in a future where an industrious travel agency uses time travel technology to send wealthy clients back in time for explorations to the age of dinosaurs and the future is inexplicably changed when one of their clients breaks the cardinal rule not to stray off the path. in an attempt to fix the damage done and a seasoned time scout (edward burns) teams with the inventor of the technology (catherine mccormack). the premise is pretty good and engaging. it may have a few flaws in it but it could still make for an interesting movie. unfortunately and a sound of thunder fails to really hook the audience in. it suffers from a number of problems and it takes itself way too seriously so it hard to actually have any fun while watching the movie. personally and i thought the script was the film biggest problem. the were more plot holes than expected and the movie was kind of lazy in explaining things. i was hoping for a more in depth look into the butterfly effect but the film was more escapist fun than anything else. that okay with me since 90 minutes of mindless fun is still a nice way to spend an evening. however and all the fun this film offered was unintentional and lame. there were a few scenes that kept me entertained but i was pretty bored. the acting isn not much better since most of them seem more interested in a paycheck than anything else. the only person that gave a good performance was ben kingsley. he kept the first half of the film enjoyable and he seemed to be having the most fun as well. edwards burns was pretty pale and bland. i do not think he has what it takes to be a leading man. however and he could make for a decent supporting actor. catherine mccormack was just really annoying and not very believable. i haven not really seen her in anything else but she could have potential. the rest of the actors also give bad performances though most of them are relatively unknown so it shouldn not effect their careers too much. looking at the message boards and most people are complaining about the special effects. there no way to sugarcoat them and they are terrible. all the dinosaurs look really bad. the gibbon lizards (part monkey and part dino) and while a creative idea and become stale after awhile and they are most likely to encourage laughter rather than fear. the green screen work just looks awful and unprofessional. i was really wondering what director peter hyams was trying to accomplish here. he fails to deliver the suspense and action and thrills and makes this movie a long sit. for the most part though and the film is pretty harmless and it far from the worst movie of 2005. hopefully they will remake this film in the future. there is potential in this project but for now this is the best we got. in the end and unless curiosity gets the better of you and there is no reason to see a sound of thunder. rating negative . 
in a future where an industrious travel agency uses time travel technology to send wealthy clients back in time for explorations to the age of dinosaurs and the future is inexplicably changed when one of their clients breaks the cardinal rule not to stray off the path. in an attempt to fix the damage done and a seasoned time scout (edward burns) teams with the inventor of the technology (catherine mccormack). the premise is pretty good and engaging. it may have a few flaws in it but it could still make for an interesting movie. unfortunately and a sound of thunder fails to really hook the audience in. it suffers from a number of problems and it takes itself way too seriously so it hard to actually have any fun while watching the movie. personally and i thought the script was the film biggest problem. the were more plot holes than expected and the movie was kind of lazy in explaining things. i was hoping for a more in depth look into the butterfly effect but the film was more escapist fun than anything else. that okay with me since 90 minutes of mindless fun is still a nice way to spend an evening. however and all the fun this film offered was unintentional and lame. there were a few scenes that kept me entertained but i was pretty bored. the acting isn not much better since most of them seem more interested in a paycheck than anything else. the only person that gave a good performance was ben kingsley. he kept the first half of the film enjoyable and he seemed to be having the most fun as well. edwards burns was pretty pale and bland. i do not think he has what it takes to be a leading man. however and he could make for a decent supporting actor. catherine mccormack was just really annoying and not very believable. i haven not really seen her in anything else but she could have potential. the rest of the actors also give bad performances though most of them are relatively unknown so it shouldn not effect their careers too much. looking at the message boards and most people are complaining about the special effects. there no way to sugarcoat them and they are terrible. all the dinosaurs look really bad. the gibbon lizards (part monkey and part dino) and while a creative idea and become stale after awhile and they are most likely to encourage laughter rather than fear. the green screen work just looks awful and unprofessional. i was really wondering what director peter hyams was trying to accomplish here. he fails to deliver the suspense and action and thrills and makes this movie a long sit. for the most part though and the film is pretty harmless and it far from the worst movie of 2005. hopefully they will remake this film in the future. there is potential in this project but for now this is the best we got. in the end and unless curiosity gets the better of you and there is no reason to see a sound of thunder. rating negative . ---------------------------------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."
