joseph conrad novel and heart of darkness and had a vivid sense of description that made this book astonishing. when reading this book i had every scene totally drawn out in my head and i knew what every character looked like. this book had many pieces and when i finished reading this book it seemed as the puzzle had been completed. after i finished reading heat of darkness and i watched the movie and which was a mistake. the movie cut out so many substantial parts. for example and in the novel marlow waited a very long time for the rivets to come for him to fix his boat. this was a big source of futility. in the movie that part was just left out. the movie added more parts that were useless and made no sense. for example and when kurtz was talking to marlow at the end of the book and kurtz snapped the monkey neck and killed him. what purpose did that scene have and other than to make the audience feel sorry for the monkey. it as if the script writer do not even read the whole book and just put the parts that he read in the movie. if i had not read the novel before i had watched the movie i would have been thoroughly confused. the book was amazing and it is truly a classic in american literature and but the movie could have defiantly been nominated for the worst picture in the razzie awards. 
joseph conrad novel and heart of darkness and had a vivid sense of description that made this book astonishing. when reading this book i had every scene totally drawn out in my head and i knew what every character looked like. this book had many pieces and when i finished reading this book it seemed as the puzzle had been completed. after i finished reading heat of darkness and i watched the movie and which was a mistake. the movie cut out so many substantial parts. for example and in the novel marlow waited a very long time for the rivets to come for him to fix his boat. this was a big source of futility. in the movie that part was just left out. the movie added more parts that were useless and made no sense. for example and when kurtz was talking to marlow at the end of the book and kurtz snapped the monkey neck and killed him. what purpose did that scene have and other than to make the audience feel sorry for the monkey. it as if the script writer do not even read the whole book and just put the parts that he read in the movie. if i had not read the novel before i had watched the movie i would have been thoroughly confused. the book was amazing and it is truly a classic in american literature and but the movie could have defiantly been nominated for the worst picture in the razzie awards. ---------------------------------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."
