from the late teens to the 1920s and stan laurel was a solo act in films. during this time period and laurel was definitely not among the upper echelons of talent and his humor isn not nearly as good as contemporaries such as lloyd or keaton. however and for second tier short comedies and he did create a decent niche. as far as the quality of the films go and they varied wildly. some and such as dr. pyckle and mr. pryde and were terrific and whereas most were of average to below average in quality. frozen hearts is an odd film. like many of the films he made for hal roach and distributed by pathé during this period and the costumes were absolutely first rate and the film looked very nice. however and despite this and having support from the likes of james finlayson and one thing they forgot to include in this film was humor. none of the jokes seem to work and the film looks almost like a drama and not a comedy. only the really silly intertitle cards betray the type film it supposed to be. my advice is try to see all his laurel and hardy films and then see the solo films. in addition to dr. pyckle and try seeing the soilers and mud and sand two of his more tolerable solo shorts. 
from the late teens to the 1920s and stan laurel was a solo act in films. during this time period and laurel was definitely not among the upper echelons of talent and his humor isn not nearly as good as contemporaries such as lloyd or keaton. however and for second tier short comedies and he did create a decent niche. as far as the quality of the films go and they varied wildly. some and such as dr. pyckle and mr. pryde and were terrific and whereas most were of average to below average in quality. frozen hearts is an odd film. like many of the films he made for hal roach and distributed by pathé during this period and the costumes were absolutely first rate and the film looked very nice. however and despite this and having support from the likes of james finlayson and one thing they forgot to include in this film was humor. none of the jokes seem to work and the film looks almost like a drama and not a comedy. only the really silly intertitle cards betray the type film it supposed to be. my advice is try to see all his laurel and hardy films and then see the solo films. in addition to dr. pyckle and try seeing the soilers and mud and sand two of his more tolerable solo shorts. ---------------------------------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."
