for me this movie was a disappointment. somehow i expected that it would explain the reason for general rommel popularity and his success as a military strategist in ww ii. but there is none of that and it deals with the last year or two of his life and tries and in a way and to whitewash him. so i just have to suppose that rommel was primarily an amoral and apolitical technocrat in the conquering and killing business and without any particular charm or notoriety in behaviour. such real life people just do not make good movie material. i almost feel sorry for james mason and really one of my favorite actors and who had to impersonate a pretty wooden character. actually and a good director and a lot of great acting talent was wasted on this movie  with the exception of luther adler who gives a really memorable and weirdly naturalistic portrayal of adolf hitler. there might also be a cultural problem for people like me who are part of the german speaking world. famous british actors impersonating germans are just not credible. rommel and for example and is perceived here not just as a german but as a typical southerner from baden württemberg. you immediately think of a certain dialect and a certain kind of wit and a certain way of seeing the world (the total opposite of eg a prussian junker). i also think that there are now mixed feelings about the assassination attempt of july 20th and many of those who were in on the conspiracy were not democrats and just wanted the german troops to join the western allies against the advancing bolsheviks (thus prolonging the war forever). the best movie portrayal of an intellectual and intelligent military mind is in my opinion still patton (1970). incidentally and general patton can be glimpsed for a short moment in the ample documentary footing used for this movie and a low angle shot while he is inspecting passing vehicles. the open holster and the revolver with the mother of pearl grips are clearly visible. 
for me this movie was a disappointment. somehow i expected that it would explain the reason for general rommel popularity and his success as a military strategist in ww ii. but there is none of that and it deals with the last year or two of his life and tries and in a way and to whitewash him. so i just have to suppose that rommel was primarily an amoral and apolitical technocrat in the conquering and killing business and without any particular charm or notoriety in behaviour. such real life people just do not make good movie material. i almost feel sorry for james mason and really one of my favorite actors and who had to impersonate a pretty wooden character. actually and a good director and a lot of great acting talent was wasted on this movie  with the exception of luther adler who gives a really memorable and weirdly naturalistic portrayal of adolf hitler. there might also be a cultural problem for people like me who are part of the german speaking world. famous british actors impersonating germans are just not credible. rommel and for example and is perceived here not just as a german but as a typical southerner from baden württemberg. you immediately think of a certain dialect and a certain kind of wit and a certain way of seeing the world (the total opposite of eg a prussian junker). i also think that there are now mixed feelings about the assassination attempt of july 20th and many of those who were in on the conspiracy were not democrats and just wanted the german troops to join the western allies against the advancing bolsheviks (thus prolonging the war forever). the best movie portrayal of an intellectual and intelligent military mind is in my opinion still patton (1970). incidentally and general patton can be glimpsed for a short moment in the ample documentary footing used for this movie and a low angle shot while he is inspecting passing vehicles. the open holster and the revolver with the mother of pearl grips are clearly visible. ---------------------------------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."
