dramatic license  some hate it and though it is necessary in retelling any life story. in the case of lucy and the main points of lucille ball teenage years and early career and 20 year marriage to desi arnaz are all included and albeit in a truncated and reworked way. the main emotional points of lucy life are made clear represent lucille struggle to find her niche as an actress and finally blossoming into the brilliant comedienne who made the character lucy ricardo a legend while her turbulent and romantic and ultimately impossible marriage to desi arnaz while lucy and desi creating the first television empire and forever securing their place in history as tv most memorable sitcom couple. as lucille ball and rachel york does a commendable job. do not expect to see quite the same miraculous transformation like the one judy davis made when playing judy garland and but york makes ball strong willed yet likable and and is very funny in her own right. even though her comedic timing is different than lucy  and she is still believable. the film never goes into much detail about her perfectionistic behaviour on the set and and her mistreatment of vivian vance during the early i love lucy years and but watching york portray lucy rehearsing privately is a nice inclusion. daniel pino is thinner and less charismatic than the real desi was and but he does have his own charm and does a mostly decent job with desi accent and especially in the opening scene. madeline zima was decent and if not overly memorable and as the teen aged lucy. vivian vance and william frawley were not featured much and thankfully and since rebecca hobbs and russell newman were not very convincing in the roles. not that they aren not good actors in their own right and they just were not all that suited to the people they were playing. most of the actors were from austrailia and new zeland and and the repressed accents are detectable at times. although the main structure of the film sticks to historical fact and there are many deviations and some for seemingly inexplicable reasons. jess oppenheimer and the head writer of lucy radio show my favourite husband which began in 1948 and is depicted in this film as arriving on the scene to help with i love lucy in 1951 and completely disregarding the fact that he was the main creator. this movie also depicts marc daniels as being the main i love lucy director for its entire run and completely ignoring the fact that he was replaced by william asher after the first season. also and though i figure this was due to budgetary constraints and the ricardo are shown to live in the same apartment for their entire stay in new york and when in reality they changed apartments in 1953. the kitchen set is slightly larger and off scale from the original as well. the connecticut home looks pretty close to the original and except the right and left sides of the house have been condensed and restructured. there also desi talking about buying rko in 1953 and during lucy red scare incident and even though rko did not hit the market until 1957. these changes well could have been for dramatic license and and the film does work at conveying the main facts and but would it have hurt them to show a bit more respect to oppenheimer and asher and two vital figures in i love lucy history. the biggest gaff comes in the i love lucy recreation scenes and at least a few of them. it always risky recreating something that is captured on film and has been seen by billions of people and but even more so when obvious changes are made. the scene with the giant bread loaf was truncated and and anyone at all familiar with that episode would have noticed the differences right away. the were having a baby number was shortened as well and but other than that it was practically dead on. by far the best was the grape stomping scene and with rachel york really nailing lucy mannerisms. the producers made the wise decision not to attempt directly recreating the vitametavegamin and candy factory bits and instead showing the actors rehearse them. these scenes proved effective because of that approach. the film main fault is that it makes the assumption the viewers already know a great deal about lucy life and since much is skimmed over or omitted at all. overall and though and it gives a decent portrait of lucy and desi marriage and and the factual errors can be overlooked when the character development works effectively. 
dramatic license  some hate it and though it is necessary in retelling any life story. in the case of lucy and the main points of lucille ball teenage years and early career and 20 year marriage to desi arnaz are all included and albeit in a truncated and reworked way. the main emotional points of lucy life are made clear represent lucille struggle to find her niche as an actress and finally blossoming into the brilliant comedienne who made the character lucy ricardo a legend while her turbulent and romantic and ultimately impossible marriage to desi arnaz while lucy and desi creating the first television empire and forever securing their place in history as tv most memorable sitcom couple. as lucille ball and rachel york does a commendable job. do not expect to see quite the same miraculous transformation like the one judy davis made when playing judy garland and but york makes ball strong willed yet likable and and is very funny in her own right. even though her comedic timing is different than lucy  and she is still believable. the film never goes into much detail about her perfectionistic behaviour on the set and and her mistreatment of vivian vance during the early i love lucy years and but watching york portray lucy rehearsing privately is a nice inclusion. daniel pino is thinner and less charismatic than the real desi was and but he does have his own charm and does a mostly decent job with desi accent and especially in the opening scene. madeline zima was decent and if not overly memorable and as the teen aged lucy. vivian vance and william frawley were not featured much and thankfully and since rebecca hobbs and russell newman were not very convincing in the roles. not that they aren not good actors in their own right and they just were not all that suited to the people they were playing. most of the actors were from austrailia and new zeland and and the repressed accents are detectable at times. although the main structure of the film sticks to historical fact and there are many deviations and some for seemingly inexplicable reasons. jess oppenheimer and the head writer of lucy radio show my favourite husband which began in 1948 and is depicted in this film as arriving on the scene to help with i love lucy in 1951 and completely disregarding the fact that he was the main creator. this movie also depicts marc daniels as being the main i love lucy director for its entire run and completely ignoring the fact that he was replaced by william asher after the first season. also and though i figure this was due to budgetary constraints and the ricardo are shown to live in the same apartment for their entire stay in new york and when in reality they changed apartments in 1953. the kitchen set is slightly larger and off scale from the original as well. the connecticut home looks pretty close to the original and except the right and left sides of the house have been condensed and restructured. there also desi talking about buying rko in 1953 and during lucy red scare incident and even though rko did not hit the market until 1957. these changes well could have been for dramatic license and and the film does work at conveying the main facts and but would it have hurt them to show a bit more respect to oppenheimer and asher and two vital figures in i love lucy history. the biggest gaff comes in the i love lucy recreation scenes and at least a few of them. it always risky recreating something that is captured on film and has been seen by billions of people and but even more so when obvious changes are made. the scene with the giant bread loaf was truncated and and anyone at all familiar with that episode would have noticed the differences right away. the were having a baby number was shortened as well and but other than that it was practically dead on. by far the best was the grape stomping scene and with rachel york really nailing lucy mannerisms. the producers made the wise decision not to attempt directly recreating the vitametavegamin and candy factory bits and instead showing the actors rehearse them. these scenes proved effective because of that approach. the film main fault is that it makes the assumption the viewers already know a great deal about lucy life and since much is skimmed over or omitted at all. overall and though and it gives a decent portrait of lucy and desi marriage and and the factual errors can be overlooked when the character development works effectively. ---------------------------------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."
