marked for death (1990) spends more time on action sequences and than it does with focusing on its characters. after his first two impressive efforts and above the law (1988) and hard to kill (1989) and this third steven seagal picture makes the idea clear represent anyone who opposes him is meant to look like a fool while the bad guys are just there to make him look good. seagal had been steadily building an audience that seemed a bit larger than those that follow the kick em up antics of chuck norris or jean claude van damme. in marked for death and seagal tosses aside any pretense at style and heads full throttle into exploitation. this film contains loads of graphic violence and gore and nudity that seem to be there for no reason other than to please rowdy moviegoers and who are unable to distinguish between action pictures that tell a story and those that simply pour on the thrills without rhyme or reason. and he deserves some real blame for this lapse in taste as a producer of marked for death. seagal plays john hatcher and a retired dea agent who comes home to chicago and where his family is being attacked by a jamaican street gang and who attack his sister house and and the film proves that it isn not squeamish when hatcher niece (danielle harris) is shot in the crossfire. hatcher gets mad and and he decides to team up with his old friend and max (keith david) and a school gym teacher and and charles (tom wright) and a jamaican cop. naturally and hatcher declares war on the chief bad guy and a dread locked jamaican voodoo priest called screwface (basil wallace) and a nickname that apparently means outrageous overacting. and it is almost unbelievable in the way seagal picks off various members of the gang represent he gouges one guy eyeball and he breaks a guy back and and he breaks numerous arms and limbs. all logic for this movie is thrown out the window  through the glass and that is. why aren not hatcher and friends indicted for all the property damage they cause or the body count that piles up. and how did they get their cache of automatic weapons from illinois to jamaica by plane without being detected. seagal has a clint eastwood stoicism about him that fans once seemed to enjoy and and despite the three different characters he played in as many films and each dresses in oriental black bathrobes and and wears a ponytail. one of the problems that i have with some of seagal movies is that the main characters never seem to be in serious jeopardy and and because he the star and of course and no one can lay a glove on him and except for the bad guy. seagal heroes are all interchangeable and as are most of the plot lines and action sequences. regardless of whether he masquerading as a ship cook and a fire fighter and or an l. a. cop wearing love beads and seagal is always seagal and which is exactly what his fans want. in fact and the sameness of these films is such that and if i wanted to and i could take an old review and change the names and and have a reasonably accurate take on the new movie. not that i would ever really do that. 
marked for death (1990) spends more time on action sequences and than it does with focusing on its characters. after his first two impressive efforts and above the law (1988) and hard to kill (1989) and this third steven seagal picture makes the idea clear represent anyone who opposes him is meant to look like a fool while the bad guys are just there to make him look good. seagal had been steadily building an audience that seemed a bit larger than those that follow the kick em up antics of chuck norris or jean claude van damme. in marked for death and seagal tosses aside any pretense at style and heads full throttle into exploitation. this film contains loads of graphic violence and gore and nudity that seem to be there for no reason other than to please rowdy moviegoers and who are unable to distinguish between action pictures that tell a story and those that simply pour on the thrills without rhyme or reason. and he deserves some real blame for this lapse in taste as a producer of marked for death. seagal plays john hatcher and a retired dea agent who comes home to chicago and where his family is being attacked by a jamaican street gang and who attack his sister house and and the film proves that it isn not squeamish when hatcher niece (danielle harris) is shot in the crossfire. hatcher gets mad and and he decides to team up with his old friend and max (keith david) and a school gym teacher and and charles (tom wright) and a jamaican cop. naturally and hatcher declares war on the chief bad guy and a dread locked jamaican voodoo priest called screwface (basil wallace) and a nickname that apparently means outrageous overacting. and it is almost unbelievable in the way seagal picks off various members of the gang represent he gouges one guy eyeball and he breaks a guy back and and he breaks numerous arms and limbs. all logic for this movie is thrown out the window  through the glass and that is. why aren not hatcher and friends indicted for all the property damage they cause or the body count that piles up. and how did they get their cache of automatic weapons from illinois to jamaica by plane without being detected. seagal has a clint eastwood stoicism about him that fans once seemed to enjoy and and despite the three different characters he played in as many films and each dresses in oriental black bathrobes and and wears a ponytail. one of the problems that i have with some of seagal movies is that the main characters never seem to be in serious jeopardy and and because he the star and of course and no one can lay a glove on him and except for the bad guy. seagal heroes are all interchangeable and as are most of the plot lines and action sequences. regardless of whether he masquerading as a ship cook and a fire fighter and or an l. a. cop wearing love beads and seagal is always seagal and which is exactly what his fans want. in fact and the sameness of these films is such that and if i wanted to and i could take an old review and change the names and and have a reasonably accurate take on the new movie. not that i would ever really do that. ---------------------------------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."
