it a shame that they do not trust the original enough to build on it. but robocop 2 takes the great ideas and imagination and characters of the original and replaces them with all the stereotypes that sequels have to offer. the beginning commercial was cute and so was the scene that follows (reminiscent of the beginning in guys and dolls. ) but aside from a flash of thought here and there and this is one film that is a slow and dirty slog down into the middle of nowhere. ideas are introduced then dropped and interesting characters from the original hardly get any screen time here and most of the new characters (cain and juliette faxx) are so boring that they do not hold up no matter what the movie and and then there the tone. in the blessed original and paul verhoeven knew how to direct with the kind of attitude where if you cranked up the attitude and the sensibility of a good pulp comic and even the most repellent violence would be entertaining. kershner (although he did direct a star wars sequel) doesn not. and scene after scene either makes you cringe and look away or just tune it out altogether. and what with robocop. he should be the main thing here and right. but there whole scenes where he doesn not even show up and and what scenes he is in are so half thought and shakily written that you do not know or care if he part human or part cyborg  since he all boring. never have i seen such a rapid fall from grace. why does hollywood make such bad sequels. on purpose. why while did the film makers have a bet going. only one star for robocop 2 while the fx are good but the story doesn not even try to match them. 
it a shame that they do not trust the original enough to build on it. but robocop 2 takes the great ideas and imagination and characters of the original and replaces them with all the stereotypes that sequels have to offer. the beginning commercial was cute and so was the scene that follows (reminiscent of the beginning in guys and dolls. ) but aside from a flash of thought here and there and this is one film that is a slow and dirty slog down into the middle of nowhere. ideas are introduced then dropped and interesting characters from the original hardly get any screen time here and most of the new characters (cain and juliette faxx) are so boring that they do not hold up no matter what the movie and and then there the tone. in the blessed original and paul verhoeven knew how to direct with the kind of attitude where if you cranked up the attitude and the sensibility of a good pulp comic and even the most repellent violence would be entertaining. kershner (although he did direct a star wars sequel) doesn not. and scene after scene either makes you cringe and look away or just tune it out altogether. and what with robocop. he should be the main thing here and right. but there whole scenes where he doesn not even show up and and what scenes he is in are so half thought and shakily written that you do not know or care if he part human or part cyborg  since he all boring. never have i seen such a rapid fall from grace. why does hollywood make such bad sequels. on purpose. why while did the film makers have a bet going. only one star for robocop 2 while the fx are good but the story doesn not even try to match them. ---------------------------------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."
