i saw i smell the dead  sorry and i sell the dead  at a press screening. glenn mcquaid and the film writer director editor and is a laddish irishman who introduced the screening by announcing that  whilst it was in progress  he would be going out for a pint. i do not begrudge him a drink and but  by telling us about it  he seemed to feel he needed to certify his laddishness or his irishness and or both. when the opening credits rolled and there were  as usual at press screenings  loud ovations for the names of every actor or crew member who would got friends in the audience and and silence for those who hadn not. mcquaid returned for a witty q and a afterwards. this horror movie doesn not take itself seriously and which is good because its humour is considerably stronger than its horror. only one scene is even remotely scary and and most of the horror is merely gross out and but i laughed throughout much of the film. this movie appears to be set in ireland circa 1850 (by which time grave robbing was mostly defunct). the story is told in flashback represent we get flashbacks within flashbacks and and the narrating character flashbacks material that he couldn not know about and because sometimes he wasn not present or (in one case) because the action is unfolding behind his back. the story begins with a prisoner being taken to the guillotine. guillotines weren not used in 19th century ireland and but  for once  we actually see a plausible guillotine sequence. the prisoner struggles on his way to execution and the rope cleats are accurate and and the prisoner manages to look up to see the blade overhead. (and there a payoff later to justify the historically inaccurate use of the guillotine itself. )the characters are ostensibly irish and but one major character speaks in cockney slang represent using phrases like a mug game and take a butcher (for have a look). for once and actors in 19th century roles display 19th century dental hygiene and yet nearly all the clothes and hairstyles (and the women make ups) are resolutely 21st century. i am not complaining in the case of heather bullock and who wears a very fetching black miniskirt cozzie that appears to be pvc. phworr. the lead actors (except ron perlman) are excellent and but most of the supporting cast have no sense of the victorian period. the worst offender is joel garland as the publican and whose characterisation is firmly rooted in the twenty first century. just when i thought that garland performance couldn not get any less victorian and he used his fingers to make ironic air quotes. the sets (especially angus scrimm lab) are detailed and impressive and yet failed to convince me that people actually lived and worked in these places. nearly every interior contains burning candles and but never once did i see what would have been there if these were actual victorian homes or workplaces represent leftover drippings from previous candles. one scene features an extra terrestrial represent i was annoyed that mcquaid plumped for a stereotypical grey schwa alien and rather than something original. there are splendid montage sequences and but mcquaid opts for flashy effects  split screens and overhead shots  that do not serve the story. i was impressed by a recurring blue screen device superimposing the main characters heads over other backgrounds. less effective was a recurring creepshow style motif of camera shots morphing actors faces into drawings resembling panel art from 1950s ec horror comics. i am a fan of ec comics and but they do not belong in 19th century ireland. the money that mcquaid spent on flashy photo f or x  showing off his editing skills without serving the story  should have been spent on accurate costumes. big spoilers now. ron perlman gives an oirish performance full of acting school tics. ostensibly playing a 19th century irish priest and he writes with his left hand. (in victorian ireland and left handed children were punished for using the devil hand and were forcibly retrained to become righties. ) but perlman character turns out to have a reason for concealing his right hand. elsewhere and a character is bitten by a zombie yet suffers no ill effects and so i knew there would be a payoff later. several scenes that would more logically take place at night are shot in daylight and apparently only because this was easier and less expensive. (since mcquaid is a proficient director and editor and he could easily have shot day for night . but using a process photography effect to help tell the story seems to interest him much less than showing off his flashy editing techniques. )mcquaid seems to be giving homage to those great old hammer horror flicks. but those hammers were so great because the actors and production designers worked hard to convince us that we were actually witnessing events in 1888 whitechapel and or wherever. i sell the dead almost entirely fails to evoke the 19th century. glenn mcquaid shows talent as a director and scripter and editor and yet in all three capacities here he makes odd choices . then largely fails to justify those choices. but i enjoyed i sell the dead. i will rate it positive  and and i look forward to his next movie. 
i saw i smell the dead  sorry and i sell the dead  at a press screening. glenn mcquaid and the film writer director editor and is a laddish irishman who introduced the screening by announcing that  whilst it was in progress  he would be going out for a pint. i do not begrudge him a drink and but  by telling us about it  he seemed to feel he needed to certify his laddishness or his irishness and or both. when the opening credits rolled and there were  as usual at press screenings  loud ovations for the names of every actor or crew member who would got friends in the audience and and silence for those who hadn not. mcquaid returned for a witty q and a afterwards. this horror movie doesn not take itself seriously and which is good because its humour is considerably stronger than its horror. only one scene is even remotely scary and and most of the horror is merely gross out and but i laughed throughout much of the film. this movie appears to be set in ireland circa 1850 (by which time grave robbing was mostly defunct). the story is told in flashback represent we get flashbacks within flashbacks and and the narrating character flashbacks material that he couldn not know about and because sometimes he wasn not present or (in one case) because the action is unfolding behind his back. the story begins with a prisoner being taken to the guillotine. guillotines weren not used in 19th century ireland and but  for once  we actually see a plausible guillotine sequence. the prisoner struggles on his way to execution and the rope cleats are accurate and and the prisoner manages to look up to see the blade overhead. (and there a payoff later to justify the historically inaccurate use of the guillotine itself. )the characters are ostensibly irish and but one major character speaks in cockney slang represent using phrases like a mug game and take a butcher (for have a look). for once and actors in 19th century roles display 19th century dental hygiene and yet nearly all the clothes and hairstyles (and the women make ups) are resolutely 21st century. i am not complaining in the case of heather bullock and who wears a very fetching black miniskirt cozzie that appears to be pvc. phworr. the lead actors (except ron perlman) are excellent and but most of the supporting cast have no sense of the victorian period. the worst offender is joel garland as the publican and whose characterisation is firmly rooted in the twenty first century. just when i thought that garland performance couldn not get any less victorian and he used his fingers to make ironic air quotes. the sets (especially angus scrimm lab) are detailed and impressive and yet failed to convince me that people actually lived and worked in these places. nearly every interior contains burning candles and but never once did i see what would have been there if these were actual victorian homes or workplaces represent leftover drippings from previous candles. one scene features an extra terrestrial represent i was annoyed that mcquaid plumped for a stereotypical grey schwa alien and rather than something original. there are splendid montage sequences and but mcquaid opts for flashy effects  split screens and overhead shots  that do not serve the story. i was impressed by a recurring blue screen device superimposing the main characters heads over other backgrounds. less effective was a recurring creepshow style motif of camera shots morphing actors faces into drawings resembling panel art from 1950s ec horror comics. i am a fan of ec comics and but they do not belong in 19th century ireland. the money that mcquaid spent on flashy photo f or x  showing off his editing skills without serving the story  should have been spent on accurate costumes. big spoilers now. ron perlman gives an oirish performance full of acting school tics. ostensibly playing a 19th century irish priest and he writes with his left hand. (in victorian ireland and left handed children were punished for using the devil hand and were forcibly retrained to become righties. ) but perlman character turns out to have a reason for concealing his right hand. elsewhere and a character is bitten by a zombie yet suffers no ill effects and so i knew there would be a payoff later. several scenes that would more logically take place at night are shot in daylight and apparently only because this was easier and less expensive. (since mcquaid is a proficient director and editor and he could easily have shot day for night . but using a process photography effect to help tell the story seems to interest him much less than showing off his flashy editing techniques. )mcquaid seems to be giving homage to those great old hammer horror flicks. but those hammers were so great because the actors and production designers worked hard to convince us that we were actually witnessing events in 1888 whitechapel and or wherever. i sell the dead almost entirely fails to evoke the 19th century. glenn mcquaid shows talent as a director and scripter and editor and yet in all three capacities here he makes odd choices . then largely fails to justify those choices. but i enjoyed i sell the dead. i will rate it positive  and and i look forward to his next movie. ---------------------------------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."
