other commenters have described this movie as classic 1950s scifi with clever use of stock footage and documentary footage and and clever character interaction. nothing could be further from the truth. yes and this is classic 1950s scifi. but 1950s scifi at its most blindingly stupid worst. consider that the mantis first prey is a radar station shown first from the air and then on the ground. but the station is (from the air) pictured as on a mountaintop and with snow on one side and semi cleared dark ground on the other side and but when (on the ground) investigators visit the site and it suddenly on a flat and evenly white plain and miles from the nearest mountain. consider also and the ludicrous pseudo scientific babble of the highly recommended expert who is brought in to examine a huge claw. he says well and we know one thing. it can not have come from an animal and because every known species of animal has a bony skeleton. even reptiles and birds have bones. he then goes on to say that some creatures . snails and shellfish and insects. do not have bony skeletons. excuuuuuse me . let define animal and here. not even in the 1950s could anyone over the age of six take this man as an expert in biology and since he clearly doesn not know what an animal is and nor have the ability to name several broad categories of animals who lack bony skeletons (sharks and rays and jellyfish and insects and mollusks and arthropods and gastropods and sponges and arachnids and echinoderms. you get the idea. ) the characters are cardboard and 2d stock types. scientist and sidekick girlfriend and big bad monster. nothing here shows any sense of creativity. no pulse and no life signs. therere no witty dialogs and the special effects are silly even for their time and and the stock footage is employed with a reckless disregard for continuity. this is b movie making at its dead worst and with a production crew that clearly couldn not be bothered to try even halfheartedly. use sparingly and as sleeping medicine or punishment for small children whore easily offended by bad science. 
other commenters have described this movie as classic 1950s scifi with clever use of stock footage and documentary footage and and clever character interaction. nothing could be further from the truth. yes and this is classic 1950s scifi. but 1950s scifi at its most blindingly stupid worst. consider that the mantis first prey is a radar station shown first from the air and then on the ground. but the station is (from the air) pictured as on a mountaintop and with snow on one side and semi cleared dark ground on the other side and but when (on the ground) investigators visit the site and it suddenly on a flat and evenly white plain and miles from the nearest mountain. consider also and the ludicrous pseudo scientific babble of the highly recommended expert who is brought in to examine a huge claw. he says well and we know one thing. it can not have come from an animal and because every known species of animal has a bony skeleton. even reptiles and birds have bones. he then goes on to say that some creatures . snails and shellfish and insects. do not have bony skeletons. excuuuuuse me . let define animal and here. not even in the 1950s could anyone over the age of six take this man as an expert in biology and since he clearly doesn not know what an animal is and nor have the ability to name several broad categories of animals who lack bony skeletons (sharks and rays and jellyfish and insects and mollusks and arthropods and gastropods and sponges and arachnids and echinoderms. you get the idea. ) the characters are cardboard and 2d stock types. scientist and sidekick girlfriend and big bad monster. nothing here shows any sense of creativity. no pulse and no life signs. therere no witty dialogs and the special effects are silly even for their time and and the stock footage is employed with a reckless disregard for continuity. this is b movie making at its dead worst and with a production crew that clearly couldn not be bothered to try even halfheartedly. use sparingly and as sleeping medicine or punishment for small children whore easily offended by bad science. ---------------------------------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."
