This movie is an interesting cat and mouse game which gives away a little too much as the movie progresses as a vlogger turns sleuth and the suspense isnt as nail biting as it should be. Blake Lively is a hoot.
Reviews
25 Reviews
When They See Us
(2019)
Not many outside of USA knew this story
30 April 2020
This is a very unique US story of racism, intolerance, police-brutality and even includes an insight into a particular nasty rich person advertising to sway public sentiment.
While this is taken from the perspective of the 5 accused and I am sure some liberties were taken for showing the cops and DA as horrible people, it begs to wonder the deep hatred and divide that is there in the US.
After the real accused owned up leading to the exoneration of the 5, the jogger victim refuses to forgive the 5 even though she claims no memory but has been fed hate by the media and so called law. This is very sad.
How many people of low social standing are in prison for misdemeanors and/or having done no crime at all?
Watch this to understand the true nature of America.
While this is taken from the perspective of the 5 accused and I am sure some liberties were taken for showing the cops and DA as horrible people, it begs to wonder the deep hatred and divide that is there in the US.
After the real accused owned up leading to the exoneration of the 5, the jogger victim refuses to forgive the 5 even though she claims no memory but has been fed hate by the media and so called law. This is very sad.
How many people of low social standing are in prison for misdemeanors and/or having done no crime at all?
Watch this to understand the true nature of America.
The Rhythm Section
(2020)
Didn't care for Stephanie Patrick
29 April 2020
I have neither read the book nor read any comments prior to watching this movie.
Stephanie Patrick loses her family to an air accident and decides to be a prostitute+drug addict as a way to cope with her loss. That in itself was a problem for me as I did not find the character redeemable as a person and could not connect with her as a human being.
Without giving away the plot, Stephanie never shows the potential to be a killing machine that the movie wants us to believe and she escapes from one situation after the other with more luck that President trump and his escapades. Now that I have written this, Stephanie Patrick should run for the highest office in the sequel novel or movie or tv series.
The training sequences were insipid, action sequences were bland and the protagonists ability for espionage with no tactical training was laughable at best. Changing your hairstyle and color or wearing a wig doesn't need a slow-mo video capture.
Thoroughly underwhelming and at most time downright boring. This could have been a great opportunity for a series which was destroyed by sub par screenplay and story writing.
Don't watch. Even for Blake Lively.
Stephanie Patrick loses her family to an air accident and decides to be a prostitute+drug addict as a way to cope with her loss. That in itself was a problem for me as I did not find the character redeemable as a person and could not connect with her as a human being.
Without giving away the plot, Stephanie never shows the potential to be a killing machine that the movie wants us to believe and she escapes from one situation after the other with more luck that President trump and his escapades. Now that I have written this, Stephanie Patrick should run for the highest office in the sequel novel or movie or tv series.
The training sequences were insipid, action sequences were bland and the protagonists ability for espionage with no tactical training was laughable at best. Changing your hairstyle and color or wearing a wig doesn't need a slow-mo video capture.
Thoroughly underwhelming and at most time downright boring. This could have been a great opportunity for a series which was destroyed by sub par screenplay and story writing.
Don't watch. Even for Blake Lively.
Spare Room
(2018)
Excruciatingly Bad
29 April 2020
Warning: Spoilers
So we have a waitress Lilian who is unhappy about the death of her husband because we not honorably discharged from the military thereby not getting any benefits from his death. However, she is superfine to be in a relationship with a loser. Enters David - ex military veteran and pure gold-class acting in being expressionless. He randomly drives to a bar, gets a job and meets Lilian in a supermarket and then rent a spare room in her house only to later confess that he was responsible for the death of her husband and his actions got him dishonorably discharged. At this point, my GERD resurfaced after 7 years and I decided to write this review fearing for my life.
Acting was horrendous all round, except for Cole as the brother of the waitress. veteran actors like Virginia Madsen & Chris Mulkey must have been in a filed-for-bankruptcy-situation to act in this meandering mess.
Absolute malarkey as Biden would say.
Acting was horrendous all round, except for Cole as the brother of the waitress. veteran actors like Virginia Madsen & Chris Mulkey must have been in a filed-for-bankruptcy-situation to act in this meandering mess.
Absolute malarkey as Biden would say.
Taken 3
(2014)
Totally disappointed
19 June 2015
This movie should not have been made.
Liam Neeson suddenly looks too old in this movie. His movements are slow, his running gait is really bad and he appeared to be totally distracted.
Dougray Scott took on Xander Berkley's role from the previous movie and he just wimped out. He is a good actor, but this was a wrong casting choice.
Forrest Whitaker plays the usual "how-do-it-happen-but-I-can-figure- it-out" act - no different from his other movies. Wrong casting choice.
Maggie Grace always looked older than her part. And she looks every day of her 31 years. In another day, another movie she would be playing Neeson's wife.
Famke Janssen was hardly in the movie.
The premise was stupid. There should have just been an international espionage story instead of a domestic marital spat. Disappointing.
I thought these guys could not make anything worse after Taken 2. I was wrong. Toothless action, insipid direction and heartless in spirit - that's Taken 3.
This movie made as much as the exquisite Mad Max: Fury Road. What a sad world we live in.
Liam Neeson suddenly looks too old in this movie. His movements are slow, his running gait is really bad and he appeared to be totally distracted.
Dougray Scott took on Xander Berkley's role from the previous movie and he just wimped out. He is a good actor, but this was a wrong casting choice.
Forrest Whitaker plays the usual "how-do-it-happen-but-I-can-figure- it-out" act - no different from his other movies. Wrong casting choice.
Maggie Grace always looked older than her part. And she looks every day of her 31 years. In another day, another movie she would be playing Neeson's wife.
Famke Janssen was hardly in the movie.
The premise was stupid. There should have just been an international espionage story instead of a domestic marital spat. Disappointing.
I thought these guys could not make anything worse after Taken 2. I was wrong. Toothless action, insipid direction and heartless in spirit - that's Taken 3.
This movie made as much as the exquisite Mad Max: Fury Road. What a sad world we live in.
Avengers: Age of Ultron
(2015)
Didn't get the point... What were the Avengers avenging? Should be "The Repairers"
4 May 2015
Warning: Spoilers
I didn't get the point of this movie. Stark and Banner mess with fire and hell breaks loose in the form of Ultron and then the Avengers have to do damage control.
There is too much collateral damage caused by the super-heroes that it is pathetic that they are heroes. Also, the 3D was extremely useless.
Action sequences are top-notch, dialogs breezy and fun, but one things is for sure - Iron Man has run it's course and Tony Stark needs to be put down. To me, he is the evil that needs to be destroyed.
Hawkeye's family situation and Widow's crush on Banner were stuff meant for Oscar documentaries. Flash in the pan appearances by Fury, Hill, Wilson and Dr Whatever are just that - cameos.
The Winter Soldier and Guardians of the Galaxy were superior movies than this. I was let down by Whedon... The Force Awakens.
There is too much collateral damage caused by the super-heroes that it is pathetic that they are heroes. Also, the 3D was extremely useless.
Action sequences are top-notch, dialogs breezy and fun, but one things is for sure - Iron Man has run it's course and Tony Stark needs to be put down. To me, he is the evil that needs to be destroyed.
Hawkeye's family situation and Widow's crush on Banner were stuff meant for Oscar documentaries. Flash in the pan appearances by Fury, Hill, Wilson and Dr Whatever are just that - cameos.
The Winter Soldier and Guardians of the Galaxy were superior movies than this. I was let down by Whedon... The Force Awakens.
Lucy
(I) (2014)
Scarlett all the way!
1 December 2014
Lucy, a student in Taipei, gets tricked by her boyfriend to handover a briefcase to a Mr Jang, a Korean mob king. In the process she becomes a drug mule along with 3 others. In captivity, one of her captors kicks her in the abdomen which houses one of the drug packets and some of the contents spill out and integrate into Lucy's bloodstream. The result is that Lucy gets a heightened physical and mental capabilities and is able to utilize her mind in many ways.
What follows next is Lucy trying to get the remaining 3 packets to stay alive a little longer as the drugs start to take its toll on her. She contacts a professor who specializes in brain science and offers herself to science.
Scarlett comes out extremely well carrying this movie on her shoulders. Her transformation from mild student to ruthless killer is great to watch. Morgan Freeman is Morgan Freeman – has a few lines and looks very serious as a professor.
The movie moves between action to thriller to science-drama. You are reminded of movies like Limitless, Transcendence, 2001: A Space Odyssey, The Matrix among others. 'Lucy' isn't preachy about the science and stays its course during its short 89 minute run delivering on all what you can expect of Luc Besson . Definitely a one-time watch.
What follows next is Lucy trying to get the remaining 3 packets to stay alive a little longer as the drugs start to take its toll on her. She contacts a professor who specializes in brain science and offers herself to science.
Scarlett comes out extremely well carrying this movie on her shoulders. Her transformation from mild student to ruthless killer is great to watch. Morgan Freeman is Morgan Freeman – has a few lines and looks very serious as a professor.
The movie moves between action to thriller to science-drama. You are reminded of movies like Limitless, Transcendence, 2001: A Space Odyssey, The Matrix among others. 'Lucy' isn't preachy about the science and stays its course during its short 89 minute run delivering on all what you can expect of Luc Besson . Definitely a one-time watch.
The Legend of Hercules
(2014)
Renny Harlin does it again!
1 December 2014
This by far has to be the one of the worst movies ever made. I read bad reviews of this movie but decided to watch for two reasons – Renny Harlin and Liam McIntyre the latter starred in as Spartacus in the Starz TV series. Renny Harlin was the director of decent blockbusters like Die Hard 2, Cliffhanger, The Long Kiss Goodnight and Deep Blue Sea.
The problem with this movie cannot be explained. Like the matrix, you have to see it to believe it. Kevin Lutz as Hercules can't act to save his life. Scott Adkins (famous as Van Damme's co-star in most of Van Damme's movies in the past 6-8 years) is absolutely out of place as the King Amphitryon. The 'story' revolves around how Hercules come to be, his outcast & gladiatorial life and return to eventually claim the throne. That's it. There is absolutely nothing to care for in this dud of a movie.
If you hate your life or want to know how to make a bad movie with $40 million, this will tickle your fancy.
Renny Harlin already holds the distinction for the most expensive box office flop of all time - Cutthroat Island (1995) cost $98 million and recovered a paltry $10 million. So this is definitely another feather in his illustrious cap.
The problem with this movie cannot be explained. Like the matrix, you have to see it to believe it. Kevin Lutz as Hercules can't act to save his life. Scott Adkins (famous as Van Damme's co-star in most of Van Damme's movies in the past 6-8 years) is absolutely out of place as the King Amphitryon. The 'story' revolves around how Hercules come to be, his outcast & gladiatorial life and return to eventually claim the throne. That's it. There is absolutely nothing to care for in this dud of a movie.
If you hate your life or want to know how to make a bad movie with $40 million, this will tickle your fancy.
Renny Harlin already holds the distinction for the most expensive box office flop of all time - Cutthroat Island (1995) cost $98 million and recovered a paltry $10 million. So this is definitely another feather in his illustrious cap.
The November Man
(2014)
A spy thriller with a lot of twists
1 December 2014
Based on a novel There Are No Spies by Bill Granger, this story is from a series of books under the 'The November Man' series.
Brosnan plays Peter Devereaux (aka The November Man), a retired CIA officer who is recruited by his ex-boss to extract an undercover operative working for the notorious presidential candidate and former army general Federov. As Federov has a lady assassin in play, it becomes vital for Devereaux to move quickly which he does.
To cut the story short, the operative has a name which can destroy Federov. She gets made by the Russians but is rescued by Devereaux but unfortunately doesn't make it. The CIA is now after the person behind the name and all leads points to a social worker played by Olga. Devereaux saves her and then sets on a mission to find the truth, which believe-it-or-not comes with various twists in the tale!
It was nice to watch Brosnan return to an action movie, although I couldn't but help think of Bryan Mills and the Taken movies; however he seems to be a little more ruthless than Mills. To remind you that Brosnan is a star from the 80s and 90s there is a love-making scene which was totally not required (and it didn't even feature Brosnan).
If you like spy stories or Brosnan then you should watch 'The November Man'.
Brosnan plays Peter Devereaux (aka The November Man), a retired CIA officer who is recruited by his ex-boss to extract an undercover operative working for the notorious presidential candidate and former army general Federov. As Federov has a lady assassin in play, it becomes vital for Devereaux to move quickly which he does.
To cut the story short, the operative has a name which can destroy Federov. She gets made by the Russians but is rescued by Devereaux but unfortunately doesn't make it. The CIA is now after the person behind the name and all leads points to a social worker played by Olga. Devereaux saves her and then sets on a mission to find the truth, which believe-it-or-not comes with various twists in the tale!
It was nice to watch Brosnan return to an action movie, although I couldn't but help think of Bryan Mills and the Taken movies; however he seems to be a little more ruthless than Mills. To remind you that Brosnan is a star from the 80s and 90s there is a love-making scene which was totally not required (and it didn't even feature Brosnan).
If you like spy stories or Brosnan then you should watch 'The November Man'.
Interstellar
(2014)
Beautiful and breathtaking, but what is the point being made?
23 November 2014
The movie takes place sometime in the not so distant future. Crops have been ruined by blight and the focus of the world has moved from technology to agriculture to ensure that the supply can meet the demand for food. In short, Earth is dying and killing mankind in the process. Former NASA pilot Cooper (McConaughey) is now a farmer living with his teen son, ten-year old daughter Murphy and father. Murphy discovers some strange happenings in her rooms with things being knocked off her shelves and Cooper discovers this to be a message which points him to the underground version of NASA.
Cooper enrolls for a mission with 3 other scientist and 2 robots to travel through a worm hole to discover hospitable planets.
The first act of the story concentrates on the father-daughter dynamics (Mackenzie Fay does a great job as the young Murphy) and the second and third act of the story deals with interstellar travel and the possible discovery of other humans who were sent by NASA to search for the hospitable planets and how Cooper manages to fight time, space and gravity to get back to his family billions of miles away. I was unaware that Matt Damon was in the movie, so that was a nice surprise when he appeared and after ten minutes I badly wanted him to disappear.
The movie runs for over 160 minutes, not that you notice. The special effects are amazing and the worm hole, new planets and the space travel have been created very intricately. Nolan has his signature sweeping camera shots and character build up to involve the audience with his story.
I enjoyed the movie but a few things didn't work for me. The core of the movie was food being scarce but beer was plenty. The amount of dust/dirt that was flying around, there was no way to keep anything clean for a period of time – so certain things could have remained on Cooper's farm as it did towards the third act. And the final act has Cooper meeting with his progenies who show no interest in him whatsoever – I mean you would like to hold the hand of your grandfather even if you never met him right? Michael Caine ages beautifully in 23 years (he goes from ancient to more ancient and doesn't look a day older). I would like to share more peeves, but that would be giving away more of the plot.
This is a good movie – one of those you absolutely have to watch on the big screen, but it will left me wondering at the end "What was the point of it all?"
Cooper enrolls for a mission with 3 other scientist and 2 robots to travel through a worm hole to discover hospitable planets.
The first act of the story concentrates on the father-daughter dynamics (Mackenzie Fay does a great job as the young Murphy) and the second and third act of the story deals with interstellar travel and the possible discovery of other humans who were sent by NASA to search for the hospitable planets and how Cooper manages to fight time, space and gravity to get back to his family billions of miles away. I was unaware that Matt Damon was in the movie, so that was a nice surprise when he appeared and after ten minutes I badly wanted him to disappear.
The movie runs for over 160 minutes, not that you notice. The special effects are amazing and the worm hole, new planets and the space travel have been created very intricately. Nolan has his signature sweeping camera shots and character build up to involve the audience with his story.
I enjoyed the movie but a few things didn't work for me. The core of the movie was food being scarce but beer was plenty. The amount of dust/dirt that was flying around, there was no way to keep anything clean for a period of time – so certain things could have remained on Cooper's farm as it did towards the third act. And the final act has Cooper meeting with his progenies who show no interest in him whatsoever – I mean you would like to hold the hand of your grandfather even if you never met him right? Michael Caine ages beautifully in 23 years (he goes from ancient to more ancient and doesn't look a day older). I would like to share more peeves, but that would be giving away more of the plot.
This is a good movie – one of those you absolutely have to watch on the big screen, but it will left me wondering at the end "What was the point of it all?"
Not Safe for Work
(2014)
Some predictable moments ruined this sweet little flick!
23 November 2014
This short movie (about 75 minutes) takes place mostly on the 34th floor office of a law firm called RBE. The protagonist Thomas is a paralegal who is fired from his job for releasing some information in a law-brief. On his exit from the building he notices an exchange of a briefcase between two men and he follows one of them back to his office. What ensues next is a cat and mouse game between him and the intruder who turns out to be a contract-killer.
The first ten minutes of the movie lets us think that Thomas is a loser with a smart girlfriend and then moves to show that Thomas is not as dumb as he is meant to be. The plot twists in the movie are fairly predictable with some small plot holes which diluted the energy of the movie for me but not enough to stop me from watching it till the end (saw it on its TV premiere). A major twist in the end left me unhappy wondering about futility of doing the right thing. JJ Fields who plays the killer is a fairly unknown actor and he does a great job in his role. For some reason he kept reminding me of Hiddleston's Loki. :( Christian Clemenson (the laywer/attorney with Asperger's syndrome in the TV show 'Boston Legal') is the senior partner who is also stuck in the office. You have the mandatory 'hold-the-girl-friend-as-hostage' scenario at the end of the movie which was my real sore point with NSFW.
However, this is a good time pass if you have nothing else to watch on TV.
The first ten minutes of the movie lets us think that Thomas is a loser with a smart girlfriend and then moves to show that Thomas is not as dumb as he is meant to be. The plot twists in the movie are fairly predictable with some small plot holes which diluted the energy of the movie for me but not enough to stop me from watching it till the end (saw it on its TV premiere). A major twist in the end left me unhappy wondering about futility of doing the right thing. JJ Fields who plays the killer is a fairly unknown actor and he does a great job in his role. For some reason he kept reminding me of Hiddleston's Loki. :( Christian Clemenson (the laywer/attorney with Asperger's syndrome in the TV show 'Boston Legal') is the senior partner who is also stuck in the office. You have the mandatory 'hold-the-girl-friend-as-hostage' scenario at the end of the movie which was my real sore point with NSFW.
However, this is a good time pass if you have nothing else to watch on TV.
Maleficent
(2014)
The Other Story
23 November 2014
Most of us know the story of the Disney version of the Brothers Grimm/Charles Pereault story 'Sleeping Beauty'. The evil witch who cast the spell on the princess Aurora (referred to as Sleeping Beauty) is Maleficent and is supposedly done away with in the Disney story.
However, Disney decided that the story could use a different perspective and offered us a version of the events from the witch's point of view. Angeline Jolie in her first movie in 4 years plays the dark fairy Maleficent and the story develops on how her estranged friendship with the neighboring prince turns her from a fairy (pure heart) to a so called witch (heart of stone). Some of the original plots remain in the story but what is interesting here is the expansion of Maleficent's world and how she changes with time. The portrayal by the various actors playing Aurora comes off well and not very cheesy as in the case with these kinds of movies. The animation and special effects are very slick and blend well in the proceedings.
Jolie does an exceptionally great job as the tortured fairy and this role looks like it has been waiting in the wings for her. I can't think of any of the modern actress who could have done this role any better. Elle Fanning as Aurora brings in a deep sense of innocence to her character. Sharlto Copley on the other hand looked a bit out of place in the film. Brenton Thwaites who plays the prince who supposedly has to wake the sleeping princess from her curse looked like he dropped in from 1600s. Apart from these 4 characters, we have 3 fairies, Sam Riley as Maleficent's sidekick and some animated troll like creatures who contribute to the proceedings.
This is an interesting movie for adults and kids alike.
However, Disney decided that the story could use a different perspective and offered us a version of the events from the witch's point of view. Angeline Jolie in her first movie in 4 years plays the dark fairy Maleficent and the story develops on how her estranged friendship with the neighboring prince turns her from a fairy (pure heart) to a so called witch (heart of stone). Some of the original plots remain in the story but what is interesting here is the expansion of Maleficent's world and how she changes with time. The portrayal by the various actors playing Aurora comes off well and not very cheesy as in the case with these kinds of movies. The animation and special effects are very slick and blend well in the proceedings.
Jolie does an exceptionally great job as the tortured fairy and this role looks like it has been waiting in the wings for her. I can't think of any of the modern actress who could have done this role any better. Elle Fanning as Aurora brings in a deep sense of innocence to her character. Sharlto Copley on the other hand looked a bit out of place in the film. Brenton Thwaites who plays the prince who supposedly has to wake the sleeping princess from her curse looked like he dropped in from 1600s. Apart from these 4 characters, we have 3 fairies, Sam Riley as Maleficent's sidekick and some animated troll like creatures who contribute to the proceedings.
This is an interesting movie for adults and kids alike.
How to Train Your Dragon 2
(2014)
A worthy sequel!
23 November 2014
How to Train Your Dragon 2 (2014) Directed by: Dean DeBlois Voiced by: Jay Baruchel, Gerard Butler, Craig Ferguson, America Ferrera, Jonah Hill, Cate Blanchett, etc.
This animation action fantasy film is a sequel to the 2010 movie of the same name (minus the 2 of course). The events in both movies take place in a mythical Viking world and revolve around the young protagonist Hiccup, son of the village chieftain and his dragon – a Night Fury called Toothless. The 2010 movie is noteworthy for its 3- D animation, imaginative illustration of dragons and dragon battles, the coming together of dragons and humans and how friendships can be forged.
The sequel follows Hiccup, who is now an acclaimed dragon master, and Toothless searching for new unexplored lands. The story unfolds to reveal a dragon trapper working for a mad conqueror Drago, a whole new bevy of dragons cared for by a Valko (Hiccups Mom) and the third act is a face/off between Hiccup and Drago.
The sequel boasts of even better 3-D animation than its predecessor, characters that draw you in, hundreds of different and beautifully imagined dragons and a few touching moments that can tug at your little child's heart. However some predictable moments in the movie to take it forward serve as spoilers.
Sequels generally lose the plot (like Cars 2) but this one delivers all the right punches and some more. Watch it when you can.
This animation action fantasy film is a sequel to the 2010 movie of the same name (minus the 2 of course). The events in both movies take place in a mythical Viking world and revolve around the young protagonist Hiccup, son of the village chieftain and his dragon – a Night Fury called Toothless. The 2010 movie is noteworthy for its 3- D animation, imaginative illustration of dragons and dragon battles, the coming together of dragons and humans and how friendships can be forged.
The sequel follows Hiccup, who is now an acclaimed dragon master, and Toothless searching for new unexplored lands. The story unfolds to reveal a dragon trapper working for a mad conqueror Drago, a whole new bevy of dragons cared for by a Valko (Hiccups Mom) and the third act is a face/off between Hiccup and Drago.
The sequel boasts of even better 3-D animation than its predecessor, characters that draw you in, hundreds of different and beautifully imagined dragons and a few touching moments that can tug at your little child's heart. However some predictable moments in the movie to take it forward serve as spoilers.
Sequels generally lose the plot (like Cars 2) but this one delivers all the right punches and some more. Watch it when you can.
The Expendables 3
(2014)
Old rotten wine in a bottle of questionable vintage!
2 September 2014
The Expendables worked because of the formula : Veteran action stars + old school action + cheesy one-liners = fun for the 30+ age group. Hurrah!
The Expendables 2 worked partially because of the curiosity factor left behind by the first installment and the presence of Van Damme on the large screen. Although the finale fight sequence between Van Damme and Stallone is pretty laughable - no way Stallone can beat Van Damme in a fair fight, at any time of his career - the movie was watchable.
The Expendables 3 does not work. No sir, it does not. Plain and Simple. The ingenuity of this caper was to bring the millennials in - new faces with the old and my, my... how it falls flat!
I'm not getting to the plot because there is none. There is an opening boring action sequence ... yawn, followed by another one ... yawn, and then one hour of movie gyan (my foot fell asleep) followed by the finale action which is quite unbelievable (what the ... unbelievable).
The new old faces include Mel Gibson as the villain (he pulls off the role excellently - Hollywood needs to forgive him and get him back in the game), Antonio Banderas as an irritating Expendable wannabe (my 6 year old kid called him the stupid man), Wesley Snipes as an old crony and Harrison Ford as a replacement for Bruce Willis with nothing much to offer in the movie. The new new faces included 4 actors I have absolutely no recollection of. (I should note their names and avoid any movie they are featured in.)
Jet Li, Lundgren, Arnie, Crews and the rest had little to no lines in the movie and are as forgettable as Mrs Bachchan Jr's role in The Pink Panther 2.
If this movie was a car then this is an absolute lemon. The only reason I am rating this a 4 is because it features Mel Gibson.
The Expendables 2 worked partially because of the curiosity factor left behind by the first installment and the presence of Van Damme on the large screen. Although the finale fight sequence between Van Damme and Stallone is pretty laughable - no way Stallone can beat Van Damme in a fair fight, at any time of his career - the movie was watchable.
The Expendables 3 does not work. No sir, it does not. Plain and Simple. The ingenuity of this caper was to bring the millennials in - new faces with the old and my, my... how it falls flat!
I'm not getting to the plot because there is none. There is an opening boring action sequence ... yawn, followed by another one ... yawn, and then one hour of movie gyan (my foot fell asleep) followed by the finale action which is quite unbelievable (what the ... unbelievable).
The new old faces include Mel Gibson as the villain (he pulls off the role excellently - Hollywood needs to forgive him and get him back in the game), Antonio Banderas as an irritating Expendable wannabe (my 6 year old kid called him the stupid man), Wesley Snipes as an old crony and Harrison Ford as a replacement for Bruce Willis with nothing much to offer in the movie. The new new faces included 4 actors I have absolutely no recollection of. (I should note their names and avoid any movie they are featured in.)
Jet Li, Lundgren, Arnie, Crews and the rest had little to no lines in the movie and are as forgettable as Mrs Bachchan Jr's role in The Pink Panther 2.
If this movie was a car then this is an absolute lemon. The only reason I am rating this a 4 is because it features Mel Gibson.
Transcendence
(I) (2014)
Transparent, Translucent but never Transcendent
4 August 2014
Warning: Spoilers
This movie revolves around a scientist couple Will and Evelyn Caster (Johnny Depp, Rebecca Hall) who are creating a thinking AI computer which they call "Transcendence". An extremist group (RIFT) who are against this form of technology attack different labs across the country and in the process send Depp's character to his deathbed (literally).
In an effort to save Will's consciousness before he dies, Evelyn "uploads" the consciousness in to a super computer (?) running on 'quantum processors' with the reluctant of their friend Max (Paul Bettany). Then a lot of things happen. Evelyn uploads Will online, RIFT attack Evelyn, capture Max and the FBI are caught napping. Computerized Will navigates Evelyn to a desert town to build a technological super- park. The infrastructure is similar to Tony Stark's underground lair.
CIA, NSA, Homeland Security, FBI, CNN, ABC and RIFT don't bother the Casters for two years so that they can develop the movie plot after the absurdity of the first part. Then everybody gets their inner wear in a twist. Will becomes some kind of a super-computer God getting enormous CGI powers and brings life to the dying and finally to the dead. People don't like him anymore, including the viewers and we wish everybody dies.
Morgan Freeman and Cillian Murphy are absolutely wasted in their roles and Kate Mara is so irritating as her RIFT character that you wish she would die first. Well, her character was killed off in House of Cards, so I didn't think I could get the same wish answered twice.
The plot holes in the movie are so large that they would give the pot- holes on Indian roads a run for their money. This movie fails/falls on so many levels - as a thriller, as science-fiction, as a preview of a dystopian future, as a study of how to make a plausible film, as a means to utilize time more effectively, etc. To top the absurdity, the last scene is open to audience interpretation.
I wouldn't recommend you to watch this convoluted, befuddling, humorless piece of Hollywood art.
My rating – 4/10, the points are for the CGI and for Hollywood giving Paul Bettany roles bigger than J.A.R.V.I.S.
In an effort to save Will's consciousness before he dies, Evelyn "uploads" the consciousness in to a super computer (?) running on 'quantum processors' with the reluctant of their friend Max (Paul Bettany). Then a lot of things happen. Evelyn uploads Will online, RIFT attack Evelyn, capture Max and the FBI are caught napping. Computerized Will navigates Evelyn to a desert town to build a technological super- park. The infrastructure is similar to Tony Stark's underground lair.
CIA, NSA, Homeland Security, FBI, CNN, ABC and RIFT don't bother the Casters for two years so that they can develop the movie plot after the absurdity of the first part. Then everybody gets their inner wear in a twist. Will becomes some kind of a super-computer God getting enormous CGI powers and brings life to the dying and finally to the dead. People don't like him anymore, including the viewers and we wish everybody dies.
Morgan Freeman and Cillian Murphy are absolutely wasted in their roles and Kate Mara is so irritating as her RIFT character that you wish she would die first. Well, her character was killed off in House of Cards, so I didn't think I could get the same wish answered twice.
The plot holes in the movie are so large that they would give the pot- holes on Indian roads a run for their money. This movie fails/falls on so many levels - as a thriller, as science-fiction, as a preview of a dystopian future, as a study of how to make a plausible film, as a means to utilize time more effectively, etc. To top the absurdity, the last scene is open to audience interpretation.
I wouldn't recommend you to watch this convoluted, befuddling, humorless piece of Hollywood art.
My rating – 4/10, the points are for the CGI and for Hollywood giving Paul Bettany roles bigger than J.A.R.V.I.S.
The Place Beyond the Pines
(2012)
Movie with heart, but not strong enough
4 August 2014
TPBTP is a crime drama which plays in two different time-lines set about 15 years apart.
The story is about a motorcycle stuntman (Ryan Gosling) who discovers he has a son from a relationship with his former ex-girlfriend (Eva Mendes). To provide for his son, he turns to crime and soon the law catches up to him in the form of a policeman (Bradley Cooper) who has been on the force for a year. Twists, turns and fifteen years later, the lives of the next generation entwine and conclude with the wheels set in motion by the stuntman.
That's it. I have kept a lot of details out. :)
Cianfrance takes his time to weave in his characters and build-up the suspense through to various sub-plots. The senior cast of Gosling, Mendes and Cooper do a great job staying in their respective characters with a fine performance by Ben Mendelsohn. Almost-cameo roles by seasoned stars like Ray Liotta, Bruce Greenwood and Harris Yulin with popular TV screen names like Rose Byrne and Mahershala Ali add that touch of somber gravitas to the narration.
However, the casting of Dane DeHaan and Emory Cohen as the 15-16 year- olds really put me off. They looked too old for their character's age and I had trouble relating to their characters because of that. This affects the final my rating of what could have been a real gem of a movie.
I recommend watching this movie on a lazy holiday afternoon as it runs for nearly 2&½ hours and you should let the feel of the 1970-80's drama film-making take you in. By the end of the movie ensure you are drinking a cup of green tea and munching some biscuits. You'll have a lovely day.
The story is about a motorcycle stuntman (Ryan Gosling) who discovers he has a son from a relationship with his former ex-girlfriend (Eva Mendes). To provide for his son, he turns to crime and soon the law catches up to him in the form of a policeman (Bradley Cooper) who has been on the force for a year. Twists, turns and fifteen years later, the lives of the next generation entwine and conclude with the wheels set in motion by the stuntman.
That's it. I have kept a lot of details out. :)
Cianfrance takes his time to weave in his characters and build-up the suspense through to various sub-plots. The senior cast of Gosling, Mendes and Cooper do a great job staying in their respective characters with a fine performance by Ben Mendelsohn. Almost-cameo roles by seasoned stars like Ray Liotta, Bruce Greenwood and Harris Yulin with popular TV screen names like Rose Byrne and Mahershala Ali add that touch of somber gravitas to the narration.
However, the casting of Dane DeHaan and Emory Cohen as the 15-16 year- olds really put me off. They looked too old for their character's age and I had trouble relating to their characters because of that. This affects the final my rating of what could have been a real gem of a movie.
I recommend watching this movie on a lazy holiday afternoon as it runs for nearly 2&½ hours and you should let the feel of the 1970-80's drama film-making take you in. By the end of the movie ensure you are drinking a cup of green tea and munching some biscuits. You'll have a lovely day.
Divergent
(2014)
Should be called Detegrent
4 August 2014
Warning: Spoilers
Divergent is a science-fiction dystopian action film and the first in a "trilogy" series of 4 movies. I seriously don't understand why the 3rd story has to be made as Part 1 and 2. This knocking off of the final adventure of Harry Potter by The Hunger Games and now this is a lame attempt to stretch a story to make money.
Anyways, on to the movie. Spoilers alert!
In the distant or not-so-distant future (I couldn't understand from the movie the year it was set) in Chicago, society has been divided into 5 factions depending on a person's particular trait -Selfless, Peaceful, Honest, Brave, and intelligent. At the age of 16, a youth undergoes a test to determine if s/he would continue in their born-into faction or are they better suited to another. Also, a person can choose another faction s/he deems themselves to be more aligned to.
The protagonist of this movie marvel is Beatrice (Shailene Woodley) a selfless tribe member, who discovers that she has multiple traits and therefore a "Divergent". She however chooses to join the "brave" ones. The movie then moves to testing her mental and physical character for her tribe and how she climbs up the ladder.
In a later mental simulation game, her divergent abilities are discovered by one of the training leaders named Four (yeah, four) but he has the hots for her and advises he to think like their tribe members. Ah, almost forgot Beatrice is now Tris.
Then you have the usual "one group is trying to take over the other" and only someone who has just been trained can save the day. A lot of confusion and mayhem follows and after 48 hours I don't really remember what happened except that I woke up.
Theo James as 'Four' is so wooden, Kate Winslet should have used him in Titanic to rescue Jack and Rose from the icy waters. Ashley Judd, Ray Stevenson, Tony Goldwyn, Kate Winslet, Jai Courtney and Maggie Q add to a nice cast, but they hardly have any major impact with the viewer. My guess is Judd and Goldwyn (likable actors) were present so that their deaths could mean something to the viewer as we clearly know they will die and don't care one way or the other.
Overall, the movie looked very muddled to me and I wonder if the sequel, Insurgent, will be any better as they are trying to release the movie in a year's time without having a proper script and director ready. As of writing this review, the sequel doesn't even have a Wikipedia page. So go figure.
My rating for this movie is 5 on 10 It was nice to see Ashley Judd on the big screen, even though very fleetingly.
Anyways, on to the movie. Spoilers alert!
In the distant or not-so-distant future (I couldn't understand from the movie the year it was set) in Chicago, society has been divided into 5 factions depending on a person's particular trait -Selfless, Peaceful, Honest, Brave, and intelligent. At the age of 16, a youth undergoes a test to determine if s/he would continue in their born-into faction or are they better suited to another. Also, a person can choose another faction s/he deems themselves to be more aligned to.
The protagonist of this movie marvel is Beatrice (Shailene Woodley) a selfless tribe member, who discovers that she has multiple traits and therefore a "Divergent". She however chooses to join the "brave" ones. The movie then moves to testing her mental and physical character for her tribe and how she climbs up the ladder.
In a later mental simulation game, her divergent abilities are discovered by one of the training leaders named Four (yeah, four) but he has the hots for her and advises he to think like their tribe members. Ah, almost forgot Beatrice is now Tris.
Then you have the usual "one group is trying to take over the other" and only someone who has just been trained can save the day. A lot of confusion and mayhem follows and after 48 hours I don't really remember what happened except that I woke up.
Theo James as 'Four' is so wooden, Kate Winslet should have used him in Titanic to rescue Jack and Rose from the icy waters. Ashley Judd, Ray Stevenson, Tony Goldwyn, Kate Winslet, Jai Courtney and Maggie Q add to a nice cast, but they hardly have any major impact with the viewer. My guess is Judd and Goldwyn (likable actors) were present so that their deaths could mean something to the viewer as we clearly know they will die and don't care one way or the other.
Overall, the movie looked very muddled to me and I wonder if the sequel, Insurgent, will be any better as they are trying to release the movie in a year's time without having a proper script and director ready. As of writing this review, the sequel doesn't even have a Wikipedia page. So go figure.
My rating for this movie is 5 on 10 It was nice to see Ashley Judd on the big screen, even though very fleetingly.
Rush
(I) (2013)
Speed thrills and speed kills!
28 July 2014
Rush (2013) Director: Ron Howard
This movie narrates the true accounts of the sporting rivalry between Niki Lauda and James Hunt, F1 racing champions in the mid 1970's.
Director Ron Howard returns to his brilliant version as a story-teller after crowd-pleasers like the two Robert Langdon movies and the middling movie 'The Dilemma'. His last real good movie was Frost/Nixon about 5 years prior to this one.
This movie narrates the stories of two F1 legends who are not very popular to the post 1980's ilk. I actually read about Niki Lauda a few years ago in a story of guts and perseverance – Niki suffered severe burns when his car crashed in a F1 race in Germany with part of his face burnt off and his lungs damaged with internal burns. However 6 weeks after that incident, he returns to the race track in Italy and comes in 4th place. Just an amazing story. Didn't realize then that I was going to see it in a movie.
Howard does a good job setting up the back story of characters – Hemsworth (Thor) as Hunt and Bruhl as Lauda – about their appetite for racing, cars and success. Their initial disdain for each other sets each on the path for achieving racing glory. While Hunt partied, Lauda engineered. The movie explores the dynamics and business of racing, the life of racers, the engineering marvel and the frenzy of the sport.
Zimmer's music is outstanding, and the camera work & sound editing is simply brilliant. The race sequences are a stand-out and keep you on the edge of your seat. If you don't know your F1 history then it's even more nerve wracking.
In my opinion, the movie focused on Hunt – how he was wronged and how he wronged. But my attention and respect was saved for Niki Lauda who was able to manage his fame and stature in real life. He is truly a living icon.
Both Hemsworth and Bruhl give memorable performances and they live their characters on screen plus a fine return to form for our good old Richie Cunningham. :)
This is one of the best movies released in 2013. Watch it if you haven't.
This movie narrates the true accounts of the sporting rivalry between Niki Lauda and James Hunt, F1 racing champions in the mid 1970's.
Director Ron Howard returns to his brilliant version as a story-teller after crowd-pleasers like the two Robert Langdon movies and the middling movie 'The Dilemma'. His last real good movie was Frost/Nixon about 5 years prior to this one.
This movie narrates the stories of two F1 legends who are not very popular to the post 1980's ilk. I actually read about Niki Lauda a few years ago in a story of guts and perseverance – Niki suffered severe burns when his car crashed in a F1 race in Germany with part of his face burnt off and his lungs damaged with internal burns. However 6 weeks after that incident, he returns to the race track in Italy and comes in 4th place. Just an amazing story. Didn't realize then that I was going to see it in a movie.
Howard does a good job setting up the back story of characters – Hemsworth (Thor) as Hunt and Bruhl as Lauda – about their appetite for racing, cars and success. Their initial disdain for each other sets each on the path for achieving racing glory. While Hunt partied, Lauda engineered. The movie explores the dynamics and business of racing, the life of racers, the engineering marvel and the frenzy of the sport.
Zimmer's music is outstanding, and the camera work & sound editing is simply brilliant. The race sequences are a stand-out and keep you on the edge of your seat. If you don't know your F1 history then it's even more nerve wracking.
In my opinion, the movie focused on Hunt – how he was wronged and how he wronged. But my attention and respect was saved for Niki Lauda who was able to manage his fame and stature in real life. He is truly a living icon.
Both Hemsworth and Bruhl give memorable performances and they live their characters on screen plus a fine return to form for our good old Richie Cunningham. :)
This is one of the best movies released in 2013. Watch it if you haven't.
Noah
(2014)
Didn't work for me
27 July 2014
Noah (2014) Director: Darren Aronofsky
Considering that the Noah's Ark story is a fairly popular one and concise in its narration, I was quite interested in what Aronofsky was going to spin.
Honestly, this movie didn't work for me. The amount of artistic license taken is plenty and the movie pretty much ended up being a fairy tale. The Watchers (fallen angels who didn't figure in any Noah Ark story till date), the tyranny of Tubal-Cain (never reference him in any other Noah Ark story) and the absence of the wives of Ham and Japheth (as per the accepted various ancient versions of this biblical story where 8 humans traveled the Ark) really didn't work for me.
The casting was pretty good. Crowe, Connelly, Winstone Hopkins and Watson were top notch. The son's of Noah were too young – Logan Lerman from the Percy movie is miscast here and Douglas Booth as Shem was baffling. With all the liberties Aronofsky was taking I was rooting for them to die in the movie.
Good special effects were the saving grace of this movie and overall the movie is over-rated. If you haven't watched it, then save your time for something else.
Rating: 4 on 10
Considering that the Noah's Ark story is a fairly popular one and concise in its narration, I was quite interested in what Aronofsky was going to spin.
Honestly, this movie didn't work for me. The amount of artistic license taken is plenty and the movie pretty much ended up being a fairy tale. The Watchers (fallen angels who didn't figure in any Noah Ark story till date), the tyranny of Tubal-Cain (never reference him in any other Noah Ark story) and the absence of the wives of Ham and Japheth (as per the accepted various ancient versions of this biblical story where 8 humans traveled the Ark) really didn't work for me.
The casting was pretty good. Crowe, Connelly, Winstone Hopkins and Watson were top notch. The son's of Noah were too young – Logan Lerman from the Percy movie is miscast here and Douglas Booth as Shem was baffling. With all the liberties Aronofsky was taking I was rooting for them to die in the movie.
Good special effects were the saving grace of this movie and overall the movie is over-rated. If you haven't watched it, then save your time for something else.
Rating: 4 on 10
Sabotage
(2014)
Ho, hum!
24 July 2014
You know the story:
1. Arnold Schwarzenegger leads a DEA task force made up of real weirdos, so much that you really don't care for any of them.
2. They steal $10 million from a cartel while doing a drug bust and unfortunately for them someone gets to their loot before them.
3. The team is suspended pending investigation and after 10 minutes (movie time) the team gets re-instated. Immediately after that, death stalks the team one by one and it is up to the remaining few and Arnie to solve the mystery as to who is after them.
I was expecting more from David Ayer (he directed the amazing "End of Watch" http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1855199). Here he doesn't help us to connect to the characters and there is absolutely no emotional attachment for the viewer with each of the targeted agents. The action scenes were far too little in between and the final car chase was a tame end to the mystery. The final scene was even more ridiculous considering that Arnie looks and feels too old for the part. This is not even a movie for Arnie fans unlike "The Last Stand", another dead duck but a definite Arnie flick.
If you have a couple of hours to kill, watch this movie. But I suggest you watch "End of Watch" first, so you won't lose respect for the director.
1. Arnold Schwarzenegger leads a DEA task force made up of real weirdos, so much that you really don't care for any of them.
2. They steal $10 million from a cartel while doing a drug bust and unfortunately for them someone gets to their loot before them.
3. The team is suspended pending investigation and after 10 minutes (movie time) the team gets re-instated. Immediately after that, death stalks the team one by one and it is up to the remaining few and Arnie to solve the mystery as to who is after them.
I was expecting more from David Ayer (he directed the amazing "End of Watch" http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1855199). Here he doesn't help us to connect to the characters and there is absolutely no emotional attachment for the viewer with each of the targeted agents. The action scenes were far too little in between and the final car chase was a tame end to the mystery. The final scene was even more ridiculous considering that Arnie looks and feels too old for the part. This is not even a movie for Arnie fans unlike "The Last Stand", another dead duck but a definite Arnie flick.
If you have a couple of hours to kill, watch this movie. But I suggest you watch "End of Watch" first, so you won't lose respect for the director.
Need for Speed
(2014)
Pretty Good!
16 July 2014
I was a bit apprehensive about watching this movie considering that the current RottenTomatoes score is a dismal 23%. So much for the critics.
Story-line is pretty weak, but I guess that's all could be done if you wanted to stick to the video game format.
Some good casting choices, some bad... Aaron, M Keaton, Rami, Dominic, Ramon did it for me, Imogen, Dakota, Harrison, Scott (he was so irritating - African-Americans should protest the stereotyping) did not. Couldn't understand how Imogen's character went from savvy biz to dreamy ditz.
Elements of the game like the build-up to the final race, police car chases, attempted roadblock (the police car-pile driver was really a low-point), helicopter surveillance, etc were featured.
The movie was engrossing and I didn't feel the length of the two hours. However, some major plot holes/ inconsistencies didn't work for me... but hey, its based on a video game. I appreciate the director for not resorting to the F&F style of direction.
Watch it if you like cars, chases and/or Aaron... Would have liked him to say "Bitch" at least once! :) But can't have everything.
Story-line is pretty weak, but I guess that's all could be done if you wanted to stick to the video game format.
Some good casting choices, some bad... Aaron, M Keaton, Rami, Dominic, Ramon did it for me, Imogen, Dakota, Harrison, Scott (he was so irritating - African-Americans should protest the stereotyping) did not. Couldn't understand how Imogen's character went from savvy biz to dreamy ditz.
Elements of the game like the build-up to the final race, police car chases, attempted roadblock (the police car-pile driver was really a low-point), helicopter surveillance, etc were featured.
The movie was engrossing and I didn't feel the length of the two hours. However, some major plot holes/ inconsistencies didn't work for me... but hey, its based on a video game. I appreciate the director for not resorting to the F&F style of direction.
Watch it if you like cars, chases and/or Aaron... Would have liked him to say "Bitch" at least once! :) But can't have everything.
Edge of Tomorrow
(2014)
Watch. Rewind. Repeat.
23 June 2014
Edge of Tomorrow has been the movie I have been waiting for from this summer's list of releases. And boy, does it deliver!
This is one Cruise's finest performances yet. There is no cockiness, holier-than-thou, smart-ass attitude which his characters usually are. The design of the mimics is literally out of this world - a cross between the sentinels from 'The Matrix' and the aliens from 'Alien' and quite terrifying. This is director Doug Liman's best work since 'The Bourne Identity' with his tight direction from the beach landing (nod to Saving Private Ryan?), the alien attacks, keeping the time loop events interesting and keeping romance largely out of the narration.
The time-loop, or day repeating itself didn't wear itself it out as new events were depicted. The humor between these loops was in good taste and connected the watcher to the events in the movie.
I would have preferred a more action oriented ending (like 'The Avengers') instead of the slightly tame one in the movie. For that reason alone, I have shaved the rating of 1 point from 10. Otherwise this movie strikes cinematic gold.
This is the action movie that audience have been complaining that they don't get to see. And it's quite unfortunate that when a movie like this is made, the viewer-ship and fan-fare is abysmal. Especially in the USA where the audience I guess has been dumbed down thanks to the Marvel and Disney movies of the past decade.
I guess that this movie will be 'The Shawshank Redemption' of Sci-Fi Action. Excellent critical rating, but poor box-office.
This is one Cruise's finest performances yet. There is no cockiness, holier-than-thou, smart-ass attitude which his characters usually are. The design of the mimics is literally out of this world - a cross between the sentinels from 'The Matrix' and the aliens from 'Alien' and quite terrifying. This is director Doug Liman's best work since 'The Bourne Identity' with his tight direction from the beach landing (nod to Saving Private Ryan?), the alien attacks, keeping the time loop events interesting and keeping romance largely out of the narration.
The time-loop, or day repeating itself didn't wear itself it out as new events were depicted. The humor between these loops was in good taste and connected the watcher to the events in the movie.
I would have preferred a more action oriented ending (like 'The Avengers') instead of the slightly tame one in the movie. For that reason alone, I have shaved the rating of 1 point from 10. Otherwise this movie strikes cinematic gold.
This is the action movie that audience have been complaining that they don't get to see. And it's quite unfortunate that when a movie like this is made, the viewer-ship and fan-fare is abysmal. Especially in the USA where the audience I guess has been dumbed down thanks to the Marvel and Disney movies of the past decade.
I guess that this movie will be 'The Shawshank Redemption' of Sci-Fi Action. Excellent critical rating, but poor box-office.
Zinda
(2006)
Below average for a re-make
15 January 2006
Warning: Spoilers
Most people who write reviews do so immediately after having felt the experience of the matter they are reviewing. I gave myself 48 hours before I decided to make what I wanted of about Zinda.
To start with, Zinda is a remake of Chan-Wook Park's Korean masterpiece ''Oldboy'' which is the second movie in his trilogy of revenge movies. So, take that whole baloney of Sanjay Gupta being an original director and stuff and put it in the garbage because we have an other copy here.
This is the official story of Oldboy in IMDb... ''An average man is kidnapped and imprisoned in a shabby cell for 15 years without explanation. He then is released, equipped with money, a cellphone and expensive clothes. As he strives to explain his imprisonment and get his revenge, he soon finds out that not only his kidnapper has still plans for him, but that those plans will serve as the even worse finale to 15 years of imprisonment.'' That's the story of Oldboy... that's the story of Zinda. It is a good plot, but Sanjay Gupta screwed it up.
Sanjay Dutt is pathetic. He always tries to be larger than the story and therefore is practically invincible. First, why did Dutt have to be a s/w engineer in the film? S/w wasn't that big in 1991 that it could buy you a seaside house in Bangkok. Also, Shahrukh Khan was practically non-existent in 1991, when Manish's character tells that Dutt could be a better actor than the Khan. Come on, the intelligent viewer can do his/her math. Script writers..whither goes thou??? There were two of you!!! The entire sequence of Mr. Dutt in the cell is rather contrived and long. He was fed a single course mean twice daily for 14 years, and he didn't loose a single kilo. Puleeez.... this is a 2005 movie! Tom Hanks lost 15+kgs for Castaway and his character had more nutrition and exercise than Dutt's had. Not acceptable, Mr Gupta.
The fight sequence with the hammer is unrealistic. Dutt is fighting Thai's who kick- box like we fart. He beats up people who are armed with knives and bats with a hammer and during the climax of the movie he fights almost the same people with a sword and they have swords at that time. This is like a Max Payne game.
Lara Dutta magically appears as the Hindi speaking taxi-driver, who automatically assumes Dutt to be an Indian, whereas the enigmatic Dutt could easily pass off for an Arab. Dutt doesn't think to ask Dutta how she recognized him to be an Indian. Hmmm.... why we make such movies with weak scripts? Dutt-Dutta-Idiotta... I am getting a rhyme. Wheeee! OK... next! Why would a person who keeps people in cells for a living not have an in-house cook instead of buying food for years for his wards? It is more expensive and isn't good business. Is the director trying to tell us that Indians are lousy as businessmen?
Manish Manjrekar was loud and boorish and I was happy to see him die.
John Abraham cannot act. However, his character was the most credible.
I can understand that a man can be made into a monster if he is held captive for 14 years for reasons undisclosed. But to be turned into a samurai??? With Director Gupta it is ... 'No problem!!!!' HA HA HA!!! Finally, not to forget, but we have Celina Jaitley who is also pathetic in her rather cameo role.
Models should not act. This is an atrocity worse than Tsunami because more lives are being effected by the way they behave on screen.
I won't waste too much time on the music. The Strings song is fantastic (as always). I have no clue why Dutt should appear in the video since his voice isn't there and all he does is play an imaginary guitar. Wait a minute, maybe it is because he produced the movie!!! Anyways, that's all I would like to say without ranting any more.
I am really sad that my brethren are giving strong reviews about this movie. But then, beggars can't be choosers. Too bad Bollywood is making beggars of us when we have to choose between movies.
Overall... give this a miss.
To start with, Zinda is a remake of Chan-Wook Park's Korean masterpiece ''Oldboy'' which is the second movie in his trilogy of revenge movies. So, take that whole baloney of Sanjay Gupta being an original director and stuff and put it in the garbage because we have an other copy here.
This is the official story of Oldboy in IMDb... ''An average man is kidnapped and imprisoned in a shabby cell for 15 years without explanation. He then is released, equipped with money, a cellphone and expensive clothes. As he strives to explain his imprisonment and get his revenge, he soon finds out that not only his kidnapper has still plans for him, but that those plans will serve as the even worse finale to 15 years of imprisonment.'' That's the story of Oldboy... that's the story of Zinda. It is a good plot, but Sanjay Gupta screwed it up.
Sanjay Dutt is pathetic. He always tries to be larger than the story and therefore is practically invincible. First, why did Dutt have to be a s/w engineer in the film? S/w wasn't that big in 1991 that it could buy you a seaside house in Bangkok. Also, Shahrukh Khan was practically non-existent in 1991, when Manish's character tells that Dutt could be a better actor than the Khan. Come on, the intelligent viewer can do his/her math. Script writers..whither goes thou??? There were two of you!!! The entire sequence of Mr. Dutt in the cell is rather contrived and long. He was fed a single course mean twice daily for 14 years, and he didn't loose a single kilo. Puleeez.... this is a 2005 movie! Tom Hanks lost 15+kgs for Castaway and his character had more nutrition and exercise than Dutt's had. Not acceptable, Mr Gupta.
The fight sequence with the hammer is unrealistic. Dutt is fighting Thai's who kick- box like we fart. He beats up people who are armed with knives and bats with a hammer and during the climax of the movie he fights almost the same people with a sword and they have swords at that time. This is like a Max Payne game.
Lara Dutta magically appears as the Hindi speaking taxi-driver, who automatically assumes Dutt to be an Indian, whereas the enigmatic Dutt could easily pass off for an Arab. Dutt doesn't think to ask Dutta how she recognized him to be an Indian. Hmmm.... why we make such movies with weak scripts? Dutt-Dutta-Idiotta... I am getting a rhyme. Wheeee! OK... next! Why would a person who keeps people in cells for a living not have an in-house cook instead of buying food for years for his wards? It is more expensive and isn't good business. Is the director trying to tell us that Indians are lousy as businessmen?
Manish Manjrekar was loud and boorish and I was happy to see him die.
John Abraham cannot act. However, his character was the most credible.
I can understand that a man can be made into a monster if he is held captive for 14 years for reasons undisclosed. But to be turned into a samurai??? With Director Gupta it is ... 'No problem!!!!' HA HA HA!!! Finally, not to forget, but we have Celina Jaitley who is also pathetic in her rather cameo role.
Models should not act. This is an atrocity worse than Tsunami because more lives are being effected by the way they behave on screen.
I won't waste too much time on the music. The Strings song is fantastic (as always). I have no clue why Dutt should appear in the video since his voice isn't there and all he does is play an imaginary guitar. Wait a minute, maybe it is because he produced the movie!!! Anyways, that's all I would like to say without ranting any more.
I am really sad that my brethren are giving strong reviews about this movie. But then, beggars can't be choosers. Too bad Bollywood is making beggars of us when we have to choose between movies.
Overall... give this a miss.
Almost Heroes
(1998)
Absolutely Cool
5 November 2000
I watched this movie for Perry and boy, did I like it! Chris was real cool too, nowhere near Tommy Boy though. Of course, the movie compares nowhere to either actor's other movies, but the theme was a refreshing change.
Tell Your Friends