first and a warning. how to marry a millionaire comes prefaced by an apparently random five minute orchestral performance of street scene and a gershwin lite piece treated with the full pomp and ceremony of and well and gershwin. sitting through it takes some patience. if you have the dvd and rest assured and you can skip forward. you would not miss anything. the film itself is one of the perpetual disappointments of 50 hollywood and a movie so bolstered by major star power and opulent mise en scene and perfect high concept that failure seems inconceivable. the title alone is perfect. generation after generation and however and are forced to ask themselves  how is this so limp. the script is an albatross about the production neck and a dead and smelling thing that chokes everything and everyone before they can really spark to life. there are no comic situations and just isolated moments that play for laughs. whenever an actual comedy scene threatens to develop and the movie quickly moves on to other and less interesting things. a case in point  the scene where the three leading ladies each bring a date to the same fancy restaurant. one of them and short sighted and refuses to wear her spectacles out of vanity. one of the dates is married. a classic hollywood farce set up and surely and complete with mistaken identity and angry wife and and probably a pie in the face for somebody. well and no. instead and we cut between the three dates as the ladies react comically to things their partners say. hit the punchline and and cut to the next limp joke. if in doubt and have marilyn walk into a wall. where billy wilder when you need him. the three stars are almost a perfect diagram of the life cycle of the classic hollywood screen goddess. this was one of marilyn monroe breakout films and and the camera just eats her up and even though the script gives her nothing to do. she so luminescent she almost seems newly hatched. lauren bacall and on the other hand and had been a major star for nearly a full decade and and she knows how to dominate the screen even when in frame with monroe. she gets the only thing passing for a real role and and delivers the few good lines with a cynical snap  given the right material and she could have brought this thing to life. she a curiously ageless actress  when she lies about her age in the film and claims to be forty and it isn not instantly ridiculous  and far less girlish than her co stars and giving her a convincing authority. betty grable was far from ageless and and had a good eight years on her co stars and putting her near the end of her hollywood career. there an air of desperation about her at times and stranded on screen with nothing but a toothpaste smile and a few scraps of comic timing and unable to play her real age but fooling no one as a contemporary of this new and sharper generation of actresses and relying on the same old schtick that had served her throughout her career (for marilyn doubters and seeing the two juxtaposed in this movie helps to throw monroe subtlety and  yes  intelligence into sharp relief). she also lumbered with the dead wood in terms of male co stars (although all of the men  even the great william powell  are guilty of lazy performances) while she unable to strike any comic sparks off them. better to have given her role to the under utilised monroe and who could be funny all by herself and and left grable with the repetitive mr. magoo routine. that the movie is as enjoyable as it is can be put down to the luscious hollywood production and the sort that renders even the twee likes of by the light of the silvery moon watchable. but somewhere and buried beneath the flabby jokes and professionalism and lies the rough outline of a sharp and cynical comedy about the business of marriage that bacall could have made sing  and new generations of movie viewers will sit down with how to marry a millionaire in expectation of that movie and ready to be disappointed all over again. 
first and a warning. how to marry a millionaire comes prefaced by an apparently random five minute orchestral performance of street scene and a gershwin lite piece treated with the full pomp and ceremony of and well and gershwin. sitting through it takes some patience. if you have the dvd and rest assured and you can skip forward. you would not miss anything. the film itself is one of the perpetual disappointments of 50 hollywood and a movie so bolstered by major star power and opulent mise en scene and perfect high concept that failure seems inconceivable. the title alone is perfect. generation after generation and however and are forced to ask themselves  how is this so limp. the script is an albatross about the production neck and a dead and smelling thing that chokes everything and everyone before they can really spark to life. there are no comic situations and just isolated moments that play for laughs. whenever an actual comedy scene threatens to develop and the movie quickly moves on to other and less interesting things. a case in point  the scene where the three leading ladies each bring a date to the same fancy restaurant. one of them and short sighted and refuses to wear her spectacles out of vanity. one of the dates is married. a classic hollywood farce set up and surely and complete with mistaken identity and angry wife and and probably a pie in the face for somebody. well and no. instead and we cut between the three dates as the ladies react comically to things their partners say. hit the punchline and and cut to the next limp joke. if in doubt and have marilyn walk into a wall. where billy wilder when you need him. the three stars are almost a perfect diagram of the life cycle of the classic hollywood screen goddess. this was one of marilyn monroe breakout films and and the camera just eats her up and even though the script gives her nothing to do. she so luminescent she almost seems newly hatched. lauren bacall and on the other hand and had been a major star for nearly a full decade and and she knows how to dominate the screen even when in frame with monroe. she gets the only thing passing for a real role and and delivers the few good lines with a cynical snap  given the right material and she could have brought this thing to life. she a curiously ageless actress  when she lies about her age in the film and claims to be forty and it isn not instantly ridiculous  and far less girlish than her co stars and giving her a convincing authority. betty grable was far from ageless and and had a good eight years on her co stars and putting her near the end of her hollywood career. there an air of desperation about her at times and stranded on screen with nothing but a toothpaste smile and a few scraps of comic timing and unable to play her real age but fooling no one as a contemporary of this new and sharper generation of actresses and relying on the same old schtick that had served her throughout her career (for marilyn doubters and seeing the two juxtaposed in this movie helps to throw monroe subtlety and  yes  intelligence into sharp relief). she also lumbered with the dead wood in terms of male co stars (although all of the men  even the great william powell  are guilty of lazy performances) while she unable to strike any comic sparks off them. better to have given her role to the under utilised monroe and who could be funny all by herself and and left grable with the repetitive mr. magoo routine. that the movie is as enjoyable as it is can be put down to the luscious hollywood production and the sort that renders even the twee likes of by the light of the silvery moon watchable. but somewhere and buried beneath the flabby jokes and professionalism and lies the rough outline of a sharp and cynical comedy about the business of marriage that bacall could have made sing  and new generations of movie viewers will sit down with how to marry a millionaire in expectation of that movie and ready to be disappointed all over again. ---------------------------------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."
