i want very much to believe that the above quote (specifically and the english subtitle translation) and which was actually written and not spoken and in a rejection letter a publisher sends to the protagonist and was meant to be self referential in a tongue in cheek manner. but if so and director leos carax apparently neglected to inform the actors of the true nature of the film. they are all so dreadfully earnest in their portrayals that i have to conclude carax actually takes himself seriously here and or else has so much disdain for everyone and especially the viewing audience and that he can not be bothered letting anyone in on the joke. some auteurs are able to get away with making oblique and bizarre films because they do so with élan and unique personal style (e. g. and david lynch and alejandro jodorowsky). others use a subtler approach while still weaving surreal elements into the fabric of the story (e. g. and krzysztof kieslowski and and david cronenberg later and less bizarre works). in pola x and carax throws a disjointed mess at the viewer and then dares him to find fault with it. well and here it is represent the pacing is erratic and choppy and in particular continuity is often dispensed with while superfluous characters abound (e. g. and the gypsy mother and child) while most of the performances are overwrought while the lighting is often poor and particularly in the oft discussed sex scene while unconnected scenes are thrust into the film for no discernible reason while and the list goes on. not to be completely negative and it should be noted that there were some uplifting exceptions. i liked the musical score and even the cacophonous industrial techno music being played in the sprawling and abandoned complex to which the main characters retreat in the second half of the film (perhaps a reference to andy warhol factory of the 60s. ). much of the photography of the countryside was beautiful and an obvious attempt at contrast with the grimy city settings. and and even well into middle age and cathering deneuve shows that she still has it. her performance was also the only one among the major characters that do not sink into bathos. there was an earlier time when i would regard such films as pola x more charitably. experimentation is admirable and even when the experiment doesn not work. but carax tries nothing new here while the film is a pastiche of elements borrowed from countless earlier films and and after several decades of movie viewing and literally thousands of films later and i simply no longer have the patience for this kind of unoriginal and poorly crafted tripe. at this early moment in the 21st century and one is left asking represent with the exception of jean pierre jeunet and are there any directors in france who know how to make a watchable movie anymore. rating represent negative . 
i want very much to believe that the above quote (specifically and the english subtitle translation) and which was actually written and not spoken and in a rejection letter a publisher sends to the protagonist and was meant to be self referential in a tongue in cheek manner. but if so and director leos carax apparently neglected to inform the actors of the true nature of the film. they are all so dreadfully earnest in their portrayals that i have to conclude carax actually takes himself seriously here and or else has so much disdain for everyone and especially the viewing audience and that he can not be bothered letting anyone in on the joke. some auteurs are able to get away with making oblique and bizarre films because they do so with élan and unique personal style (e. g. and david lynch and alejandro jodorowsky). others use a subtler approach while still weaving surreal elements into the fabric of the story (e. g. and krzysztof kieslowski and and david cronenberg later and less bizarre works). in pola x and carax throws a disjointed mess at the viewer and then dares him to find fault with it. well and here it is represent the pacing is erratic and choppy and in particular continuity is often dispensed with while superfluous characters abound (e. g. and the gypsy mother and child) while most of the performances are overwrought while the lighting is often poor and particularly in the oft discussed sex scene while unconnected scenes are thrust into the film for no discernible reason while and the list goes on. not to be completely negative and it should be noted that there were some uplifting exceptions. i liked the musical score and even the cacophonous industrial techno music being played in the sprawling and abandoned complex to which the main characters retreat in the second half of the film (perhaps a reference to andy warhol factory of the 60s. ). much of the photography of the countryside was beautiful and an obvious attempt at contrast with the grimy city settings. and and even well into middle age and cathering deneuve shows that she still has it. her performance was also the only one among the major characters that do not sink into bathos. there was an earlier time when i would regard such films as pola x more charitably. experimentation is admirable and even when the experiment doesn not work. but carax tries nothing new here while the film is a pastiche of elements borrowed from countless earlier films and and after several decades of movie viewing and literally thousands of films later and i simply no longer have the patience for this kind of unoriginal and poorly crafted tripe. at this early moment in the 21st century and one is left asking represent with the exception of jean pierre jeunet and are there any directors in france who know how to make a watchable movie anymore. rating represent negative . ---------------------------------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."
