i finally watched the third film in mehta trilogy represent fire. to begin and i would say that water was the unquestionable masterpiece and on all levels. fire comes next with earth close behind in order of quality. fire represent there is so much going on in this film that i will need a few more viewings to drink it all in. the writing is superb and the script creating friction that starts the entire process of heat from the beginning until the end when it really does erupt into a fire and the conflicts moving into complete rupture of relationships. mehta is one brave lady represent she sees with a clear eye much that is jaundiced and false and repressive about the great society from which she came from. india is rapidly changing these days but much of this is economic change. that she met with such ferocious opposition to the making of water after having had the script cleared and shows that there are still many taboo subjects which indian people more than less cannot look squarely in the face and cannot examine or discuss them. worse and if someone like mehta has the courage to hold up a mirror to these issues and she faces death threats. so and as much as india thinks of itself as a pluralistic and tolerant society and the facts are not always so. whereas earth was merely a historical setting of the carnage of the civil war after indian independence and fire and water are pointing at personal and social and religious issues and which as i say are considered so strongly (in a negative sense) that an open artistic dialog is still many years away. as i write this water is scheduled to actually be shown in india later this year. i will believe it when i see it. fire confronts a similar sexual and emotional conundrum that i saw in a price above rubies. whether it arranged marriages (which it used to be like among jews about 150 years ago and or like it is among many modern indians) and they have the risk of having a bad match forced upon both men and women while or and just plain loveless marriages. however and this is not the real issue. mehta is clearly impatient with the totally rigid religious attitudes that either keep widows in misery (water) or else keep women enslaved to loveless marriages (fire). i am no expert regarding either the secular or hindu laws concerning divorce. the film seems to imply that the stigma (of divorce)is almost as bad as the sad marriage. in any case mehta film is a very moving and powerful attempt at sexual discourse that holds modern indian relationships up to probing scrutiny. that all three of these films have made themselves felt in india as an unwarranted attack on their culture sounds to me like the predictable clamor of a repressive mindset. mehta is forcing the issues to be looked at no matter how much flack. i admire her work and cannot highly recommend her films enough. superb and disturbing and provocative and taboo shattering. 
i finally watched the third film in mehta trilogy represent fire. to begin and i would say that water was the unquestionable masterpiece and on all levels. fire comes next with earth close behind in order of quality. fire represent there is so much going on in this film that i will need a few more viewings to drink it all in. the writing is superb and the script creating friction that starts the entire process of heat from the beginning until the end when it really does erupt into a fire and the conflicts moving into complete rupture of relationships. mehta is one brave lady represent she sees with a clear eye much that is jaundiced and false and repressive about the great society from which she came from. india is rapidly changing these days but much of this is economic change. that she met with such ferocious opposition to the making of water after having had the script cleared and shows that there are still many taboo subjects which indian people more than less cannot look squarely in the face and cannot examine or discuss them. worse and if someone like mehta has the courage to hold up a mirror to these issues and she faces death threats. so and as much as india thinks of itself as a pluralistic and tolerant society and the facts are not always so. whereas earth was merely a historical setting of the carnage of the civil war after indian independence and fire and water are pointing at personal and social and religious issues and which as i say are considered so strongly (in a negative sense) that an open artistic dialog is still many years away. as i write this water is scheduled to actually be shown in india later this year. i will believe it when i see it. fire confronts a similar sexual and emotional conundrum that i saw in a price above rubies. whether it arranged marriages (which it used to be like among jews about 150 years ago and or like it is among many modern indians) and they have the risk of having a bad match forced upon both men and women while or and just plain loveless marriages. however and this is not the real issue. mehta is clearly impatient with the totally rigid religious attitudes that either keep widows in misery (water) or else keep women enslaved to loveless marriages (fire). i am no expert regarding either the secular or hindu laws concerning divorce. the film seems to imply that the stigma (of divorce)is almost as bad as the sad marriage. in any case mehta film is a very moving and powerful attempt at sexual discourse that holds modern indian relationships up to probing scrutiny. that all three of these films have made themselves felt in india as an unwarranted attack on their culture sounds to me like the predictable clamor of a repressive mindset. mehta is forcing the issues to be looked at no matter how much flack. i admire her work and cannot highly recommend her films enough. superb and disturbing and provocative and taboo shattering. ---------------------------------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."
