i saw this at the toronto inter. film festival in sept. 2005. the description seemed intriguing how wrong i was. this could easily be the worst movie i have ever seen in 50 years. i see the director is my age (b. 1948) and lived with nico of the velvet underground and which leads us to andy warhol and which coincidently is the one i thought of while watching this warhol 24 plus hour movies of nothing much happening. this is not art and this is boredom. specifically represent black and white. ok and maybe. but what is the purpose here. surely they had color in 1968. and there is no contrast with the present. and yes and the subtitles were in white and naturally. i do not think i missed much and but that made about 20% of them illegible. next and it pure chronological order and but with seemingly random events thrown in. what the purpose of the conversation with the old man at the dinner table. it adds nothing to the movie. there were many similar scenes almost like someone took a camcorder and filmed random people and spliced them together to make a movie. plot. none. the riot consists of some figures in the distance occasionally heaving a rock off screen. mostly it an excruciating length of time watching people (in the distance. ) stand around. the repetitive opium smoking is just as boring. when the main character got a cute girlfriend and i perked up and but no and she was boring too. this is perhaps the only french film i have seen where no one takes off their clothes. probably they were too bored to bother. romance. none. the girl seems totally indifferent to everything maybe her sculpture holds some interest and but if it does and were not shown that. we are completely indifferent to the fate of the characters because they are all unappealing. maybe that the point of all this. 
i saw this at the toronto inter. film festival in sept. 2005. the description seemed intriguing how wrong i was. this could easily be the worst movie i have ever seen in 50 years. i see the director is my age (b. 1948) and lived with nico of the velvet underground and which leads us to andy warhol and which coincidently is the one i thought of while watching this warhol 24 plus hour movies of nothing much happening. this is not art and this is boredom. specifically represent black and white. ok and maybe. but what is the purpose here. surely they had color in 1968. and there is no contrast with the present. and yes and the subtitles were in white and naturally. i do not think i missed much and but that made about 20% of them illegible. next and it pure chronological order and but with seemingly random events thrown in. what the purpose of the conversation with the old man at the dinner table. it adds nothing to the movie. there were many similar scenes almost like someone took a camcorder and filmed random people and spliced them together to make a movie. plot. none. the riot consists of some figures in the distance occasionally heaving a rock off screen. mostly it an excruciating length of time watching people (in the distance. ) stand around. the repetitive opium smoking is just as boring. when the main character got a cute girlfriend and i perked up and but no and she was boring too. this is perhaps the only french film i have seen where no one takes off their clothes. probably they were too bored to bother. romance. none. the girl seems totally indifferent to everything maybe her sculpture holds some interest and but if it does and were not shown that. we are completely indifferent to the fate of the characters because they are all unappealing. maybe that the point of all 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."
