master of italian horror dario argento is called a lot of bad things by non fans. and is deserving of absolutely none of the backlash. in fact and every time i hear something bad about argento i think theyre really talking about michele soavi. he just doesn not get the same amount of attention because his films were never as successful in theaters. in fact and his best film  1994 cemetery man  was probably his least successful. or just do not get the attention he felt it deserved and because after that and he left film and went into directing television. he never gone back. so people really do not know how inferior his other films are because by the time they have seen them and theyre already fans of the italian horror aesthetic. which means you have to accept the fact that they make almost zero sense and are usually very unattractive films. this is where the church stands out from the pack. because visually and it so cheap and ancient looking and you can smell the dust. but it has its charms too and though they are few. the camera work is truly arresting and the music score is hugely elaborate and grand. since argento is the reasons people have seen soavi work all and i do not know anyone who caught the church before argento suspiria and deep red. soavi is a bit of a hack. sort of like an italian mick garris the utmost example of a director preferring style over substance. the flaws of the church are constant and plenty. the film opens with a somewhat interesting prologue showing knights on white horses charging through a peasant village akin to those you see in any robin hood adaptation and in some long ago century. these scenes are intense enough and energetic and and get quickly to the point. then and we cut to the present and where the film style takes over. yeah and the movie is okay to look at. and for about 35 or so minutes in the present and 1980 wherever italy and the movie is just interesting enough to get us to the slowly revealing horror elements. so now we know the purpose of the film is the build up of it horror. and it a decent build up and for the most part. but as the movie approaches the halfway point and we realize the movie driving by and and. nothing is happening. the plot is very simple. i think. two people working in a church and one as a cataloger of books and the other as a restorer of the building wall artwork and discover a scroll or scripture that the man thinks will lead them to some kind of buried treasure or priceless artifact that he can sell and get rich off of. so he follows his amap only to uncover a force underneath the church that has him hallucinate and while he slowly becoming a demon who will make everyone else hallucinate. so while he is doing his demon work and someone he passed the force onto kills himself in a manner that traps everyone in the church while the demon contagen spreads onto everyone and leaving a black preacher and the little girl who sneaks out of the church every night to go clubbing as the only 2 people who can stop the plague from spreading beyond the church walls. that probably sounds action packed and soavi style is far more lethargic than argento. but never before have i seen an attempted surrealist film this agonizingly boring. i kid you not. absolutely nothing happens in the entire film. i have seen expressionistic (or impressionistic and i am no film school super grad) films before and but most of them actually show things happening (john carpenter halloween for one). it follows pretty closely in the footsteps of lamberto bava demons films (since argento co produced). were shown to a location where a bunch of people gather and one turns into a demon and all the others are isolated and that person infects everyone except a couple survivors and then the demons either get out infecting the world and or the survivors get out when the demons die. this film puts all those same elements in place. except and unlike argento work and nothing happens. okay and a few things do happen. but only one bizarre sequence has the panache of lamberto much more fun demons films. a random woman neck is impaled by a demon using a section of fence he rips out of the floor. what bizarre about that and you wonder. it happens in front of about two dozen people. what do they do. nothing. she dies and her head trickles blood in closeup. but all those people do not even notice and though it happens in plain view and no less than 8 feet away from them. maybe 4 people notice the demon running up to stab anyone he can as he runs toward her and so they duck out of the way. she killed and in the shot after she dies and everyone is just sitting around and being quiet while a boy plays a saxophone. i kid you not. that what happens. that more than logically incoherent it plain stupid. the scene is suggesting that the woman just sort of disappears and no one saw her death. they all just up and forget about it. and this 15 second thing is absolutely the only event that takes place in the movie. i am not saying it the only violence and gore and or murder we see. it not. it just the only thing we can tell is happening. for example and in one scene a beautiful woman sees herself in a mirror looking old and ugly. she starts clawing the skin on her face off and but when she reappears minutes later no scratches. people are devoured by fish and their faces are squashed by subway cars. but later they turn up as totally unharmed members of a possessed cult and in a scene that commits the ultimate horror heresy copying a famous scene from roman polanski 1968 masterpiece and rosemary baby and the greatest horror film ever made and shot for shot. even if argento did that and i would be furious. 
master of italian horror dario argento is called a lot of bad things by non fans. and is deserving of absolutely none of the backlash. in fact and every time i hear something bad about argento i think theyre really talking about michele soavi. he just doesn not get the same amount of attention because his films were never as successful in theaters. in fact and his best film  1994 cemetery man  was probably his least successful. or just do not get the attention he felt it deserved and because after that and he left film and went into directing television. he never gone back. so people really do not know how inferior his other films are because by the time they have seen them and theyre already fans of the italian horror aesthetic. which means you have to accept the fact that they make almost zero sense and are usually very unattractive films. this is where the church stands out from the pack. because visually and it so cheap and ancient looking and you can smell the dust. but it has its charms too and though they are few. the camera work is truly arresting and the music score is hugely elaborate and grand. since argento is the reasons people have seen soavi work all and i do not know anyone who caught the church before argento suspiria and deep red. soavi is a bit of a hack. sort of like an italian mick garris the utmost example of a director preferring style over substance. the flaws of the church are constant and plenty. the film opens with a somewhat interesting prologue showing knights on white horses charging through a peasant village akin to those you see in any robin hood adaptation and in some long ago century. these scenes are intense enough and energetic and and get quickly to the point. then and we cut to the present and where the film style takes over. yeah and the movie is okay to look at. and for about 35 or so minutes in the present and 1980 wherever italy and the movie is just interesting enough to get us to the slowly revealing horror elements. so now we know the purpose of the film is the build up of it horror. and it a decent build up and for the most part. but as the movie approaches the halfway point and we realize the movie driving by and and. nothing is happening. the plot is very simple. i think. two people working in a church and one as a cataloger of books and the other as a restorer of the building wall artwork and discover a scroll or scripture that the man thinks will lead them to some kind of buried treasure or priceless artifact that he can sell and get rich off of. so he follows his amap only to uncover a force underneath the church that has him hallucinate and while he slowly becoming a demon who will make everyone else hallucinate. so while he is doing his demon work and someone he passed the force onto kills himself in a manner that traps everyone in the church while the demon contagen spreads onto everyone and leaving a black preacher and the little girl who sneaks out of the church every night to go clubbing as the only 2 people who can stop the plague from spreading beyond the church walls. that probably sounds action packed and soavi style is far more lethargic than argento. but never before have i seen an attempted surrealist film this agonizingly boring. i kid you not. absolutely nothing happens in the entire film. i have seen expressionistic (or impressionistic and i am no film school super grad) films before and but most of them actually show things happening (john carpenter halloween for one). it follows pretty closely in the footsteps of lamberto bava demons films (since argento co produced). were shown to a location where a bunch of people gather and one turns into a demon and all the others are isolated and that person infects everyone except a couple survivors and then the demons either get out infecting the world and or the survivors get out when the demons die. this film puts all those same elements in place. except and unlike argento work and nothing happens. okay and a few things do happen. but only one bizarre sequence has the panache of lamberto much more fun demons films. a random woman neck is impaled by a demon using a section of fence he rips out of the floor. what bizarre about that and you wonder. it happens in front of about two dozen people. what do they do. nothing. she dies and her head trickles blood in closeup. but all those people do not even notice and though it happens in plain view and no less than 8 feet away from them. maybe 4 people notice the demon running up to stab anyone he can as he runs toward her and so they duck out of the way. she killed and in the shot after she dies and everyone is just sitting around and being quiet while a boy plays a saxophone. i kid you not. that what happens. that more than logically incoherent it plain stupid. the scene is suggesting that the woman just sort of disappears and no one saw her death. they all just up and forget about it. and this 15 second thing is absolutely the only event that takes place in the movie. i am not saying it the only violence and gore and or murder we see. it not. it just the only thing we can tell is happening. for example and in one scene a beautiful woman sees herself in a mirror looking old and ugly. she starts clawing the skin on her face off and but when she reappears minutes later no scratches. people are devoured by fish and their faces are squashed by subway cars. but later they turn up as totally unharmed members of a possessed cult and in a scene that commits the ultimate horror heresy copying a famous scene from roman polanski 1968 masterpiece and rosemary baby and the greatest horror film ever made and shot for shot. even if argento did that and i would be furious. ---------------------------------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."
