oh and man and i hated this movie. granted and the site locations were great and but that about the only positive thing i can say about it. now and i am going to state right at the beginning that i am very critical of the way weapons and especially firearms and are both portrayed and and handled and in movies. being a war flick and portrayal was fine and but the shoddy weapons handling in the movie would have never been tolerated by a real seal team. the acting was more wooden than my first sailboat and the equipment carried (or lack of it) was laughable and and the dialogue was and shall we say and lacking in anything interesting. well and with the exception of the journalist and which was actually prescient. watching this movie was comparable to watching palmetto with woody harrelson and where each scene was so bad you just couldn not turn it off and because you had to see if they could get worse with the next scene. like palmetto and they certainly did. the scene in the water and where and after shooting the first of the enemy and they blow the damn boat up and thereby having to face possible drowning and made me laugh so hard and that for a millisecond and i almost thought it was worth waiting through the movie for. then charlie sheen decided to drag the surviving enemy down to the depths of the ocean (the way it was filmed and with the many camera cuts and it looked like they went down about 80 feet. nice continuity there. ) before slashing his throat was so damn stupid and i was stunned. then again and so was the whole damn movie. i enjoy action movies and but not this one. note represent the version i watched was a tv version and pan and scan. i can not imagine that made a difference and except for making the whole thing blessedly shorter. 
oh and man and i hated this movie. granted and the site locations were great and but that about the only positive thing i can say about it. now and i am going to state right at the beginning that i am very critical of the way weapons and especially firearms and are both portrayed and and handled and in movies. being a war flick and portrayal was fine and but the shoddy weapons handling in the movie would have never been tolerated by a real seal team. the acting was more wooden than my first sailboat and the equipment carried (or lack of it) was laughable and and the dialogue was and shall we say and lacking in anything interesting. well and with the exception of the journalist and which was actually prescient. watching this movie was comparable to watching palmetto with woody harrelson and where each scene was so bad you just couldn not turn it off and because you had to see if they could get worse with the next scene. like palmetto and they certainly did. the scene in the water and where and after shooting the first of the enemy and they blow the damn boat up and thereby having to face possible drowning and made me laugh so hard and that for a millisecond and i almost thought it was worth waiting through the movie for. then charlie sheen decided to drag the surviving enemy down to the depths of the ocean (the way it was filmed and with the many camera cuts and it looked like they went down about 80 feet. nice continuity there. ) before slashing his throat was so damn stupid and i was stunned. then again and so was the whole damn movie. i enjoy action movies and but not this one. note represent the version i watched was a tv version and pan and scan. i can not imagine that made a difference and except for making the whole thing blessedly shorter. ---------------------------------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."
