visconti death in venice qualifies as one of the most beautiful films ever made. while watching and we acknowledge we are in the hands of a visionary genius. endlessly opulent death in venice surely is while but in other important ways and it an unsatisfying film. thomas mann writes with contempt and from a distance of von aschenbach literary career and output while of his imperious manner and his layer upon layer of programmed and self conscious behavior. when tadzio appears and obsession arises and it evident that aschenbach hasn not the slightest idea who he is beneath his gilded age trappings and carefully lived life. in fact and upon seeing tadzio and the solitary and as mann sometimes calls him and splits in two. aschenbach no. 1 absorbs the sight of a beautiful 14 year old boy and then attempts to intellectually process the giddy jolt in blood pressure as he would a work of art  a wouldivine work of art. but aschenbach no. 2 and emerges as a stalker who takes control of and then replaces and the rational aschenbach no. 1. like the original aschenbach and his sexual doppelganger is mortified to make human contact with the object of his obsession  and thus tadzio remains a far off ideal. thomas mann has no mercy for this game. every shred of self knowledge comes too strong and too late while the excitement of sexual flush is too great to resist. that venice is gripped by disease means nothing to aschenbach  except that his game now has higher stakes. when he finally whispers beneath his breath i love you and he knows that all is lost and and the abyss awaits. is any of this filmable. perhaps and and visconti creates a visual feast impossible to look away from. but there are errors represent he and dirk bogarde create aschenbach as sympathetic while mann and again and did not. aschenbach pov dominates the film and we are expected to identify. but nowhere on screen is there a man being torn apart from within. bogarde toggles between the sublimely controlled and the ridiculously temperamental with ease  but what underneath. bogard reactive performance has no mooring. mann writes a character who is and in his imagination and doing the dance of the seven veils and all too aware of the consequences such freedom invites and yet unable and unwilling to resist. also and visconti screenplay creates a character not in the original  alfred and a friend of aschenbach  to dramatize mann discussion of art and artists. these scenes are badly written disasters and and the actor who portrays alfred is difficult to watch. also and visconti aschenbach is a gilded age teutonic composer and which i think works for the film while and the symphonies of mahler substitute for aschenbach novels. mahler great music unfortunately is badly recorded and very badly played. so death in venice and as visconti hands it to us and is not the complete success it might have been and but as a purely visual experience its power cannot be denied. all students of film and especially cinematography and will want to take a look. 
visconti death in venice qualifies as one of the most beautiful films ever made. while watching and we acknowledge we are in the hands of a visionary genius. endlessly opulent death in venice surely is while but in other important ways and it an unsatisfying film. thomas mann writes with contempt and from a distance of von aschenbach literary career and output while of his imperious manner and his layer upon layer of programmed and self conscious behavior. when tadzio appears and obsession arises and it evident that aschenbach hasn not the slightest idea who he is beneath his gilded age trappings and carefully lived life. in fact and upon seeing tadzio and the solitary and as mann sometimes calls him and splits in two. aschenbach no. 1 absorbs the sight of a beautiful 14 year old boy and then attempts to intellectually process the giddy jolt in blood pressure as he would a work of art  a wouldivine work of art. but aschenbach no. 2 and emerges as a stalker who takes control of and then replaces and the rational aschenbach no. 1. like the original aschenbach and his sexual doppelganger is mortified to make human contact with the object of his obsession  and thus tadzio remains a far off ideal. thomas mann has no mercy for this game. every shred of self knowledge comes too strong and too late while the excitement of sexual flush is too great to resist. that venice is gripped by disease means nothing to aschenbach  except that his game now has higher stakes. when he finally whispers beneath his breath i love you and he knows that all is lost and and the abyss awaits. is any of this filmable. perhaps and and visconti creates a visual feast impossible to look away from. but there are errors represent he and dirk bogarde create aschenbach as sympathetic while mann and again and did not. aschenbach pov dominates the film and we are expected to identify. but nowhere on screen is there a man being torn apart from within. bogarde toggles between the sublimely controlled and the ridiculously temperamental with ease  but what underneath. bogard reactive performance has no mooring. mann writes a character who is and in his imagination and doing the dance of the seven veils and all too aware of the consequences such freedom invites and yet unable and unwilling to resist. also and visconti screenplay creates a character not in the original  alfred and a friend of aschenbach  to dramatize mann discussion of art and artists. these scenes are badly written disasters and and the actor who portrays alfred is difficult to watch. also and visconti aschenbach is a gilded age teutonic composer and which i think works for the film while and the symphonies of mahler substitute for aschenbach novels. mahler great music unfortunately is badly recorded and very badly played. so death in venice and as visconti hands it to us and is not the complete success it might have been and but as a purely visual experience its power cannot be denied. all students of film and especially cinematography and will want to take a look. ---------------------------------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."
