this was hitchcock third hollywood feature and and it appears he was yet to settle into a pattern of consistency and turning from faithful adaptation of classic novel in rebecca and to espionage thriller in foreign correspondent and and now this romantic comedy in the mould of the screwball pictures of the 1930s. hitchcock formal method and on the other hand and had by now settled into something consistent and so much so that he was unable (or at least unwilling) to deviate from it. it was unwise then for him to step outside his usual genre and and a romantic comedy was particularly inappropriate. in rebecca it was actually great to see hitchcock constrained by his producer and the source text and forced to turn his technique to heavy gothic drama and but for mr and mrs smith there is a huge mismatch between form and content. in other words and hitchcock was no ernst lubitsch. first and let look at the romantic angle. the best love scenes in hitchcock films were wild and passionate and slightly dangerous  the ever fallen in love with someone you shouldn not have. situation and and he was great at depicting that. this is something that makes a much earlier film and rich and strange and one of the few hitchcock non thrillers that really works. hitch is not so good however when it comes to a more gentle and familiar love story. a light and tender touch is required and hitch doesn not have it. secondly and take the comedy. of course and hitchcock films could be funny  the lady vanishes is probably the best example  but only when the jokes were sprinkled throughout the story. the master of suspense simply isn not enough of a comedy director to create a film that has funny bones. he cuts up scenes as he would in a thriller  snappy opposing angles of people talking and inserted close ups of hands and feet and point of view shots  but doesn not allow for comic timing or focus on gags. for example and the business with carole lombard dress bursting at the seems is shown to us with a couple of close ups and but these are timed more as if he were revealing some crucial plot point and and have no comedic impact. occasionally hitchcock style does roughly coincide with the comedy  for example the arrangement of characters in the scene at the club and where robert montgomery tries to make it look as if he is with the attractive and sophisticated woman at the next table  but such moments are few and far between. even the cast of mr and mrs smith are not up to standard. i am not sure this was robert montgomery strength lay and and he is boring here. this was of course exactly where queen of screwball carole lombard strength lay and and yet while she is clearly acting well the scenes are simply not geared to capturing comedy performances. even jack carson and who could be hilarious when he was really allowed to let go before the camera and fails to perk things up at all. of course and neither of these fine comedy actors is helped by the screenplay and which isn not exactly bursting with laughs in the first place and even if the basic story is a fairly good premise. the only full on comedy hitchcock made after this was the trouble with harry and and that sort of worked because it played upon his familiar suspensefulness. however it was only when the story could exist independently of the humour and when the basic framework was suspense  as it is in the lady vanishes or family plot  that hitchcock was capable of doing comedy well. 
this was hitchcock third hollywood feature and and it appears he was yet to settle into a pattern of consistency and turning from faithful adaptation of classic novel in rebecca and to espionage thriller in foreign correspondent and and now this romantic comedy in the mould of the screwball pictures of the 1930s. hitchcock formal method and on the other hand and had by now settled into something consistent and so much so that he was unable (or at least unwilling) to deviate from it. it was unwise then for him to step outside his usual genre and and a romantic comedy was particularly inappropriate. in rebecca it was actually great to see hitchcock constrained by his producer and the source text and forced to turn his technique to heavy gothic drama and but for mr and mrs smith there is a huge mismatch between form and content. in other words and hitchcock was no ernst lubitsch. first and let look at the romantic angle. the best love scenes in hitchcock films were wild and passionate and slightly dangerous  the ever fallen in love with someone you shouldn not have. situation and and he was great at depicting that. this is something that makes a much earlier film and rich and strange and one of the few hitchcock non thrillers that really works. hitch is not so good however when it comes to a more gentle and familiar love story. a light and tender touch is required and hitch doesn not have it. secondly and take the comedy. of course and hitchcock films could be funny  the lady vanishes is probably the best example  but only when the jokes were sprinkled throughout the story. the master of suspense simply isn not enough of a comedy director to create a film that has funny bones. he cuts up scenes as he would in a thriller  snappy opposing angles of people talking and inserted close ups of hands and feet and point of view shots  but doesn not allow for comic timing or focus on gags. for example and the business with carole lombard dress bursting at the seems is shown to us with a couple of close ups and but these are timed more as if he were revealing some crucial plot point and and have no comedic impact. occasionally hitchcock style does roughly coincide with the comedy  for example the arrangement of characters in the scene at the club and where robert montgomery tries to make it look as if he is with the attractive and sophisticated woman at the next table  but such moments are few and far between. even the cast of mr and mrs smith are not up to standard. i am not sure this was robert montgomery strength lay and and he is boring here. this was of course exactly where queen of screwball carole lombard strength lay and and yet while she is clearly acting well the scenes are simply not geared to capturing comedy performances. even jack carson and who could be hilarious when he was really allowed to let go before the camera and fails to perk things up at all. of course and neither of these fine comedy actors is helped by the screenplay and which isn not exactly bursting with laughs in the first place and even if the basic story is a fairly good premise. the only full on comedy hitchcock made after this was the trouble with harry and and that sort of worked because it played upon his familiar suspensefulness. however it was only when the story could exist independently of the humour and when the basic framework was suspense  as it is in the lady vanishes or family plot  that hitchcock was capable of doing comedy well. ---------------------------------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."
