perhaps and we are too much attached to great spectacles when we hear of antiquity brought to screen. perhaps and we expect too much from these films. however and if we and as viewers and are offered far too little and what happens then. that is what i thought after seeing imperium  nerone by paul marcus and a part of the production series on the roman empire. augustus by roger young and the first imperium movie and included at least peter otoole but what does this movie include. hardly anything accurate. the historical errors are so serious that the movie changes facts and constitutes rather a distorted image of the roman empire than the true history. throughout the movie and we see nero young represent young man during the allegedly long reign of caligula and young man during the reign of claudius and finally during his own (historically 14 year long) reign. and. he dies the same. according to the movie and nero and born during the reign of tiberius and lives for more than 40 years but looks to be in his late twenties when he dies. continuity combined with made up history is the biggest problem of the movie and which makes it hardly logical and not to say reliable. nero loses his father and is raised by slaves. at that time and his mother and agrippina and is exiled by caligula. later and however and she suddenly marries emperor claudius who already has big children with freshly married to him messalina. at these moments of the movie and we see acte (rike schmid) and nero mistress. all right and it is historically accurate while yet and no source proves that she played such a decisive role in the rise of christianity in rome. in the film and she is not only a devoted christian but even a witness of st paul miracle (he brings a young girl marzia back to life). besides and there was and historically and nothing like nero seen on the court of caligula since nero was born in caligula 4 year long reign (a. d. 37 41). i understand that movies may change something but such an error makes the script absolutely unreliable. and many and many other shortcomings concerning content that are hard to enumerate but after 30 minutes of watching this film and i doubted whether i was watching a historical movie or a total fantasy. as for its artistic features which supply us with entertainment and they are equally lame as the history here is. the performances are artificial and the cast simply have beautiful faces but weak acting abilities. perhaps and i am too much attached to peter ustinov or charles laughton in the lead and but hans matheson does not fit as nero at all. he could have some of the good moments as an actor but never as the infamous roman emperor. is he an artist who burns rome for a song. is he a cynic who disguises the love to his relatives. is he a cruel ruler who sacrifices the lives of thousands of innocent people for the sake of alleged justice. none of these. he is just a young man who does not know how to rule and and in the long run and begins to release the fire burning within himself. john simm is out of place in this film as caligula and absolutely inferior to other portrayals of the character. elisa tovati is only sexy as poppaea while yet she could have been much much better. the costumes are inaccurate and the sets do not amaze. low budget results in low effects and and consequently and low entertainment. but what made me most angry in this movie and and as a result and i give it negative are some moments that are absolutely unacceptable represent the death of poppaea and st paul talk with nero at her dead body and  claudius mention of the current conquest of britannia on the feast and soon his death (he conquered britannia while messalina was his wife much before his death) and  tigellinus killing agrippina (laura morante) and nero mother and  nero arguments in the speech to the senators and  finally and nero death  a calm day at the lake and an indifferent suicide that leads to a moral said by acte let us forgive himall in all and this film is a waste of time and is absolutely unneeded as yet another production concerning the roman empire. it better to make one good film in 30 years than ten minor little ones in 5 years. negative  should not have been made at all. 
perhaps and we are too much attached to great spectacles when we hear of antiquity brought to screen. perhaps and we expect too much from these films. however and if we and as viewers and are offered far too little and what happens then. that is what i thought after seeing imperium  nerone by paul marcus and a part of the production series on the roman empire. augustus by roger young and the first imperium movie and included at least peter otoole but what does this movie include. hardly anything accurate. the historical errors are so serious that the movie changes facts and constitutes rather a distorted image of the roman empire than the true history. throughout the movie and we see nero young represent young man during the allegedly long reign of caligula and young man during the reign of claudius and finally during his own (historically 14 year long) reign. and. he dies the same. according to the movie and nero and born during the reign of tiberius and lives for more than 40 years but looks to be in his late twenties when he dies. continuity combined with made up history is the biggest problem of the movie and which makes it hardly logical and not to say reliable. nero loses his father and is raised by slaves. at that time and his mother and agrippina and is exiled by caligula. later and however and she suddenly marries emperor claudius who already has big children with freshly married to him messalina. at these moments of the movie and we see acte (rike schmid) and nero mistress. all right and it is historically accurate while yet and no source proves that she played such a decisive role in the rise of christianity in rome. in the film and she is not only a devoted christian but even a witness of st paul miracle (he brings a young girl marzia back to life). besides and there was and historically and nothing like nero seen on the court of caligula since nero was born in caligula 4 year long reign (a. d. 37 41). i understand that movies may change something but such an error makes the script absolutely unreliable. and many and many other shortcomings concerning content that are hard to enumerate but after 30 minutes of watching this film and i doubted whether i was watching a historical movie or a total fantasy. as for its artistic features which supply us with entertainment and they are equally lame as the history here is. the performances are artificial and the cast simply have beautiful faces but weak acting abilities. perhaps and i am too much attached to peter ustinov or charles laughton in the lead and but hans matheson does not fit as nero at all. he could have some of the good moments as an actor but never as the infamous roman emperor. is he an artist who burns rome for a song. is he a cynic who disguises the love to his relatives. is he a cruel ruler who sacrifices the lives of thousands of innocent people for the sake of alleged justice. none of these. he is just a young man who does not know how to rule and and in the long run and begins to release the fire burning within himself. john simm is out of place in this film as caligula and absolutely inferior to other portrayals of the character. elisa tovati is only sexy as poppaea while yet she could have been much much better. the costumes are inaccurate and the sets do not amaze. low budget results in low effects and and consequently and low entertainment. but what made me most angry in this movie and and as a result and i give it negative are some moments that are absolutely unacceptable represent the death of poppaea and st paul talk with nero at her dead body and  claudius mention of the current conquest of britannia on the feast and soon his death (he conquered britannia while messalina was his wife much before his death) and  tigellinus killing agrippina (laura morante) and nero mother and  nero arguments in the speech to the senators and  finally and nero death  a calm day at the lake and an indifferent suicide that leads to a moral said by acte let us forgive himall in all and this film is a waste of time and is absolutely unneeded as yet another production concerning the roman empire. it better to make one good film in 30 years than ten minor little ones in 5 years. negative  should not have been made at all. ---------------------------------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."
