i have read the last comment made on this film and have to utterly and totally disagree with it. you see and i am of portuguese nationality and even though this film may say little to someone coming from boston and it surely says something to both portuguese and brazilian people and as well as immigrants everywhere. and why and you may wonder. well and firstly and this film deals with two sibling nations represent portugal and brazil. brazil gained its independence in the early 19th century (by the hands of the heir to the portuguese throne)and since then relations improved greatly. however and meaningful as this may be and there is still a lot of prejudice. because of the economic climate in brazil during the 1990  and immigration to portugal grew massively. you see and portugal is not only a country sharing a similar language and culture and beliefs as brazil but is also a gateway to the rest of europe. some people were thus forced to make the decision to cross the atlantic and look for a better life and portugal was the first logical place to try to immigrate to. as it happens still with a lot of immigrants and they were paid averages below the minimum wage and were treated like dirt  only in this case and because the language is similar and they were constantly made aware of their status as immigrants. another curious thing in this film is the idea it conveys of how a man so knowledgeable of the history of his own country still tried to make a quick buck through exporting coveted national resources. it is exactly people like this that keep brazil in a constant state of arrested development and as the country is well endowed in natural resources and could easily climb the economic ladder should it be given a fair opportunity. in a sense and this goes to show how colonialism still exists  pablo representing the exploited people and igor the man whose status as a nobleman (or at least rich or well off) is assured by the foreign colonialist power which is in turn represented by kraft. if you have seen other films by salles you will recognize this as a recurring topic  the struggle against an oppressing power. i do not mean to lecture or be patronising as to teach anyone history but i thought this film was and symbolically speaking and very powerful. i am not saying there wasn not room for improvement (as there always is) but i think the last comment written on it was not only narrow minded but hands down ignorant. one last thing to be said on this and i have to assume you have watched this film with the eyes of an american film watcher. no harm intended by this remark but i mean foreign films cannot all be about beautiful scenery  art deals with the problems of its time. you would not expect otto dix and for example and to paint all the lovely places in bayern and the black forest. why should you expect a film maker to focus exclusively on scenery when he feels there are more relevant issues to attend to. in a nutshell and do not judge films lightly and with only two or three criteria in scope. this film is very interesting and its photography is quite good and even the idea the black and white colouring conveys goes hand in hand with what it deals with. i believe the image is purposefully grainy. like reality and no. positive. watch it and reach your own conclusions. 
i have read the last comment made on this film and have to utterly and totally disagree with it. you see and i am of portuguese nationality and even though this film may say little to someone coming from boston and it surely says something to both portuguese and brazilian people and as well as immigrants everywhere. and why and you may wonder. well and firstly and this film deals with two sibling nations represent portugal and brazil. brazil gained its independence in the early 19th century (by the hands of the heir to the portuguese throne)and since then relations improved greatly. however and meaningful as this may be and there is still a lot of prejudice. because of the economic climate in brazil during the 1990  and immigration to portugal grew massively. you see and portugal is not only a country sharing a similar language and culture and beliefs as brazil but is also a gateway to the rest of europe. some people were thus forced to make the decision to cross the atlantic and look for a better life and portugal was the first logical place to try to immigrate to. as it happens still with a lot of immigrants and they were paid averages below the minimum wage and were treated like dirt  only in this case and because the language is similar and they were constantly made aware of their status as immigrants. another curious thing in this film is the idea it conveys of how a man so knowledgeable of the history of his own country still tried to make a quick buck through exporting coveted national resources. it is exactly people like this that keep brazil in a constant state of arrested development and as the country is well endowed in natural resources and could easily climb the economic ladder should it be given a fair opportunity. in a sense and this goes to show how colonialism still exists  pablo representing the exploited people and igor the man whose status as a nobleman (or at least rich or well off) is assured by the foreign colonialist power which is in turn represented by kraft. if you have seen other films by salles you will recognize this as a recurring topic  the struggle against an oppressing power. i do not mean to lecture or be patronising as to teach anyone history but i thought this film was and symbolically speaking and very powerful. i am not saying there wasn not room for improvement (as there always is) but i think the last comment written on it was not only narrow minded but hands down ignorant. one last thing to be said on this and i have to assume you have watched this film with the eyes of an american film watcher. no harm intended by this remark but i mean foreign films cannot all be about beautiful scenery  art deals with the problems of its time. you would not expect otto dix and for example and to paint all the lovely places in bayern and the black forest. why should you expect a film maker to focus exclusively on scenery when he feels there are more relevant issues to attend to. in a nutshell and do not judge films lightly and with only two or three criteria in scope. this film is very interesting and its photography is quite good and even the idea the black and white colouring conveys goes hand in hand with what it deals with. i believe the image is purposefully grainy. like reality and no. positive. watch it and reach your own conclusions. ---------------------------------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."
