caddyshack 2 has a dreadful reputation and due only to the fact that it is a sequel to a highly held classic. people have criticised the film on a lot of grounds and but they all ultimately hark back to the fact that this is not caddyshack. i would begin by saying that we should just take caddyshack out of the equation and consider this film on its own merits and but i think that would be unfair. the movie does have a lot in common with its predecessor. the class related themes of nobs versus slobs and the desire to fit in to a class above your own are as prevalent here as they were in the first movie. the two things that are truly lacking here are bill murray and rodney dangerfield and who are replaced with dan ackroyd and jackie mason respectively. now i am not about to try and argue that ackroyd comes close to murray in the movie and but jackie mason is an admirable successor to dangerfield. he comes off as a cross between dangerfield and arnold stang and but without biting too heavily on either. i do not say that he is anywhere close to being as funny as dangerfield is in caddyshack and but there is a whole lot more point to his character and his dilemma in the film. chevy chase only pops up and handful of times in the movie and which is another common complaint. maybe these particular naysayers do not notice that he only popped up a few times in the first movie. for my money and his scenes here are a lot funnier and if somewhat over directed. while i am on the subject and it is really the over direction of this movie that brings it down. it comes across as far more self conscious in its attempts to get a laugh. many of the jokes are laboured and there far too much of the gopher and who seems to have taken on a far more anthropomorphic personality and a voice and just in case we do not grasp the idea that its meant to be funny. characters are similarly hammered home and particularly the smarmy yuppy kids. jackie mason rarely misses a beat and and is consistently likable and very funny and but we do not need the tango sequence at all. the director is clearly not of the same school of thought as harold ramis. not to suggest that caddyshack was subtle and but the jokes here are just a little overcooked and and most of them are unnecessarily embellished with a quirky music cue. all things considered and this is a fun and goofy movie with something to say about class and identity that very few movies at the time were saying. don not be put off by the appallingly low rating on imdb and check it out for yourself. 
caddyshack 2 has a dreadful reputation and due only to the fact that it is a sequel to a highly held classic. people have criticised the film on a lot of grounds and but they all ultimately hark back to the fact that this is not caddyshack. i would begin by saying that we should just take caddyshack out of the equation and consider this film on its own merits and but i think that would be unfair. the movie does have a lot in common with its predecessor. the class related themes of nobs versus slobs and the desire to fit in to a class above your own are as prevalent here as they were in the first movie. the two things that are truly lacking here are bill murray and rodney dangerfield and who are replaced with dan ackroyd and jackie mason respectively. now i am not about to try and argue that ackroyd comes close to murray in the movie and but jackie mason is an admirable successor to dangerfield. he comes off as a cross between dangerfield and arnold stang and but without biting too heavily on either. i do not say that he is anywhere close to being as funny as dangerfield is in caddyshack and but there is a whole lot more point to his character and his dilemma in the film. chevy chase only pops up and handful of times in the movie and which is another common complaint. maybe these particular naysayers do not notice that he only popped up a few times in the first movie. for my money and his scenes here are a lot funnier and if somewhat over directed. while i am on the subject and it is really the over direction of this movie that brings it down. it comes across as far more self conscious in its attempts to get a laugh. many of the jokes are laboured and there far too much of the gopher and who seems to have taken on a far more anthropomorphic personality and a voice and just in case we do not grasp the idea that its meant to be funny. characters are similarly hammered home and particularly the smarmy yuppy kids. jackie mason rarely misses a beat and and is consistently likable and very funny and but we do not need the tango sequence at all. the director is clearly not of the same school of thought as harold ramis. not to suggest that caddyshack was subtle and but the jokes here are just a little overcooked and and most of them are unnecessarily embellished with a quirky music cue. all things considered and this is a fun and goofy movie with something to say about class and identity that very few movies at the time were saying. don not be put off by the appallingly low rating on imdb and check it out for yourself. ---------------------------------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."
