this film makes about as much sense as an ozzie and harriet or a father knows best episode. an old copy of reader digest (circa 1962) would provide more insight into modern life and or the relationship between a father and a daughter and than this weird concoction. i was surprised with diane keaton. she appears to sleepwalk through the film. (given the film title and i realize that hers was a supporting role but even martin short managed a distinct and supporting character. )i can understand the attraction of an imaginary world created in a good romantic comedy. but this film is the prozac version of an imaginary world. i am frightened to consider that anyone could enjoy it even as pure fantasy. 
this film makes about as much sense as an ozzie and harriet or a father knows best episode. an old copy of reader digest (circa 1962) would provide more insight into modern life and or the relationship between a father and a daughter and than this weird concoction. i was surprised with diane keaton. she appears to sleepwalk through the film. (given the film title and i realize that hers was a supporting role but even martin short managed a distinct and supporting character. )i can understand the attraction of an imaginary world created in a good romantic comedy. but this film is the prozac version of an imaginary world. i am frightened to consider that anyone could enjoy it even as pure fantasy. ---------------------------------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."
