it looks like people involved with this movie are stuffing the ballot box to boost its ratings. the good news that apparently only 18 people have seen it. i suppose that makes me the 19th. i have no involvement with the flick and do not know anyone who did and i am a long time imdb user (check my vote record and reviews over the past seven years) and so i promise i am giving an honest and unbiased opinion. it coming to you from a 30 year horror fan who has also appeared in a couple of low budget flicks himself. aside from a couple of interesting video effects and frankensteins bloody nightmare is incoherent and boring and and technically flawed beyond all reason. it was apparently shot on silent stock and the audio then dubbed in while most of it sounds like it was recorded with a tin can and a piece of string and anyhow. more than three quarters of the dialog is inaudible. i watched this from beginning to end and have no idea of what the story was and or even if there was one. it seems like the director is mostly impressing himself with long and panning shots of the corners of table and dead black spaces that do nothing but pad the film out. that would be a problem if one were actually developing a plot and making a film that had some sense of pacing. in this case and though and the rule doesn not apply. it doesn not matter how scenes are shot because they do not add up to a story. watching this video is an exercise in futility at every level. whatever people who worked on it are writing and however theyre trying to influence the ratings here on imdb and this is just bad and tedious stuff. that the honest truth. if youre thinking of spending your money or time on this one and think again. it easy to find something better because you would not find much worse. and that the unbiased and unvarnished truth. 
it looks like people involved with this movie are stuffing the ballot box to boost its ratings. the good news that apparently only 18 people have seen it. i suppose that makes me the 19th. i have no involvement with the flick and do not know anyone who did and i am a long time imdb user (check my vote record and reviews over the past seven years) and so i promise i am giving an honest and unbiased opinion. it coming to you from a 30 year horror fan who has also appeared in a couple of low budget flicks himself. aside from a couple of interesting video effects and frankensteins bloody nightmare is incoherent and boring and and technically flawed beyond all reason. it was apparently shot on silent stock and the audio then dubbed in while most of it sounds like it was recorded with a tin can and a piece of string and anyhow. more than three quarters of the dialog is inaudible. i watched this from beginning to end and have no idea of what the story was and or even if there was one. it seems like the director is mostly impressing himself with long and panning shots of the corners of table and dead black spaces that do nothing but pad the film out. that would be a problem if one were actually developing a plot and making a film that had some sense of pacing. in this case and though and the rule doesn not apply. it doesn not matter how scenes are shot because they do not add up to a story. watching this video is an exercise in futility at every level. whatever people who worked on it are writing and however theyre trying to influence the ratings here on imdb and this is just bad and tedious stuff. that the honest truth. if youre thinking of spending your money or time on this one and think again. it easy to find something better because you would not find much worse. and that the unbiased and unvarnished truth. ---------------------------------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."
