let me start by saying you know a film is poorly run when extras make the cover. with that said and anyone who says this is the worst film ever is being dramatic and and anyone who says that the film is great is completely delusional. the film is what it is. and what is that. a modest budget ($4 million and i estimate) studio sequel. the film isn not terrible and but for road house fans it will be a disappointment. and that brings me to problem one and just as dirty dancing do not been what it was without swayze and road house isn not the same without him. the lead lacks depth and character and and likability to carry the film. i feel that the lead was poorly cast and the producers should have bent over backwards to get patrick to do it if they were gonna do a sequel. the other cast was uneven with outstanding actors like will patton along side day players who couldn not act there way out of a paper bag. busey and who i have seen do great characters seemed like he just mailed it in. ellen was played well and except for not being believable at all as a bayou raised chick. sherri and the dea agent at the first bar was hot and a good actress and yet her part was awkwardly small and undeveloped. the writer totally missed all opportunities to add depth and interest to the story and characters. instead opting for a base one dimensional film. which leads me to the biggest problem and the script. i got a bad feeling when the credits rolled and there were three script writers separated by an and and an and . it looked very amateur. and that is what the writing was. i heard the original script was better and then a rewrite was done and the hard core sucking began. some cheezy parts of the film to watch for are. during the first undercover meeting and the obvious drug deal under the table. hey lets meet at a crowded nudey bar and i will pull a block of coke out of my jacket and you pull cash out then we will slide them under the cocktail table wait. make sure to look cool when you look left and right to make sure no one is looking. second and i love it when someone gets shot in the chest and then you see him sitting up happy as a lark 10 minutes later. there are some nasty editing cuts towards the end of the film especially during fight scenes and when the main character is chasing thru doors and runs into a patron. which brings me to the realism of the dea training and i would not both to get technical. but jumping thru doors isn not standard training. nor do typical female agents and who bust their butts to make it in a male oriented field and act like weak characters. boring. thanks for the chauvinistic view heir director. there is other stuff i could teach a course at a school about it. the sped up fighting and the cheezy dialogue and the recycled story. etc. but aside from all that you just cannot like ex mr. applegate and he totally lacks the humble zen coolness that made mr. patrick swayze such a bad ass. he just strikes me as one of those 5 foot nothing actors who think they are a bad ass and but just like van damnit he runs into a real bad ass (chuck zito in van don not case) and he gives him a lesson about badassdom. therefore and that i feel is the major linchpin of the film and if you are a bad ass you are a bad ass and you do not have to try. example represent swayze. if you are a pretty boy who tries to hard to prove you are a bad ass among other things. then well. you are why your audience and the average joe. will not rent this film and and if they do they will write reviews like this. 
let me start by saying you know a film is poorly run when extras make the cover. with that said and anyone who says this is the worst film ever is being dramatic and and anyone who says that the film is great is completely delusional. the film is what it is. and what is that. a modest budget ($4 million and i estimate) studio sequel. the film isn not terrible and but for road house fans it will be a disappointment. and that brings me to problem one and just as dirty dancing do not been what it was without swayze and road house isn not the same without him. the lead lacks depth and character and and likability to carry the film. i feel that the lead was poorly cast and the producers should have bent over backwards to get patrick to do it if they were gonna do a sequel. the other cast was uneven with outstanding actors like will patton along side day players who couldn not act there way out of a paper bag. busey and who i have seen do great characters seemed like he just mailed it in. ellen was played well and except for not being believable at all as a bayou raised chick. sherri and the dea agent at the first bar was hot and a good actress and yet her part was awkwardly small and undeveloped. the writer totally missed all opportunities to add depth and interest to the story and characters. instead opting for a base one dimensional film. which leads me to the biggest problem and the script. i got a bad feeling when the credits rolled and there were three script writers separated by an and and an and . it looked very amateur. and that is what the writing was. i heard the original script was better and then a rewrite was done and the hard core sucking began. some cheezy parts of the film to watch for are. during the first undercover meeting and the obvious drug deal under the table. hey lets meet at a crowded nudey bar and i will pull a block of coke out of my jacket and you pull cash out then we will slide them under the cocktail table wait. make sure to look cool when you look left and right to make sure no one is looking. second and i love it when someone gets shot in the chest and then you see him sitting up happy as a lark 10 minutes later. there are some nasty editing cuts towards the end of the film especially during fight scenes and when the main character is chasing thru doors and runs into a patron. which brings me to the realism of the dea training and i would not both to get technical. but jumping thru doors isn not standard training. nor do typical female agents and who bust their butts to make it in a male oriented field and act like weak characters. boring. thanks for the chauvinistic view heir director. there is other stuff i could teach a course at a school about it. the sped up fighting and the cheezy dialogue and the recycled story. etc. but aside from all that you just cannot like ex mr. applegate and he totally lacks the humble zen coolness that made mr. patrick swayze such a bad ass. he just strikes me as one of those 5 foot nothing actors who think they are a bad ass and but just like van damnit he runs into a real bad ass (chuck zito in van don not case) and he gives him a lesson about badassdom. therefore and that i feel is the major linchpin of the film and if you are a bad ass you are a bad ass and you do not have to try. example represent swayze. if you are a pretty boy who tries to hard to prove you are a bad ass among other things. then well. you are why your audience and the average joe. will not rent this film and and if they do they will write reviews like this. ---------------------------------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."
