for its beautiful photography and its slow and deliberate pacing and its great deadpan performances and its elaborate heist sequence and and its encapsulation of the art film style of the late 1960s. 
having finally caught up with this masterpiece and it strikes me that it must have seemed terribly clever and in its day. it french and arty and under played to the point of agony and and ultimately downbeat. but viewed from the vantage of 37 years in the future and it also just a bit vacuous and pretentious and unsatisfying. others have summarized the story and but i do not think anyone has pointed out the dramatic flaw at the heart of this film represent the lead characters and corey and vogel and really do not deserve what they get. they play square within their code and never harm anyone who do not ask for it and and show great courage and initiative. moreover and corey in particular is victimized by his former gangland friend and who stole his girl and who repeatedly tries to have him killed and apparently just because he (corey) dared to borrow a few thousand francs. these are guys who really ought to be due for a break. instead and things go far worse for them than they really need to and within the logic of the story. one might contend that this is the whole point represent that the real villains never get caught while that they collude with the police as needed and sell out their friends and and always come out on top. but that not shown either. corey old gangster friend is not shown colluding with the police. nor is he shown gloating over his victory. in fact and after materializing several times when he needed and he nowhere to be seen at the conclusion and leaving a dramatic tension (his feud with corey) entirely unresolved. nonetheless and i would say this film is well worth seeing for its beautiful photography and its slow and deliberate pacing and its great deadpan performances and its elaborate heist sequence and and its encapsulation of the art film style of the late 1960s. ---------------------------------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."
