i saw that the foreigner was ranked in the bottom 100 movie listings here on imdb and so i wasn not expecting much when i tuned into it on the usa channel a week back and but i did have hopes. belly of the beast (which aired a month ago) was a mess and but it had great scenery and photography and some pretty cool moments scattered throughout and so i thought that this movie might have some of the same. alas and this movie fails the standards of basic watch ability in almost every way. the screenplay comes off as the bastard offspring of a john lecarre novel and a richard ludlum movie and but done by people with none of those worthy writers talent for plot and characterization. instead what we got is a glum and mean spirited and nihilistic and cryptic mare nest of muddled motives and tangled alliances and back shootings. and chest shootings. and bombings. and eviscerations. this carries over to the directorial style and which relies on hackneyed grainy shot or slow motion shots every 10 seconds and along with wire work and hyperactive jump cuts. these filmic devices that were stale 10 years ago when mtv directors used them for whitesnake videos and and the director works them like a punch press and hoping to inject some weird art house techno thriller coolness into the proceedings. segal himself is just awful in this. he spends the entire film talking in a hoarse and throaty half whisper and alternating between two expressions represent looking like he is sucking on a lemon while someone waves a small turd under his nose and or looking constipated. and he so chunky (and vain about it) that he never actually takes off his knee length duster on camera. i understand that it hard to keep the girth under control as a male actor ages (although denzel washington and paul newman never seemed to have that problem). but you deal with it by being honest about it and and by growing as an actor and not by hiding it with carefully chosen camera angles and floor length robes. so i can not really tell what going on and and the movie doesn not give me a reason to care about what going on and and the protagonist is completely one dimensional and visually unappealing. not a recipe for a good movie experience. oddly and most of the set designs and scenery are atmospheric and striking while in fact and if you were to freeze the film on almost any given scene that wasn not a close up of seagal and you would be struck by the care and professionalism of the lighting and colors and and composition and by how beautiful the eastern european settings are. but dressing up a rotten egg as a faberge egg can not make it edible. and the proceedings are rotten at heart. there are cool movies (like versus) and and there are visually striking but emotionally cold movies (like underworld) and there are paranoia conspiracy thrillers (like the bourne identity and its remake with matt damon). and then there is this thing and which can not make up its mind what it wants to be and pretends to be all these things and and fails because it has no guts or soul. this is a movie made by professionals with an actual budget and so you can not really put it in the same class as manos and killer shrews or hobgoblins. but i would rather watch all three of those movies back to back several times than watch the foreigner again even once. 
i saw that the foreigner was ranked in the bottom 100 movie listings here on imdb and so i wasn not expecting much when i tuned into it on the usa channel a week back and but i did have hopes. belly of the beast (which aired a month ago) was a mess and but it had great scenery and photography and some pretty cool moments scattered throughout and so i thought that this movie might have some of the same. alas and this movie fails the standards of basic watch ability in almost every way. the screenplay comes off as the bastard offspring of a john lecarre novel and a richard ludlum movie and but done by people with none of those worthy writers talent for plot and characterization. instead what we got is a glum and mean spirited and nihilistic and cryptic mare nest of muddled motives and tangled alliances and back shootings. and chest shootings. and bombings. and eviscerations. this carries over to the directorial style and which relies on hackneyed grainy shot or slow motion shots every 10 seconds and along with wire work and hyperactive jump cuts. these filmic devices that were stale 10 years ago when mtv directors used them for whitesnake videos and and the director works them like a punch press and hoping to inject some weird art house techno thriller coolness into the proceedings. segal himself is just awful in this. he spends the entire film talking in a hoarse and throaty half whisper and alternating between two expressions represent looking like he is sucking on a lemon while someone waves a small turd under his nose and or looking constipated. and he so chunky (and vain about it) that he never actually takes off his knee length duster on camera. i understand that it hard to keep the girth under control as a male actor ages (although denzel washington and paul newman never seemed to have that problem). but you deal with it by being honest about it and and by growing as an actor and not by hiding it with carefully chosen camera angles and floor length robes. so i can not really tell what going on and and the movie doesn not give me a reason to care about what going on and and the protagonist is completely one dimensional and visually unappealing. not a recipe for a good movie experience. oddly and most of the set designs and scenery are atmospheric and striking while in fact and if you were to freeze the film on almost any given scene that wasn not a close up of seagal and you would be struck by the care and professionalism of the lighting and colors and and composition and by how beautiful the eastern european settings are. but dressing up a rotten egg as a faberge egg can not make it edible. and the proceedings are rotten at heart. there are cool movies (like versus) and and there are visually striking but emotionally cold movies (like underworld) and there are paranoia conspiracy thrillers (like the bourne identity and its remake with matt damon). and then there is this thing and which can not make up its mind what it wants to be and pretends to be all these things and and fails because it has no guts or soul. this is a movie made by professionals with an actual budget and so you can not really put it in the same class as manos and killer shrews or hobgoblins. but i would rather watch all three of those movies back to back several times than watch the foreigner again even once. ---------------------------------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."
