i am a big fan of deepa mehta work and especially fire and earth 1947. unfortunately and this movie of hers lacks _all_ that is needed for a good film. the movie attempts to showcase the plight of the widows in india in the early 20th century and the new wave of ideas of their rehabilitation around the same time. shown with a child widow as a central character and although the plot too banal from an indian standpoint and it could still have been a very powerful movie. alas. the movie lacked both the sensitivity of fire and the intensity of emotion in earth 1947. even if one assumes that the story is a given and although there are hundreds of things i would have liked different in that as well and the movie making is especially unfortunate. everything is said. everything is shown straight. absence of sensitive implied sentences. absence of things left unsaid. i just couldn not believe that this was a deepa mehta film. there were some very standard hindi movie characters  like an old widow with her own vested interests and or a father who has double standards of the highest quality. can one not write a script without having these old style standard indian movie characters. many people acclaimed deepa for making a movie and proving a point against hindu fundamentalists. well and i agree that she took a bold step and but should one not worry about the quality of movie and or is it being a controversial one an end in itself. its obvious and that if you start with a story as in water and you will end up feeling the pain of the widows in consideration   it doesn not take an accomplished director to achieve that. and the movie had nothing more than that. so where is deepa contribution to the film. and talk about acting etc.  pathetic. lisa ray has a pretty face and an extremely pretty face  but thats where it ends. she can not speak hindi while she can not emote. john abraham is no better. most widows seem unnatural. the saving grace are seema biswas and the young girl. they are fabulous. and this was a period film  but the hindi dialogues suck big time. even there utterance is also as unnatural as it gets. no rustic accents. no local slangs. no nothing. the only thing right was probably the shooting locales. i thought that the set of the vidhwa ashram was reasonably real. the overall blue tinge in the whole movie is also apt. but all and all and do not watch this movie. you _would not_ get anything. there is nothing in the story and or direction. if you have to watch it watch it for the little girl acting. 
i am a big fan of deepa mehta work and especially fire and earth 1947. unfortunately and this movie of hers lacks _all_ that is needed for a good film. the movie attempts to showcase the plight of the widows in india in the early 20th century and the new wave of ideas of their rehabilitation around the same time. shown with a child widow as a central character and although the plot too banal from an indian standpoint and it could still have been a very powerful movie. alas. the movie lacked both the sensitivity of fire and the intensity of emotion in earth 1947. even if one assumes that the story is a given and although there are hundreds of things i would have liked different in that as well and the movie making is especially unfortunate. everything is said. everything is shown straight. absence of sensitive implied sentences. absence of things left unsaid. i just couldn not believe that this was a deepa mehta film. there were some very standard hindi movie characters  like an old widow with her own vested interests and or a father who has double standards of the highest quality. can one not write a script without having these old style standard indian movie characters. many people acclaimed deepa for making a movie and proving a point against hindu fundamentalists. well and i agree that she took a bold step and but should one not worry about the quality of movie and or is it being a controversial one an end in itself. its obvious and that if you start with a story as in water and you will end up feeling the pain of the widows in consideration   it doesn not take an accomplished director to achieve that. and the movie had nothing more than that. so where is deepa contribution to the film. and talk about acting etc.  pathetic. lisa ray has a pretty face and an extremely pretty face  but thats where it ends. she can not speak hindi while she can not emote. john abraham is no better. most widows seem unnatural. the saving grace are seema biswas and the young girl. they are fabulous. and this was a period film  but the hindi dialogues suck big time. even there utterance is also as unnatural as it gets. no rustic accents. no local slangs. no nothing. the only thing right was probably the shooting locales. i thought that the set of the vidhwa ashram was reasonably real. the overall blue tinge in the whole movie is also apt. but all and all and do not watch this movie. you _would not_ get anything. there is nothing in the story and or direction. if you have to watch it watch it for the little girl acting. ---------------------------------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."
