it purports to be the life of paul the apostle. it opens with him involved in a loin cloth wrestling match with a priest. the pharisees were called that because they separated themselves from the hellenism being forced upon the jews by their gentile rulers. the point is that saul would never have been involved in greco roman wrestling. period. then we have the two men (saul and the priest and reuben  a totally extra biblical fictitious character) shown being washed down in the nude in a roman style bath house. again and the torah and which saul adhered to religiously and condemned in the strongest possible terms looking upon the nakedness of another man. reuben is shown being the one that pushes saul into destroying the church. again and the text of scripture doesn not matter and for their it is paul that says that he laid waste of the church and breathed out threatenings and slaughter against the church. the movie shows barnabas sprinkling paul  not baptizing (immersing) him and when the text of scripture says it was ananias that did it. their is no mention of mark or his turning back so the writers of the script are forced to have paul and barnabas argue over paul desire to preach in rome as the basis of their separation. no silas on paul second and third missions while no timothy. ever. no titus while no apollos. no and no and noooo. james is said to have known jesus for a long time rather than it saying and as the text of scripture does and that he is jesus brother. why not just call the movie frank and the fictitious apostle. at least that would be closer to the text of scripture. 
it purports to be the life of paul the apostle. it opens with him involved in a loin cloth wrestling match with a priest. the pharisees were called that because they separated themselves from the hellenism being forced upon the jews by their gentile rulers. the point is that saul would never have been involved in greco roman wrestling. period. then we have the two men (saul and the priest and reuben  a totally extra biblical fictitious character) shown being washed down in the nude in a roman style bath house. again and the torah and which saul adhered to religiously and condemned in the strongest possible terms looking upon the nakedness of another man. reuben is shown being the one that pushes saul into destroying the church. again and the text of scripture doesn not matter and for their it is paul that says that he laid waste of the church and breathed out threatenings and slaughter against the church. the movie shows barnabas sprinkling paul  not baptizing (immersing) him and when the text of scripture says it was ananias that did it. their is no mention of mark or his turning back so the writers of the script are forced to have paul and barnabas argue over paul desire to preach in rome as the basis of their separation. no silas on paul second and third missions while no timothy. ever. no titus while no apollos. no and no and noooo. james is said to have known jesus for a long time rather than it saying and as the text of scripture does and that he is jesus brother. why not just call the movie frank and the fictitious apostle. at least that would be closer to the text of scripture. ---------------------------------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."
