The movie should surely be renamed ‘Cash for idiots’. Cash is a heist film, but made with zero intelligence and for an audience of zero intelligence.

There wereno skills whatsoever on the part of every single person who’s worked on it, barring perhaps the action director who’s designed some cool stunts. The film is like one of those mindless video games in which all characters walk and talk like zombies and the game, sorry movie moves from one stunt to another without any link between the two or even related to the story line, which is definitely missing.

The director has spent so much money on the stunts that he definitely decided to give the script writer a miss. The instructionsto the heroines is clear cut – show off your toned bodies, that’s it, don’t try to act.

What’s wrong with A-Grade actor Ajay Devgan? At one time he used to be my fav actor – the actor with brains and heart. Does he really need money so desperately to produce his own films that he has taken to acting in C-grade films? I am throughly disillusioned.

Free weekend? Don’t waste Rs 150 on Cash (even Rs50 is tooooo much!) Watch Indian Idol / SRGMP instead. Better entertainment.

Rating 1/5 (That too because of the stunts) Sphere: Related Content Posted in (less)

Right from the vintage drama songs Ambili Ammava Thamara Kumbililenthundu , Marivillin Thenmalare to classic songs like Kasturi Manakkunnallo , Kayampoo Kannil Viriyum and from the rivalry between Udaya and Merryland Studios to the suicide of actor Vijayasree. But one may wonder why, with all these nostalgic ingredients, Nayika fails to impress and ends as an average flick! The major setback is the lack of a proper platform to place the characters, be it Sharada's Gracy, Jayaram's Anand, Sidhique's Stephen Muthalali and Mamta Mohandas' Aleena.

The first three characters have resemblance to some prominent figures who ruled the Malayalam industry once but it is slightly twisted. Jayaram lends the gestures and mannerisms of the late Prem Nazir to his character, and since imitating Nazir is his masterpiece as a mimicry artiste, it really came out well.

But with the absence of a strong script, all the characters ended up as bygones and at many points, were left clueless. Scriptwriter Deedi Damodaran, who made a promising debut through Gulmohar , knitted a tale by placing the mystery behind the death of actress Vijayasree in the centre.

The actress, who was known as the Marilyn Monroe of Mollywood, committed suicide following an incident while shooting for the movie Ponnapuram Kotta . While enacting a scene in a waterfall, her dress got removed accidentally and the cameraman continued with the shooting.

Her nude images appeared in the film and it is said that the actress committed suicide following the incident. Though Gracy is in a mentally-challenged state, Aleena succeeds in interacting with her with the help of the actress' personal assistant Rangannan (Jagathy).

Travelling through the memories of Gracy comes Padampriya (depicting the youth of Gracy) and her relationship with actor Anand. Kudos to Jayaraj for casting Padmapriya as the young Gracy.

Her beauty and acting skills helped in portraying the role to perfection and 'young Gracy' ends as the saving 'grace' of the film. Apart from these references to the past, Deedi's script fails to blend all these characters together into the plot.

The director, apart from following the script, has not tried anything extraordinary leaving the spectator indifferent in the end. If director Ranjith's Thirakkatha - a recent Malayalam film that narrated a tale from the 1980s Mollywood - was a serene and haunting experience, Nayika , which could have been made crispier - has failed to reveal its truest possible form at its best.

Tweet (less)

Jaswant Sisodia (Manoj Bajpayee) rules supreme in the town of Bijnor and one of his indulgences involve forcing a girl Anshu (Tia Bajpai) to be his mistress. Anshu's parents are as helpless and humiliated as the vulnerable victim, who ironically gets willfully raped every night by Jaswant.

Jaswant's close aid (Arjan Bajwa), who he as well considers his younger brother, comes to the town and supervises his illicit operations. His loyalty towards Jaswant remains integral until his empathy towards Anshu overpowers it.

That's when he decides to betray his mentor. Visibly Tia symbolizes Sita, Manoj Bajpayee represents Raavan, and Arjan Bajwa stands for Vibhishan in this selective depiction of Ramayana.

And through its dense drama, the film justifies Vibhishan's stand to stand against the morally wrong Raavan. Where debutante director Maqbool Khan's expertise comes is in giving Manoj Bajpayee's character a poised tone wherein, on one hand he is despicable for the heroine, on the other hand he is role model for the hero.

As an audience, you relate to both the extreme shades in his personality, which can also be immensely attributed to Bajpayee's persuasive hold on the character. The plotline isn't entirely inventive and one has seen thematically similar interpretations, notably in Rakesh Roshan's Koyla (1997) or more recently Kites (2010).

How it steers clear from other cinematic adaptations of Ramayana is from the fact that it intentionally avoids incorporating Ram as the ideal protagonist and substitutes it with Vibhishan who might not be perfect yet opposes evil. So the entire essence of the film lies in the camaraderie between Raavan-Vibhishan (Bajpayee-Bajwa) and their subsequent conflict.

Thereby the director keeps the romance track between Arjan Bajwa and Tia Bajpai to the minimal and thankfully the narrative never branches out into their individual love story. A better alternative would have been to restrict their bonding only till empathetic emotions (like in Emraan Hashmi's Awaarapan ) over the avoidable streak of romance.

The focus is more on the conflict between men than highlighting the trauma inflicted on the woman. Thereby the lust and obsession that fuels Jaswant's desire to dominate Anshu, both, physically and psychologically, remains peripheral to the plot and doesn't register effectively enough.

In fact their back-story is never fleshed out. Somewhere there is more amity between the male leads than animosity with Arjan Bajwa's duty-bound character being a mute spectator for the major runtime before he rebels in the very end.

And post his revolt, the film comes to a quick end with a solo climactic confrontation scene between the men. The climax, however, seems hurried and convenient in the bigger picture.

It's sad then that what could have been shown as a rare account of ethical unfaithfulness ends up being a generalized preachy epilogue on how men should treat woman with respect and how wronged woman should not lose hope and continue their fight against injustice and blah blah blah. It almost changes the tenor of the male-dominated drama to a woman-liberation film.

Shashank Dabral's writing is fairly interesting to the extent that it never strikes your engaged mind that Arjan Bajwa's character name is never mentioned in the film. However the political nexus in the narrative isn't seamlessly integrated with central plot and rather runs parallel to it.

Also the dialogues could have been more effective over the trite lines. The film is completely designed in and around Manoj Bajpayee's character and the actor justifies the immense scope he gets with an authoritative performance.

He has a menacing attitude, his eyes speak volumes, he laughs hysterically and thankfully never goes overboard (despite a strong tendency to ham). Arjan Bajwa is impressive as the man of few words and despite Bajpayee's towering persona; he still commands good screen presence.

Fortunately Tia Bajpai is given the least lines, scenes and footage in the film and one doesn't complain. Yateen Karyekar as the defenseless father is impressive.

The immensely talented Manish Chaudhari doesn't get much scope here. Yashpal Sharma is regular.

Director Maqbool Khan shows restraint and refinement in crafting his first film. This Lanka, though not full of gold, has some shining moments.

Finally there's a film about Raavan which belongs to its Raavan! Verdict: Good (less)

But alas! the terrain is a tad too familiar to give his legions of fans their long wished-for catharsis. The plot is simple.

Jai (Pawan), an orphan, is a loyal lieutenant of a don Bhagwan (Jackie Shroff) and when not making a mince meat of his godfather's rivals, he's busy basking in the lap of nature at his own nursery which he runs with his pal Chotu (Ali). Life turns upside down with the arrival of Munna (Adivi Seshu), son of Bhagwan, who covets Jai's childhood friend Jhahnavi (Anjali Lavania).

Meantime, Jai runs into a green peace activist Sandhya (Sarah Jane Dias) and sparks fly between the duo. The plot thickens when a jilted Munna batters Jhanavi to death and is dispatched to hell by an enraged Jai.

The ungrateful act has the don turn his ire against Jai and the rest of the story unfolds along predictable lines. Director Vishnu Vardhan of Billa fame, who has also scripted the film, lives up to his reputation with his stylish frames but the story, a mash up of Pawan's old movie Balu and Sai Kumar-starrer Prasthanam , is at best old wine in a new bottle.

Action sequences by Shyam Kausal, cinematography by Vinod and music by Yuvan Shankar Raja breathe life into the film. The comedy track involving Pawan Kalyan and Brahmanandam, who plays a cop, is insipid.

What's refreshing though is the absence of in-your-face dialogues with which Pawan has come to be identified in recent years. The star, sporting a beard, plays a subdued character who exhibits controlled aggression.

Though welcome, the characterisation veers off track during his comic scenes with Brahmanandam. The rest of the actors deliver decent performances.

The director and editor ought to have used their scissors more liberally as the supposed action thriller drags at a snail's pace. It's surprising and in fact, it is a cardinal sin to have omitted the racy title song from the film.

It's another lost opportunity for Pawan but definitely an improvement over his films since Khushi. One cannot but sympathise with the star who seems to be nostalgic as are his fans about his glorious days.

Panjaa is set in Kolkata, an obvious journey back in time for Pawan. But then, nostalgia doesn't compensate for novelty.

Tweet (less)

A dam's basic purpose is to stock water and perhaps the director's idea of making the viewer correlate with the water reservoir is by testing how much can they hold on to the film that has everything on show but the dam. And by the time Mr.

Dam makes a special appearance in the final reel, audience ke sabr ka baandh toot jaata hain. So you are supposed to endure multiple tales including a star-crossed couple, a love triangle, a child longing for his mother's love, a mother yearning to have a child, a sailor-turned-author, a scheming politician, his wheel-ridden wife and an old man who specializes in alternate treatment therapies.

Imagine the director going that extra mile for character development in a film that is primarily about dam destruction and moreover none of them are even remotely connected to the dam or its disintegration. Dam 999 also seems to be culturally confused cinema.

The setting is in Kerala yet the locals insist on speaking in heavily accented English and whenever cupid strikes, the love songs play in Hindi. Add to it, with the collapse of a dam that is located somewhere in South India, the film attempts to give a tribute to a dam disaster in China.

Intermittently the film seems like a documentary highlighting the miracles of Ayurveda, though that again has nothing to do with the dam. Simultaneously it also promotes astrology and strongly endorses the belief that some mismatched horoscopes influenced the dam wreck.

Which makes us wonder whether other categorical issues like the dam's structural weakness, political intervention and an earthquake were insignificant for the climatic catastrophe! Coming to the 3D aspect of the film, the stereoscopy merely adds depth in some frames but who cares for 3D effects in a film which has 2 hours of human drama and (literally) 2 minutes of dam-break footage. And even the special effects in the film's two minutes of fame are so tacky that you curse yourself for sitting till the end.

The performance from the lesser known cast is mediocre and nothing much to rave about. Both Vinay Rai and Joshua Fredric Smith lack screen presence.

The leading ladies - Vimala Raman , Megha Burman and Linda Arsenio have face appeal, but nothing beyond that. Child actor Jineet Rath irritates with his mugged up lines.

Thankfully Ashish Vidyarthi doesn't go overboard. Rajit Kapoor tries to get the body language and accent of his character correct, though he stresses a little too much at times.

This is one damn boring film. Avoid or be damned.

Verdict: Below Average (less)

But most of the times for the wrong reasons (anglicized accents, ludicrous scenes, ham acts). And even they are far and few between.

The story keeps beating around the bush and by the time the narrative actually comes to point, the film bores you to death. The good-for-nothing Atul (Chandan Roy Sanyal), his mom (Suhasini Mulay) and dad (Kallol Banerjee) are surviving on the assets of Atul's wife, Sonia (Yuki Ellias).

Her late parents have left behind a fortune for her, which the in-laws want to exploit to their advantage. But when Sonia refuses to fund Atul's new security system project, he and his mother decide to terminate her.

What follows is a series of misadventures in her murder attempt. While the burning-the-bride conflict might sound hoary and hackneyed, director Rafeeq Ellias' treatment to this crime-comedy is way away from conventional.

But so hatke is his direction that in making things wild and wacky, the film ends up turning weird. There seems to be a deliberate attempt to devise crazy characters who have crazier conflicts.

Like the father is wildlife enthusiast, the mother indulges in play-station sessions with the domestic help and Sonia is obsessed with astrology of any kind. None of these attributes contribute to the central plot and so the film tries too hard to be funny.

Amongst the genuinely funny sequences are the one where Atul and his mother negotiate Sonia's murder with a theatre director (Chetan Shashital) and a condolence speech given at a dog's funeral attended by dogs of all castes and 'breeds'. Otherwise the film has a very unusual tone of humour where you see a sexologist (Sohrab Ardeshir) who doubles up as a rockstar - a preposterous 'turnoff'.

Initially the viewer has no idea where the story is heading towards. And by the time one apprehends, they seem to be least interested.

The climax set in the Priyadarshan-Anees Bazmee mould, getting all the characters together, thankfully doesn't get commotional and is smartly executed. While the approach to the humour is never full-blown, much of the wit is lost in the film's subtlety.

The performances are kind of dramatic. One can't help but notice a strong Urmila Matondkar hangover in Yuki Ellias' looks.

She comes up with a decent act. Chandan Roy Sanyal isn't bad but gets overtly expressive at times.

Suhasini Mulay is good. Kallol Banerjee is funny in the restaurant and funeral sequence.

Sheeba Chadha and Chetan Shashital are fine for their parts. Sohrab Ardeshir hams.

Nicholas Brown (last seen as the villain in Kites ) doesn't get much scope. All said and done, Love you to Death had the potential to be a much funnier and entertaining film.

Sadly it shows only sporadic sparks of life! Verdict: Average (less)

After that he made "Joke Falls", a remake of a Hrishikesh Mukherjee directed Hindi film, and it did reasonably well. Now he has returned with a decent edge-of-the-seat thriller called 9 to 12 .

Unfortunately, the film has been released with no publicity as a result it has not been able to create a buzz, which is necessary because nowadays audiences focus on hyped movies. But Ashok Patil has done a fairly good job by weaving a story which is able to create curiosity among the audiences.

Not that 9 to 12 is flawless. The film about incidents that happen between 9 to 12 at night makes a disastrous beginning with a boring narrative.

But it gathers momentum, thanks to interesting incidents. Patil could have done a better while selecting artists for pivotal roles.

The film also suffers from poor production values. The music could have been a little better and the songs' placement may irritate you.

Many sequences in the first half drag, particularly when a bunch of eunuchs get into the hero's taxi. Despite the flaws, the film keeps the audience engaged in the second half.

Coming to the plus points of the film, Patil has been able to mix sentimental elements into a thriller. The mother-son and father-daughter sentiments gel well.

The story goes like this - Munna is a hot tempered driver who is attached to his mother and daughter. His neighbour Durgi loves him despite knowing that he is a widower.

Munna takes a loan to buy a car after he is sacked by his employer. At the same time his mother is admitted to a hospital and she needs to be operated upon and it will cost Rs.

300,000. Munna is devastated, but help comes in the form of an underworld chap who is ready give him money if he transports a bag to a nearby railway station.

As the film moves towards the climax, Munna is able to bust human trafficking attempts of underworld. Meanwhile, he also rescues his own daughter who has been kidnapped by the underworld.

Kishore Kumar has delivered a good performance. Actress Smitha, who has changed her name to Nivedita, doesn't suit the role.

Her limited presence in the film doesn't make any impact. Veteran actress B.

V. Radha has done well.

Niranjan Babu's camera work stands out. 9 to 12 is a good watch for people who love suspense thrillers.

Tweet (less)

But the Kannada remake is certainly not well-crafted with its poor production values and very ordinary narration killing the soul of the movie. The essence of the movie which is reflected in the relationship between a very good son and his strict and enraged father fails to penetrate deep in the minds of the viewers mainly because director Umakanth's narration lacks seriousness.

Despite very good performances by Diganth and Avinash, Puthra does not rise up to the standards of the original. The two actresses have competed with each other in delivering drab expressions and even the senior technicians have worked without any imagination.

Despite being good to his family members and others, Krishna is much misunderstood by his short-tempered father Narasimha who runs a grocery shop. Despite being cowed down by his father, Krishna remains obedient and takes on all the insults heaped by him with composure.

In his college, Krishna's classmate Madhu loves him intensely. He likes his relative Thulasi but the two families have a long history of misunderstanding which separates them.

He tries to unite the two families which further enrages Narasimha. Krishna and Thulasi leave their homes and lead a separate life.

How Krishna respects his father even after he acquires good reputation in society forms the climax of the film. Diganth surprises with his convincing emotional performance.

He tries to save the film by understanding the nuances of the complex role. Veteran Avinash has excelled in the role of a tough father.

The two heroines of the film fail to make an impact. Veteran actor Tennis Krishna has done a good job while Sundar Raj fills in perfectly for his role.

Naveen Suvarna's camera work is ordinary while Raja Ramesh's music does not raise above ordinary levels. Puthra is an ordinary film despite a good story and neat performances from the two lead male actors.

Tweet (less)

But an excessive lifestyle of sex and substance abuse, not only makes him lose focus towards work, but also leads to a permanent physical disability. In his world dominated by loud music, Raunak turns completely deaf and is unable to pursue his dreams to make music.

Things change when Raunak meets Gauri (Soha Ali Khan), who too is hearing impaired but has mastered the art of lip-reading. In Gauri, Raunak finds a tutor and life-partner.

Also his passion for music is rekindled, as he attempts to sense sound (if not hear) and study digital waveforms of tunes he knew, to create new music. Thereby a deaf DJ turns a renowned composer.

Debutante director Neerav Ghosh attempts to give a docu-drama shade to the narrative to make it seem like a biographical take on the life of his protagonist. Thankfully the documentary treatment never overcomes the actual story, which has enough scope for drama per se.

The first half seems obsessed with close-up shots of alcohol, drugs, smoke and sex. Raunak boozes as if he were drinking water and smokes like he is breathing air.

The idea might be to give a dark and disturbing shade to the film like Anurag Kashyup brand of cinema (the maverick filmmaker also has a cameo), more so with ample scope for substance abuse in the narrative. But after a point of time, it only gets repetitive and seems forced.

The tone of the film suddenly changes in the second half when the narrative turns more soft and sober, as Raunak goes on a self-rehabilitation drive, shunning all addiction. His romance track (with Soha) is blithe as compared to his hardcore sex-drive (with Mrunalini Sharma) in the first half.

But beyond the somber shade and his chemistry with costars, the narrative isn't able to create as much contrast between the first half and the second that would have resulted in relating and feeling for the protagonist's plight better. The depth that it adds to Raunak's relearning process of music (which is the soul of the film) in the second half pales in comparison to the intensity that it lends to the buildup of substance abuse in the first half.

Which means the film adds intensity where not needed and vice versa. A basic idea of a deaf person composing decent music makes for an inspiring story.

While the promising premise of the film doesn't let you down, one still feels the entire account could have been more stimulating, esp. when the director had straight reference point in the form of the original film.

The entire track of Raunak's fight with his inner demon (clowning around him in a joker-faced mask) looks ludicrous over being symbolic. It gets exasperating after a point and the entire track could certainly have been avoided.

For a film dealing primarily with music, the actual 'soundtrack' isn't as stimulating as one would have expected. Also the length could have been shorter and the film could have done away with several repetitive portions.

However, the dialogues, esp. in the second half, are well-worded and leave an impact.

Soundtrack works to a big extent because of the persuasive performance of its protagonist played by Rajeev Khandelwal . At the onset, one seems uncertain if the sober-imaged actor would be able to pull off a character as wild and weird as this.

But as you see him getting more and more into his character, you are amazed at the conviction he brings to his role. Soha Ali Khan not only plays a deaf character, she has to lisp in her diction too.

And the actress does it with absolute subtlety (as compared to the Bollywood stereotypes that go overboard) and brings grace to her role. It would have made more sense if the story enlightened on the reason behind her lisp.

Mrinalini Sharma looks refreshingly sexy and is not one-bit vulgar in her skimpily-clad character. Mohan Kapur hams.

Manu Rishi doesn't get much scope. Yatin Karyekar is decent.

While it had potential to be a rocking film, Soundtrack, at least, turns out to be sound cinema. Worth giving an ear (and eye) too! (less)

To cut a long story short, the album delivers big-time as composer duo Vishal-Shekhar pack a killer punch. The film offers 14 tracks, including a few remixes and themes.

It kicks off on a superb note with the already popular number Chammak Challo . A clear winner, the song, which has Hindi, English and Tamil words in the lyrics, makes you groove with it instantly.

international popstar Akon sings in English and surprisingly well in Hindi, making Chammak Challo ride high on its novelty factor. Hamsika Iyer, who has sung for films like Raajneeti and Khoya Khoya Chand in the past, supports him beautifully, accompanying the English-Hindi vocals with a little Tamil strewn in.

Primarily a dance track, Chammak Challo is here to stay. The song also has a couple of remixes, but don't dismiss them as ordinary fare.

A Punjabi Mix adds some bhangra to the beats while DJ Khushi's version, simply titled Chammak Challo Remix , is explosive. A third, international version is what his fans will hear globally--this one is pure Akon, without Hamsika to accompany him.

Then comes Dildaara , a mush melody that seems slightly out of place in this electric (and eclectic), beat-heavy disc. Sung by Shafqat Amanat Ali, it has John Lennon's song Stand by me mixed into it; the makers, who bought the rights for Lennon's iconic song, have done a commendable job with this seemingly odd combination.

A surprise for many fans, Akon shines in his second song, called Criminal , a peppy and upbeat track that also has Vishal Dadlani and Shruti Pathak behind the mike. An amalgamation of Hindi and English lyrics, Criminal is a perfect party number.

Considering that Konvict was the name of Akon's debut album, and the one he remains most famous for, Criminal is one song that should sit right up there on his shelf. It also has a remixed version by DJ Amit.

Bhare naina is the soundtrack's dark horse. It will definitely make you sit up and take notice.

With a sublime cold opening, the track completely turns on its head to become one helluva haunting melody. Over 200 musicians of the famous Prague Philharmonic Choir were flown in from the Czech Republic for its orchestration, which makes it a one-of-its-kind coup for the Indian film industry; Bhare naina becomes the first Indian song to be composed and recorded off shore.

Nandini Srikar and Vishal-Shekhar add vocals to this near-perfect, soulful song. It's a steady, slow number that pans across genres; it's moody and it's brilliant.

Sidd Coutto's Right by your side is perhaps the only ordinary composition. Even then, it's fast-paced and peppy and will have you dancing.

Perhaps the song that defines the whole flavour of RA.One is Raftaarein .

If you thought Chammak Challo is the face of the film then Raftaarein is its soul. Beginning with a classy nod to RD Burman, Vishal Dadlani ramps up your adrenaline.

The RA.One theme we've been hearing in the trailer gets a 70's style treatment with some elekronica to boot.

Probably meant to be a situational song, Raftaarein leaves its mark by jumping out and gobbling the album whole. Up next is Jiya mora ghabraaye -- The Chase , a fusion of rock and semi-classical.

With strong arrangement and impressive vocals by Sukhwinder Singh and Vishal Dadlani, and the song will be liked by hard rock lovers. As the title suggests, its pacy and is meant to accompany a chase sequence in the film.

Three instrumental themes called Comes the light , I'm on --which is the main RA.One them--and a sad, slow Song of the end wrap up the album.

RA.One , therefore, lives up to expectations and perhaps even surpasses some.

It's more than worth it, it's a winner all the way. Tweet (less)

But unlike "Only Vishnuvardhana" which was released a week earlier, this film does not use the name of the iconic actor extensively and show the clips of his many films. But a photograph of Abhijit and Vishnuvardhan is displayed with a note that the film has been dedicated to the late actor.

The film has a revenge-based story which is full of commercial elements like action and thrills. A little bit of comedy is also thrown in with actor Bullet Prakash trying to pull a few comedy punches here and there.

But the story is too predictable to sustain any interest among the audience. Even the technical value of the film is below the average standards that are exhibited in many contemporary Kannada films.

The camera work is pathetic but the graphics work is slightly better. Krupakar has done just average work in his music compositions.

The first half is badly narrated while the second half is little interesting. But overall, the film suffers from low quality of production and a haphazard narration.

Vishnu is a do-gooder who comes to his native village to help one of his friends who is trying to marry his lover -- the daughter of a village ruffian who torments the villagers. When Vishnu finds that most of the villagers treat him specially and give a lot of respect, he goes deep into the reasons for such reverence.

He understands it is all because of his father Narasimha who tried to protect the villagers and do good things for the benefit of the village. His attempts to help out the villagers for constructing a lake are not to the liking of his relatives who kill him.

Vishnu avenges the death of his father by killing his relatives responsible for the murder. Abhijit's attempt to have a new look in both the roles has not yielded good results.

His hair styling is atrocious. However, he has excelled in action sequences.

The film's heroine Catherine is only there for her glamour quotient and nothing else. The veteran actors, including Ashish Vidyarthi and Sharath Lohitashwa who play the villain's roles, just shout and scream rather than showing their talents.

Tweet (less)

And devoid of a star-studded cast, the film still boasts of high production values. What goes horribly wrong with the film then is that it's backed by an outmoded plotline that is certainly not jo hum chahein .

What annoys you is the hero's (Sunny Gill) incessant arrogance and cockiness. He reeks of overconfidence which impresses everyone from his babe (Simran Kaur Mundi) to boss (Alyy Khan) but the audience.

He takes his girlfriend to spiritual dates across temples, churches and gurudwara across the city. Until he wakes up one morning to realize he has lost his virginity to a nymphomaniac aunty (Achint Kaur).

As the narrative wanders aimlessly amidst ambition and love, the viewer seems more lost about the central plot of the picture. Until you realize it archaic and nothing more than Shah Rukh Khan's Raju Ban Gaya Gentleman (1992) revisited or for that matter Raj Kapoor's Shree 420 (1955).

The lovers part ways, the hero turns toy-boy of aunty and the heroine inevitably has to be pregnant. The only thing you derive pleasure from in the otherwise predictable proceedings is to see the downfall of the hero who was so full of himself throughout the first half.

The film certainly might be having its heart at the right place but the dated chronicle fails to touch your heart by any means. The romance is cheesy, the writing is verbose and the emotions are so soap-opera that it seems like watching a TV serial.

A multitude of songs only add to your tedium. And the second half almost seems like an endless saga with the hero trying to mend his ways.

While director Pawan Gill doesn't impress much in terms of storytelling, he ensures that the film is a technically sound product and extracts notable performances from the cast. The film is tailor-made as a launch pad for Sunny Gill and he makes a confident debut.

Unlike the recent amateur lot of first-timers, Sunny is natural in his act and appeal and has good screen presence (though he could let himself a little loose). A better script could tap the immense potential of this actor.

Simran Kaur Mundi is decent. Achint Kaur and Alyy Khan play their parts well.

But largely, Jo Hum Chahein certainly doesn't have what we wish from a film - entertainment! Verdict: Below Average (less)

But alas! the terrain is a tad too familiar to give his legions of fans their long wished-for catharsis. The plot is simple.

Jai (Pawan), an orphan, is a loyal lieutenant of a don Bhagwan (Jackie Shroff) and when not making a mince meat of his godfather's rivals, he's busy basking in the lap of nature at his own nursery which he runs with his pal Chotu (Ali). Life turns upside down with the arrival of Munna (Adivi Seshu), son of Bhagwan, who covets Jai's childhood friend Jhahnavi (Anjali Lavania).

Meantime, Jai runs into a green peace activist Sandhya (Sarah Jane Dias) and sparks fly between the duo. The plot thickens when a jilted Munna batters Jhanavi to death and is dispatched to hell by an enraged Jai.

The ungrateful act has the don turn his ire against Jai and the rest of the story unfolds along predictable lines. Director Vishnu Vardhan of Billa fame, who has also scripted the film, lives up to his reputation with his stylish frames but the story, a mash up of Pawan's old movie Balu and Sai Kumar-starrer Prasthanam , is at best old wine in a new bottle.

Action sequences by Shyam Kausal, cinematography by Vinod and music by Yuvan Shankar Raja breathe life into the film. The comedy track involving Pawan Kalyan and Brahmanandam, who plays a cop, is insipid.

What's refreshing though is the absence of in-your-face dialogues with which Pawan has come to be identified in recent years. The star, sporting a beard, plays a subdued character who exhibits controlled aggression.

Though welcome, the characterisation veers off track during his comic scenes with Brahmanandam. The rest of the actors deliver decent performances.

The director and editor ought to have used their scissors more liberally as the supposed action thriller drags at a snail's pace. It's surprising and in fact, it is a cardinal sin to have omitted the racy title song from the film.

It's another lost opportunity for Pawan but definitely an improvement over his films since Khushi. One cannot but sympathise with the star who seems to be nostalgic as are his fans about his glorious days.

Panjaa is set in Kolkata, an obvious journey back in time for Pawan. But then, nostalgia doesn't compensate for novelty.

Tweet (less)

The 42-year old will play a real estate agent, while Nolte will be a mentor to Statham's title character in the movie, which is an adaptation of Donald Westlake's 2000 book Flashfire. Describing JLo's role, director Taylor Hackford told the Hollywood Reporter: "She plays a real estate agent who finds that a little larceny may in fact be in the cards for her.

" Patti LuPone, Emma Booth, Michael Chiklis, Wendell Pierce and Clifton Collins Jr will also star in the movie. The filming of the movie will start in New Orleans this week and the flick is set to release in October, next year.

Tweet (less)

Unlike in the original, the monologue plays pretty late in the remake, whereby it establishes Vijay's identity over merely introducing him and with such individuality and elegance that it pays a perfect homage to the original, while at the same time not blatantly imitating it. That is how a remake is supposed to be! Retaining the spirit of the original and having a soul of its own.

This dialogue kinda summarizes the overall aura of the remake. The basic backdrop remains the same.

Kancha Cheena (Sanjay Dutt) is the uncrowned king of Mandwa Island and terminates the rebellious village schoolmaster. The master's son swears revenge and grows up to be Vijay Dinanath Chauhan (Hrithik Roshan) under the wings of Rauf Lala (Rishi Kapoor).

Lala who trades in human and drug trafficking, rules the Mumbai underbelly. Vijay uses Lala to reach Kancha and thereby reclaim his island and self-esteem.

While the primary plotline remains the same as Mukul Anand's classic, director Karan Malhotra along with co-writer Ila Bedi Datta refreshingly revamps the screenplay giving it a new structure and approach. So you never miss the omission of Mithun Chakravarthy's award-winning Krishnan Iyer from the original and welcome the induction of Rishi Kapoor's foul-mouthed and despicable kasai character.

If at all the film falls into predictable zone, it's not because you are familiar with the original but because at the core of it, the story remains a basic revenge drama. The film employs the age-old conflict of a reformist school-teacher versus the conniving zamindar, duping the villagers of their lands.

The remake isn't essentially remodeled to modern times because the film retains its original era thereby reviving the raw essence of the 1990 film. And beyond the epoch, Malhotra also imparts the cinematic treatment of that time period to his film.

So both the villain and hero have stylized entries, their confrontations boast of high-voltage drama and, in the climax, when the bruised and battered protagonist rises to take revenge (in exactly the same manner like his father was killed), he wins instant applause. Also the idea of Vijay concealing his identity from his teenaged sister is so intrinsic of the era (a la Anil Kapoor's Jeevan Ek Sanghursh ).

Where the new Agneepath raises the bar is by casting Sanjay Dutt as the baddie. In his black-attire and bald-look, Dutt has such solid screen-presence that the director makes things difficult for himself with a challenge of how would Hrithik's hero overpower the villain.

Thereby the film employs some extreme action, which is more brutal than boisterous, to justify Kancha's imposing persona and the subsequent seethe in Vijay's revenge. Thankfully, what puts Agneepath a notch above the recent mindless actioners is that it has a basic human connect which it reasonably balances with the extreme action and never blatantly exploits any emotion.

Piyush Mishra's dialogues are impressive with rhetoric punches every now and then. And even when the lines go unrefined for Rishi Kapoor's crude character, it leaves immense impact without crossing the familial domain.

Cinematography by Ravi K Chandran and Kiran Deohans is remarkable. Akiv Ali's editing is accomplished and despite the film having a three-hour runtime, you never lose the narrative for a moment.

The only slacker is the obligatory romance track (Priyanka Chopra) but thankfully even that is kept short. Ajay-Atul's music and esp.

the background score are effective. Abbas Ali Moghul's action is raw and unrestrained.

Beyond his hold on the subject, Karan Malhotra succeeds in extracting inspiring performances from the impressive cast. The usually suave Hrithik Roshan convincingly glides into his coarse character here and has a towering presence.

He completely redefines Vijay Dinanath Chauhan and never in his act do you see even a glimpse of the original. Sanjay Dutt reeks of menace and malice through his sadistic laughs.

At times he overdoes his guffaws but therein lays his strength, which he uses to the hilt. Rishi Kapoor has never looked or played so mean onscreen before.

As the kohl-eyed Rauf Lala, the affable actor reinvents his screen image with a beastly streak to his character. So good is the actor that you never get enough of him.

Arish Bhiwandiwala as the young Vijay Chauhan puts in a confident act. Priyanka Chopra, Zarina and Om Puri are functional.

With Bollywood being obsessed with remakes in recent times, Agneepath is an important lesson on how to pay proper tribute to the original. Despite the original being his home production, Karan Johar attempts playing with fire (treading uncharted territory) with Agneepath and emerges victorious.

Agneepath has the fire for a lustrous entertainer! Verdict: Better than Good (less)

Tamil remake was titled Kavalan and Vijay and Asin Thottumkal starrer received a satisfactory response at the ticket window, and the Hindi version starring Salman Khan and Kareena Kapoor was a hit too. While the earlier three versions were directed by Siddique, Anand wielded the megaphone for the Kannada remake.

In fact, he returned to direction after a long time. The film suffers on many counts.

The artists selected for lead roles are miscast. Actor-director Guru Datt, who plays heroine's father, doesn't fit the bill either.

Jaggesh, who does well in comedies, doesn't look good in his role. Poor production values has also affected the film badly.

Though the Kannada version has followed the Malayalam original, its screen presentation is of low quality. The melodramatic twist in the last 20 minutes is certainly a treat for the viwers who have not seen the original or the other two versions.

Jaggesh has tried his best to salvage the film by his comic timing and peculiar dialogue delivery. But Jaggesh's effort will not overshadow the weak points in the film which includes lack of depthness in the narration.

The film moves at snail's pace and crucial sequences are marred by poor writing. When a politician is attacked by his opponents, safety of his and his family members becomes an issue.

So, Ashokanna hires Jayakrishna as his daughter Ammu's bodyguard. Jayakrishna accompanies her even to her college, which makes things awkward for Ammu.

Ammu pretends to love Jaykrishna and even calls him from a private number. But Ammu's pretence becomes reality and she actually falls for her bodyguard.

Meanwhile Ammu's friend Poorna plays a spoil sport. How Jayakrishna and Ammu are united in the end forms the rest of the story.

Daisy Shah looks artificial and her performance leaves much to be desired. Spoorthi is just okay.

Sadhu Kokila shines in comedy sequences. Ashok's camera work and Vinaya Chandra's music are much better when compared to other technical work in the film.

Body Guard is just an average flick which can be enjoyed only by ardent Jaggesh fans. Tweet (less)

In a country governed by corruption, the common man is still ruled by red-tapism. The maximum that he can do is hurl a shoe at bureaucracy or slap the system.

And that's precisely what the hero of the film does. Beyond that he and his story are as powerless as the common man.

Bharat (Akshaye Khanna) works as a bank cashier who plays Hanuman in the local Ram Leela and aspires to upgrade to the lead role of Ram someday. When he refuses to offer his house for the political campaign of a local candidate (Murli Sharma), the politico's younger brother (Amit Mistry) gets him embroiled in a bureaucratic mess.

He is forced to reclaim from court, a table fan supposedly stolen from his house, for which he has to bribe everyone from the constable, witness, lawyer to even the thief. He ends up paying a fortune for the fan, which, in first place, was never his.

Problems persist when he wishes to get rid of the ill-fated fan. The basic theme and treatment of this political satire is right away reminiscent of Pankaj Kapur's popular TV series ' Office Office ' which highlighted the common man's vulnerability against a corrupt system.

The struggle for retrieving an object, which was neither yours nor desired by you, gives way for an interesting black comedy. Moreover in a society bogged down by bureaucracy to extremities and where anything and everything is possible, writers Mumukshu Mudgal and Rumy Jafry don't need to go that extra mile to make the black comedy believable enough.

Things fall into place in the script almost through the inherent spirit of bribery. The narrative also smartly establishes the irony that when another household object is actually stolen, the cynical Bharat never reports its loss.

But once the 'systematic' exploitation is firmly established in the first half, the audience expects the tables to turn in the second half with hopes that the hero would give his detractors a taste of their own medicine. Sadly what follows is more turmoil for him in his attempts to get rid of the fan that boomerangs back.

Since you identify with Bharat's common man character who is repeatedly at the receiving end, it becomes distressing after a while because you see your defeat in his. Some sequences are genuinely funny but by large the screenplay seems 'fan'atically stretched over a single conflict.

The actual scope for some (courtroom) drama in the climax is hastily edited in a transition song. While the social satire mocks at corruption through its runtime, in the climax, the hero has to resort to corruption to set himself free.

Thereby this anti-graft drama sets a sad example for itself and endorses bribery, when everything else fails. And when you expect the politician's payback time to have actually started when the hero slaps him, you are surprised to see the end credits roll.

Director Rumy Jafry never makes his common-man protagonist larger-than-life, perhaps implying that there is no practical solution to the widespread disease of corruption. Unfortunately his film hangs between neo-realism and escapism.

The hero waving the national flag in end credits can induce artificial patriotism but not curb corruption. The narrative is needlessly corrupted with love song and item number - both of which are absolutely avoidable.

What's more redundant is a tangential track where Bharat's wife (Shriya Saran) doubts him of having an affair with the paying guest (Mughda Godse). The family drama remains unconnected with the core corruption saga and the film could have easily done without a romance track.

The Ram Leela episodes that play in parallel makes for an interesting setting but the director could have used its analogy with the central plot more effectively. Akshaye Khanna, for a pleasant change, doesn't go theatrical despite his staged Ram Leela acts.

He maintains restrain in his performance and convincingly brings out the susceptibility of a common man without overdoing it either. Annu Kapoor, as the corrupt constable, dominates the bureaucratic escapades and is the scene-stealer.

Vijay Raaz is funny in his two-bit role. Satish Kaushik , as the plump papa, plays his part well.

Amit Mistry makes for a good villain. Shriya Saran looks beautiful.

Mughda Godse was absolutely avoidable. Veena Malik's item number is downright vulgar.

Despite a decent premise, this one falls short of being a fan-tastic film. Alas Gali Gali Bore Hai ! Verdict: Average (less)

This zillionth Bollywood spin-off on the second half of Kuch Kuch Hota Hai is no different! Jai (Zayed Khan) and Naina (Dia Mirza) are in their individual mismatched relationships. Until they meet in a common friend's wedding.

Amidst song-dance routine, cupid strikes Jai by the interval point. Naina is uncertain until her doting mother advices ' wahi karo jo tumhara dil kehta hai ' (how pioneering and profound!) Alas she takes a little too long to decide while the viewer has already reached to the conformist conclusion.

Till date, Bollywood has devised only two alternatives for the climax of a film like this. In the feel good format, the other man willingly decides to let go his ladylove for the main hero (like Salman Khan did in Kuch Kuch Hota Hai ).

The other option is when this other man acts difficult (Jimmy Sheirgill in Tanu Weds Manu ). This film belongs to the former feel-good variety.

While the film could have brought some variety with its other assorted couples, the problem with the writing is that all the supporting tracks are half-baked. Jai's friend (Cryus Sahukar) falls for a 'Sheila' (Tisca Chopra) who isn't exactly 'jawaan'.

While this odd-aged couple has its moments of charm and comedy, their bonding could certainly have been explored in a better way. The girl from Dairy Milk ad (Umang Jain) has graduated to having ice-creams here after her multiple break-offs, but her sweet revenge spree was far from funny.

The film does have a lighthearted mood throughout but one does feel that its sense of humour, though not bad, could have been more fine-tuned and sharp. While this brand of comedy is anytime better than a senseless slapstick, there is a feeling that the film could have been funnier.

At the same time while the director tries to keep things subtle and avoid melodrama, some situations lack the basic intensity that the drama demands. Like Jai's breakup with his first girlfriend (Pallavi Sharda) comes across so casually that it seems as if nothing has happened.

The pacing is slow and the length is a little too long for a predictable film. Zayed Khan and Dia Mirza share good chemistry and are decent in their acts.

Dia has a natural charm. Cyrus Sahukar underplays his character and is the butt of most jokes.

Tisca Chopra looks delightful despite playing a (slightly) elderly female. Umang Jain is cute but has a short-lived character.

Vaibhav Talwar plays in a limited range but pulls off his part. Satyadeep Mishra is good.

Pallavi Sharda and Auritra Ghosh get no scope. From all the special appearances, Boman Irani is hilarious and leaves more impact that Shah Rukh Khan who doesn't do much beyond playing himself and endorsing furniture brand.

Director Sahil Singha doesn't show any innovation in the storytelling of his debut venture but he still has the command to bring a smile on your face, thanks to the breezy romance and the film's optimistic outlook. While being conventional cinema, it isn't essentially exasperatingly cliched.

Neither utterly lovely nor breakthrough! Love Breakups Zindagi is that variety of predictable cinema that is passable (less)

But unlike "Only Vishnuvardhana" which was released a week earlier, this film does not use the name of the iconic actor extensively and show the clips of his many films. But a photograph of Abhijit and Vishnuvardhan is displayed with a note that the film has been dedicated to the late actor.

The film has a revenge-based story which is full of commercial elements like action and thrills. A little bit of comedy is also thrown in with actor Bullet Prakash trying to pull a few comedy punches here and there.

But the story is too predictable to sustain any interest among the audience. Even the technical value of the film is below the average standards that are exhibited in many contemporary Kannada films.

The camera work is pathetic but the graphics work is slightly better. Krupakar has done just average work in his music compositions.

The first half is badly narrated while the second half is little interesting. But overall, the film suffers from low quality of production and a haphazard narration.

Vishnu is a do-gooder who comes to his native village to help one of his friends who is trying to marry his lover -- the daughter of a village ruffian who torments the villagers. When Vishnu finds that most of the villagers treat him specially and give a lot of respect, he goes deep into the reasons for such reverence.

He understands it is all because of his father Narasimha who tried to protect the villagers and do good things for the benefit of the village. His attempts to help out the villagers for constructing a lake are not to the liking of his relatives who kill him.

Vishnu avenges the death of his father by killing his relatives responsible for the murder. Abhijit's attempt to have a new look in both the roles has not yielded good results.

His hair styling is atrocious. However, he has excelled in action sequences.

The film's heroine Catherine is only there for her glamour quotient and nothing else. The veteran actors, including Ashish Vidyarthi and Sharath Lohitashwa who play the villain's roles, just shout and scream rather than showing their talents.

Tweet (less)

Anant Mahadevan's well-intentioned film Staying Alive falls in that category. The story is about two men who suffer a heart attack and share the hospital room.

Aditya (Ananth Mahadevan) is a newspaper editor who has already survived two strokes in the past and has somewhat adapted to the crisis. Shaukat Ali (Saurabh Shukla), an underworld kingpin who has often witnessed death closely, gets paranoid with his first heart-attack.

The story is about their interactions and exchange of ideas in the ICU room that changes Ali's perspective towards life. The film is more or less a single-setting drama largely happening in the hospital room and intermittently cutting into flashbacks.

But what brings more monotony is Sujit Sen's one-dimensional screenplay, with the verbose drama between the two patients not leading to anywhere. The wordplay is mostly about the art of living or the smaller joys of life that never have a bigger meaning.

Outside the hospital room, their wives try to console each other almost initiating a soap-opera of sorts. The characters are directly introduced at the hospital and aren't established enough that you would feel for them.

Like Shaukat Ali's criminal activities, in the first place, never dawn on you that you would want him to mend ways in life. The film attempts to be a simple drama without any twists or turns making it more predictable fare.

But at the heart of it, the gist of the story is the conversational chemistry between the two characters that leads to the mobster's change of heart by the climax. Unfortunately this expected rapport between the two never registers, making the core conflict of the film hollow.

The idea of inducing emotions in the climax through humane conduct with an impassive coma-patient has been already employed to better effect in Rajkumar Hirani's Munnabhai MBBS . Also a melodramatic end to the story was pretty-much avoidable.

The film works, to an extent, only because of Saurabh Shukla, who largely tries to make up for the lack of his character-development and shallowness in script with his 'lively' act of the paranoid patient. Ananth Mahadevan is too idealistic in his act.

This is amongst Chandan Roy Sanyal's early acts. The actor seems raw and has an Imtiaz Ali hangover in his hairstyle.

Navni Parihar and Sunita fill in as the soapy female leads. Alas, Staying Alive is low on life! Verdict: Average (less)

Sadly, in the subsequent decade, all he served in the name of stress-free slapsticks is noise and commotion. While we aren't demanding that the filmmaker upgrade with times, all we expect is that the one-time king of comedy merely maintain his original brand of humour.

Is that asking for too much? Rascals is what one can call a 'vacation' filmmaking stint where everyone works on the film as if they were on a 'holiday' and the audience is expected to 'leave' their senses behind. The actors make least efforts to add conviction to their performances and the patchy writing just allows them to play as they please.

Invariably the director tries to camouflage the shallowness in the story by adding depth only in the decibel levels of the dialogue delivery. So you have conmen Chetan (Sanjay Dutt) and Bhagat (Ajay Devgn) in one-upmanship game to win the girl (Kangana Ranaut) loaded with assets (both financial and physical).

It's never clear what they love more - her body or her bank-balance. And their lecherous rivalry only seems to be about who would get to hug the cleavage-popping girl more number of times.

One-upmanship has been a popular plot for several comedies since the times of Amitabh Bachchan - Shashi Kapoor's Do Aur Do Paanch (1980). Even David Dhawan had smartly handled the concept in his earlier comedies like Govinda-Anil Kapoor's Deewana Mastana (1997) and Akshay-Salman's Mujhse Shaadi Karogi (2004).

Unfortunately it doesn't quite work this time, primarily because Kangana Ranaut doesn't share any chemistry with either men and so their persistent pursuit to get the girl falls flat. Also thanks to the dull camaraderie, the viewer never really bothers which hero would actually win the heroine in the end.

Thereby the small surprise in the climax (no, there isn't a cameo by a third hero) also doesn't register much. The storytelling in the animated title credits is more appealing than the conventional narrative structure.

While one has already left logic behind, the problem is that Yunus Sejawal's screenplay is inconsistent, convenient and uneventful. It lacks the imagination or wit for some real exciting clash between the male leads.

One can easily see through most of the worn-out gags. Sanjay Chhel's synchronized rhyming dialogues are occasionally funny but seem forced otherwise.

You laugh more on the corniness of the scenes than the comedy per se. The tone of humour is consistently loud and commotional.

Expectedly Ajay Devgn keeps screaming most of the time and hams outrageously. Sanjay Dutt is better in comparison, which isn't saying much.

He gets the funnier lines, gags and scenes. Kangana Ranaut is ill at ease in comedy.

She struggles to hold her own and emerges as a bimbo in her act. Lisa Haydon is merely employed to look hot and she does a fair job at it.

Hiten Paintel is used as an add-on and his presence in the film is immaterial. Satish Kaushik attempts to induce few laughs with his gibberish brand comedy.

Bharti Achrekar gets no scope. Chunky Pandey overacts.

Arjun Rampal has pretty much nothing to do. Rascals ends up being a silly and stupid comedy! (less)

However, the strange thing was that they also asked us to mute the word China. We tried to reason it out with them but to no avail.

Surprisingly, they have passed the word Pakistan but not China." Sachin Joshi, the lead actor felt it was a biased decision.

"We have seen other films, which have crude scenes get an U/A certificate. Our film does not hurt any religious sentiments, neither does it have a controversial scene and it got an A certificate.

" When contacted, J.P.

Singh, regional officer of censor board said, "We have followed the guidelines. The international relations should not be spoiled due to one movie.

Once someone sees the film, they will unerstand why we asked for those changes." (less)

Aarakshaka is a curiosity inducive film with intelligently written sequences and Vasu's script impresses despite the fact that as a director he has not shown such consistency. Though the film is heavily inspired by Hollywood hit Shutter Island , Vasu has given it a desi touch by adding comedy, songs, fights and emotions into the script.

Aarakshaka wins because the film keeps the audiences engaged. There is plenty of juggling between emotions and thrills in the script.

Some interesting twists, mind boggling thrills and suspense will keep the audience on the edge of their seats. The last 20 minutes is the best narrated part in the entire film.

Certainly Vasu has excelled in writing a totally out of the box script for the Kannada cinema. But Vasu failed to extract the best from the composer also, some comedy sequences do not gel with the film, and the first half drags.

The story is about Arun Kumar, a police officer, who has to find Stephen Raj, a witness to three murders. Arun suspects that Raj is hiding in a mental asylum as a fake patient and the doctors in the hospital are shielding him.

The hospital dean asks doctor Maya to assist Arun in solving the mystery of Stephen Raj. Whenever Arun tries to investigate Stephen Raj's past, he reaches a dead end.

Meanwhile, he reveals his past to Maya and says Stephen Raj is responsible for his missing wife. During the course of his investigation, Arun spots his look alike in the hospital and wants to find out the real identity of his look alike.

The entire secret behind Aun's real identity is revealed in the climax as well as the mystery behind the three murders. Upendra delivers a strong performance in both the roles he has played.

His body language and mannerism are perfect. His dialogue delivery is another high point.

Raagini is good and Sada is also impressive. Shahaji Shinde overacts, but Aadi Lokesh is impressesive.

Seetha and Rajesh have played their respective roles aptly. Sharan's comedy irritates, but he has been able to raise a few laughs in some sequences.

P.K.

H. Doss' camera work is exceptionally good.

His superb craft can be seen by the way he has shot some visually spectacular outdoor scenes in Kerala. Music director Guru Kiran is inconsistent, but two songs - Kalli kalli and Anna Hazaare - are well composed and picturised.

Editing work of Suresh Urs is top class. Aarakshaka is an impressive film and can be watched despite flaws.

Tweet (less)

Muraliraman Music: Aruldev Cinematography: Gopi Amarnath Potta Potti is all about two teams playing a cricket match to decide upon a suitable bridegroom for a girl, who is the daughter of a big landlord in a village. It might remind you of films like Aamir Khan's Lagaan or Venkat Prabhu's Chennai 600 028 , but the similarity starts and ends with cricket.

Debutant director Yuvaraj has no pretensions about what he wants. He makes it pretty clear and obvious that he wants to present a comedy film making use of the most popular game in India - cricket.

The story kicks off in a picturesque village. Two locals, Kodaivaanan (R.

Sivam) and Kolaivaanan (Umar) have a girl, Ranjitham (newcomer Harini to fight for. Kolaivaanan is violent and serious while Kodaivaanan is a happy-go-lucky kind of a guy.

He has Avatharam ('Avatar' Ganesh) as his right hand. Kodaivaanan's group kidnaps former cricketer Sadagopan Ramesh (playing himself) to coach them.

On the other hand, Harichandran (Mayilsamy), a fake coach, joins Kolaivaanan's group. Later, they get professional support with the help of some businessman eyeing to get advantage from Kolaivaanan after the match.

Ranjitham doesn't like either of the guys and instead falls for the cricketer who also likes the girl. Watch the movie to find out the outcome of the match and the affair between Sadagopan and Ranjitham.

The task of making people who have never touched a cricket bat play has been shown in a funny manner. Yuvarj has managed to present the movie with ample dose of humour.

He has been effectively complemented by Avatar Ganesh, S. Sivam, and Mayilsamy in making the film entertaining.

The first half is racy while the second half is relatively slow. The build-up for the match is neither fun nor engaging.

Strangely, Ranjitham never expresses her disinterest towards the two contenders. Everything has been handled in a casual manner.

Sivam and Umar have played their parts well but it's Avatar Ganesh who's the pick of the lot. He is the one who makes the proceedings interesting.

Harini looks good and does what the director has told her to do. Period.

Sadagopan's appearance throughout the movie doesn't strengthen the script. He's a misfit in comical fare.

Mayilsamy has done his job neatly. The cinematography by Gopi Amarnath is an asset while the music by Aruldev is just about okay.

Potta Potti doesn't have the excitement of a movie based on sports but it doesn't disappoint as a fun-filled movie. Watch it for the innocence with which the villagers approach the game and some hilarious moments presented by the characters of Kodaivaanan and Avatharam.

Tweet (less)

Ruth eventually finds herself living in a dilapidated apartment with a drug dealer boyfriend who lives off her. She makes a living by working in a shady massage parlour, offering ‘ happy endings ’ to sleazy old men.

Her every effort towards finding her father, whom she vaguely remembers, culminates in discovering darkest and terrible secrets. Still from That Girl In Yellow Boots An alien to the city, Ruth’s stay here is fraught with unending problems and misery.

The story looks promising in the beginning, but slowly loses its essence as the movie unfolds. It loses all and any sense of reality somewhere in the middle, with Ruth struggling to make ends meet at one place and dishing out thousands of rupees to find her father and protect her lover at the same time.

The movie is not very believable in this regard. Also the characters in the movie are played with a certain amount of intensity but do not develop as the story progresses.

The title of the film is quite fun. The bright yellow boots stand out in a mundane environment just as Ruth stands out in the city of Mumbai putting across the whole concept of being out of place.

Veteran actor, Nasseerudin Shah has outdone himself once again. He’s a father figure to Ruth who visits her at the parlour for treatment to a painful leg ailment.

Chittiapa (Gulshan Devaiah), a gangster who threatens Ruth when her boyfriend (Prashant Prakash) runs away with his money, and Maya (Puja Swarup), the receptionist at Ruth’s parlour provide comic relief to the otherwise heavy script. Anurag Kashyup’s cinematography is admirable.

Most of the scenes are shot in natural light and on the city’s roads. As for the background score, composer Naren Chandavarkar has made sure it supports and adds life to the script.

The film rather ends on an abrupt note and the climax isn’t a surprise but it is disturbing. Watch only if you’re in the mood for something not run-of-the-mill.

Rating: 2.5 /5 (less)

Aarakshaka is a curiosity inducive film with intelligently written sequences and Vasu's script impresses despite the fact that as a director he has not shown such consistency. Though the film is heavily inspired by Hollywood hit Shutter Island , Vasu has given it a desi touch by adding comedy, songs, fights and emotions into the script.

Aarakshaka wins because the film keeps the audiences engaged. There is plenty of juggling between emotions and thrills in the script.

Some interesting twists, mind boggling thrills and suspense will keep the audience on the edge of their seats. The last 20 minutes is the best narrated part in the entire film.

Certainly Vasu has excelled in writing a totally out of the box script for the Kannada cinema. But Vasu failed to extract the best from the composer also, some comedy sequences do not gel with the film, and the first half drags.

The story is about Arun Kumar, a police officer, who has to find Stephen Raj, a witness to three murders. Arun suspects that Raj is hiding in a mental asylum as a fake patient and the doctors in the hospital are shielding him.

The hospital dean asks doctor Maya to assist Arun in solving the mystery of Stephen Raj. Whenever Arun tries to investigate Stephen Raj's past, he reaches a dead end.

Meanwhile, he reveals his past to Maya and says Stephen Raj is responsible for his missing wife. During the course of his investigation, Arun spots his look alike in the hospital and wants to find out the real identity of his look alike.

The entire secret behind Aun's real identity is revealed in the climax as well as the mystery behind the three murders. Upendra delivers a strong performance in both the roles he has played.

His body language and mannerism are perfect. His dialogue delivery is another high point.

Raagini is good and Sada is also impressive. Shahaji Shinde overacts, but Aadi Lokesh is impressesive.

Seetha and Rajesh have played their respective roles aptly. Sharan's comedy irritates, but he has been able to raise a few laughs in some sequences.

P.K.

H. Doss' camera work is exceptionally good.

His superb craft can be seen by the way he has shot some visually spectacular outdoor scenes in Kerala. Music director Guru Kiran is inconsistent, but two songs - Kalli kalli and Anna Hazaare - are well composed and picturised.

Editing work of Suresh Urs is top class. Aarakshaka is an impressive film and can be watched despite flaws.

Tweet (less)

But the Kannada remake is certainly not well-crafted with its poor production values and very ordinary narration killing the soul of the movie. The essence of the movie which is reflected in the relationship between a very good son and his strict and enraged father fails to penetrate deep in the minds of the viewers mainly because director Umakanth's narration lacks seriousness.

Despite very good performances by Diganth and Avinash, Puthra does not rise up to the standards of the original. The two actresses have competed with each other in delivering drab expressions and even the senior technicians have worked without any imagination.

Despite being good to his family members and others, Krishna is much misunderstood by his short-tempered father Narasimha who runs a grocery shop. Despite being cowed down by his father, Krishna remains obedient and takes on all the insults heaped by him with composure.

In his college, Krishna's classmate Madhu loves him intensely. He likes his relative Thulasi but the two families have a long history of misunderstanding which separates them.

He tries to unite the two families which further enrages Narasimha. Krishna and Thulasi leave their homes and lead a separate life.

How Krishna respects his father even after he acquires good reputation in society forms the climax of the film. Diganth surprises with his convincing emotional performance.

He tries to save the film by understanding the nuances of the complex role. Veteran Avinash has excelled in the role of a tough father.

The two heroines of the film fail to make an impact. Veteran actor Tennis Krishna has done a good job while Sundar Raj fills in perfectly for his role.

Naveen Suvarna's camera work is ordinary while Raja Ramesh's music does not raise above ordinary levels. Puthra is an ordinary film despite a good story and neat performances from the two lead male actors.

Tweet (less)

And though it has its share of inconsistencies, the desi duo is entertaining enough in the larger picture. In a recession-hit UK, it doesn't take too long for the jobless duo of Jerry (Akshay Kumar) and Nick (John Abraham) to rename themselves as Rocco and Hunter and turn towards the morally-low but highly-paying profession of male escorts.

They strip at hen parties though never cross the preset (Bollywood hero) limits of sleeping around. Things go wrong when Nick's girlfriend Radhika (Deepika Padukone) discovers of their clandestine career.

Jerry and Nick fall apart and the narrative divides into their individual episodes with Sajid Khan's Heyy Babyy being a strong influence for both tracks. Nick tries every trick in the trade to seek forgiveness from Radhika.

Anupam Kher, as her dad, reprises Boman Irani's part from Heyy Babyy supporting the repentant boyfriend. On the other hand, the flippant Jerry turns serious in life to win the custody of his orphan nephew.

For that he walks that extra mile - to the university, bringing back memories of Farah Khan's Main Hoon Na also. Rohit Dhawan's storytelling is simple and swift and the comedy never takes the no-brainer route with adequate conviction in the writing.

He smoothly establishes the comic chemistry between Akshay and John and never lets anyone overshadow the other, thanks to their reasonably written roles. Renuka Kunzru's dialogues, ranging from the witty to the wacky variety, are a major highlight and pack the requisite comic punches with some much-needed freshness over the customary synchronized lines in most recent comedies.

Certainly Desi Boyz isn't unblemished and has its set of flaws and formula. The basic conflict of Akshay Kumar going back to college to acquire a clean-chit image that could help him legally win back his nephew sounds too silly.

If that was not enough, he graduates in less than half a year, thanks to private tuitions by his super-hot teacher (Chitrangda Singh) who gives economics lessons through salsa and striptease sessions. Then the film treads in absolute unnecessary territory, taking its desi title a little too seriously, giving sermons on the intelligence of Indians amidst firangs who demean our country.

Sadly the Namastey London gimmick seems completely out of place in this film. After an interesting graph to the narrative, the film is marred by a weak end, which lacks the high point that a climax demands.

A courtroom drama, which drastically changes the scene tone from being comedy to contemplative, isn't a befitting culmination for the otherwise engaging flick. Nevertheless, on second thoughts, you find it as a much better end as compared to the commotional climax that most slapsticks resort to in present times.

And like its climax, the film underplays in its humour and romance. The decibel levels don't go deafening in an attempt to make you laugh and you prefer the half-baked Akshay-Chitrangda track rather than the plot straying into an extended love story.

Thankfully the film balances the Desi Boyz' acts and smartly summarizes their striptease stunts in a couple of songs. The strip-shows never go crass and are classily captured with the requisite gloss and glamour.

Akshay and John's sculpted bodies save the show and the average audience is never grossed out. With striking cinematography, crisp editing and vibrant costume design, the film's a technically superior product.

Pritam's music is catchy and peps up the mood of the film. Akshay Kumar is in good form and after long a film does justice to his impeccable comic timing.

He often steals the scene even where his presence is not primary. John Abraham is cool, convincing and glides effortlessly through his part.

Their casual chemistry makes the film work big time. Deepika Padukone is charming and makes her presence felt in the male-dominated flick.

Chitrangda Singh might not have as much extensive role but brings a refreshing appeal and immense screen presence to her character. Anupam Kher is funny.

Omi Vaidya is hilarious in his short role. Sanjay Dutt, in a cameo, perhaps gets the best lines in the film.

So make some way for the Desi Boyz . And be sure, they won't disappoint you! Verdict: Good (less)

"What's happening is: Get off this tour, and then my [holiday] album's coming out, so I have to go back out and promote that album and then after that it's almost time for my next album, so then everything starts over again. Hopefully next summer I can start on a movie or something," said the Baby hitmaker.

Bieber has tried his hand at acting after he starred on crime drama TV series CSI: Crime Scene Investigation' last year and he has since admitted that he's caught the acting bug. "I definitely want to do more acting, and further my career in that area, that's something I would love to do," he said.

Tweet (less)

And like the title, the viewer is openly informed about Ricky Bahl's job profile though people around him take a while to figure it out. So Ricky (Ranveer Singh) is Sunny, Dev, Iqbal for different girls who he cons in individual instances.

Charm or cleverness, he uses whatever works best to his advantage to swindle the unsuspecting target. But then three of his female victims - Raina (Dipannita Sharma), Dimpy (Parineeti Chopra) and Saira (Aditi Sharma) team up to get even with him.

They hire the services of a smart salesgirl Ishika (Anushka Sharma) who they use as a bait to trap the conman. Ishika poses as daughter of a NRI hotelier who's on a business visit to Goa to invest in property.

The idea is to lure him into a business partnership and rip off his riches for revenge. But then cupid strikes and everything goes for a toss.

The film starts off impressively and comes straight to the point without wandering aimlessly. At times it seems too convenient for the victims to part off with their money at the drop of a hat.

And consequently it seems even more convenient for a certified conman like Ricky to fall for the trap set by the girl gang. However, the con-games are crisp and executed with such swiftness that you never get time to notice any loose ends.

Since we are conversant with the con artist from start, any major suspense element in the plot is ruled out. Structurally the film reminds of the Hollywood flick John Tucker Must Die with it's plotline of three girls trying to get even with a guy by setting him up with another girl.

What saves it from getting into the chick-flick mode is that the girls are not merely betrayed in love but also in business and their revenge mechanism involves smarter cons over momentary cheap-thrills. That takes Devika Bhagat's screenplay a notch higher (though the confessional climax is evocative of her earlier work in Bachna Ae Haseeno where Ranbir Kapoor seeks forgiveness from three girls).

Also the Ranveer-Anushka smooching chemistry seems directly derived from their last flick Band Baaja Baaraat . The major hiccup in this otherwise engaging film is that it falls prey of the typical trappings of Bollywood.

As romance takes over the con-games, the smart-n-saucy film is substituted by a tepid tale where the conman wants to come clean and change his ways for that one girl in life. That makes for a lame climax and a conventional end.

The graph of the narrative drops somewhere in the second half and plunges even further as one realizes mixing con with cupid might not be the best of ideas. Thankfully the pacing is perfect and the film never seems stretched.

Irrespective of its minor blemishes, director Maneesh Sharma succeeds in striking a constant connect with the audience and also extracts decent performances from the entire cast. Ranveer Singh glides into his multiple con-artist characters effortlessly and radiates such charm that you don't blame the ladies while falling for him.

Anushka Sharma comes across as affable but a standard smile pasted on her face sometimes seems overdone. Nevertheless she is alluring in her act and appearance.

Thankfully the other three ladies never get overshadowed. Dipannita Sharma is amazingly confident.

Aditi Sharma is endearing. Debutante Parineeti Chopra as the blabbermouth gets the best lines and never overdoes her Punjabi kudi part.

While Ladies vs Ricky Bahl doesn't exceed expectations (like Band Baaja Baaraat ), it doesn't con you in the name of entertainment either. Verdict: Good (less)

To divert him from duty, Divya starts flirting with Lovely on phone posing as an anonymous caller. Until she expectedly falls in love with him! This love story clearly brings back memories of the Ghajini romance track with merely a gender-reversal.

Like Aamir Khan who never discloses his true identity to Asin in Ghajini , even Kareena Kapoor refrains from revealing to Salman that she's her secret caller. Where does Kuch Kuch Hota Hai come into picture, you ask? Well, while there isn't any love-triangle as such, there's an ailing mother on deathbed who writes personalized notes to her son, unveiling the entire narrative in flashback mode.

And like the daughter in K2H2 , the son of Bodyguard finds a substitute for mother through his biological mom's diary. What still works in the film's favour is that, unlike most overblown Salman Khan capers, Bodyguard doesn't go slapstick in humour, loud in attitude or crass in conduct.

Salman continues to be a glorified hero who does the customary topless act in the climax but, in the character of Lovely Singh, he is refreshingly restrained and comes across as down-to-earth guy (esp. after his regular recent ostentatious antics).

The story isn't much innovative but at least it stays true to its theme. Regardless of the title, theme or Salman's biceps, Bodyguard is more of a love story than an action film.

It remains lighthearted for its major runtime until when the villains suddenly surface in the climax. Unlike the Tamil or Malayalam versions, there isn't much buildup or back-story about the baddies in the Hindi Bodyguard and Salman makes mandatory mincemeat of them in a single action sequence.

Popular South filmmaker Siddique , who already directed the Malayalam and Tamil versions, seems at ease while making the film for the third time. He works more for a surprise element in the climax but it isn't something that you can't see coming.

And though the climax is predictably cliched, he doesn't leave much scope for melodrama. The pacing is quick, music is peppy, action is stylized and editing is crisp.

Karisma Kapoor's dubbing for Kareena's telephonic conversations seems seamless. Salman Khan is cool and convincing in the title role.

His subdued act and charming innocence wins your heart. Kareena Kapoor is likeable.

Hazel Keech as Kareena's friend is alluring. Rajat Rawail, as the bloated comedian, makes you laugh with his funny T-shirt captions and gibberish lines.

The graceful actress of yesteryear, Vidya Sinha, is criminally wasted. The villains from Aditya Pancholi to Mahesh Manjrekar have nothing much to do either.

Bodyguard doesn't catch you off guard. But it's a decent entertainer nonetheless (less)

And if IIT is unaware of such exploits, it needs to take stringent action against the opportunists. With Love Delhi is essentially a spin-off on Naseeruddin Shah starrer ' A Wednesday ' where an anonymous abductor (Tom Alter) holds as hostage a prolific real-estate developer (Kiran Kumar) without any monetary aspirations.

All he expects from the people he is negotiating with is to decode some cryptic clues which will lead them to an array of historical monuments across Delhi. For the developer's daughter (Pariva Praniti) history seems to be a closed chapter.

So she summons her historian friend..

. rather prospective boyfriend (Ashish Lal) who cracks each clue as if he was born for it.

The daughter meanwhile seems seldom stressed in the state of affairs and remains immaculately decked-up throughout, showing more lip-gloss than anxiety on her face. And the guy never misses any opportunity to hug her on the pretext of consoling.

After Wikipedia lecture on every tombstone in the capital city, one presumes that the film would be an implied (and extended) public service message on the restoration and relevance of heritage structures in present times. While that would have still made some sort of sense with the endless 22-charade in the film, the central idea of the film is as disconnected with history or heritage as filmmaking is from the Indian Institute of Technology.

The abductor reveals that his only intent was to avenge some ancestral rivalry with the hostage. If that was the case, what was the elaborate historical tour across Delhi all about? The running around the bush happens for a whole two months in the film.

In fact, the makers themselves seem so uninterested after a point that several monuments are rushed off merely in montages. To be honest, the film had an interesting (connect-the-dots) premise but the potential remains untapped thanks to its patchy writing and amateurish direction, not to mention its pathetic performances.

The male lead Ashish Lal, who also triples up as the producer and writer, is entirely focused on showing-off his heroism and know-how and, in process, solves the puzzles in such a way that only he understands the question and also the answer to it. It would have certainly made more sense to also involve the audience in unraveling the encrypted hints.

It is important to mention here that the film has an extremely pretentious demeanour. It is made as an English language film but seems desperately wannabe like a desi-turned mod faking a firang accent, just to come across as a cool dude.

First of all, the choice of language seems sham in the given milieu and secondly the actors hopelessly struggle to deliver lines in English. Especially irritating is Ashish Lal in his desi drawl and conceited act.

Same holds for Pariva Praniti who shows more makeup than emotion. Seema Biswas is consistently bad in her two-line English or two-scene act.

Be grateful to small mercies that there is Tom Alter, the epitome of English in Hindi films. Kiran Kumar has pretty less to do as the captive though the audience gets the feeling of being a detainee.

The makers perhaps believe they have a trump card in store in the climax but the supposed suspense is lame and pretty-much predictable. What's more ludicrous is the basis on which the hostage forgives his kidnapper.

Also the makers seem to be under an impression that they are at their creative best in the opening and end credits but it's only laughable. What is more surprising is that the heroine in the end-credit song changes to some random face!!! With Love Delhi is a 'historic' lesson on how not to project a seemingly substandard college-project film as a feature film - forget an intelligent thriller! Verdict: Poor (less)

Tamil remake was titled Kavalan and Vijay and Asin Thottumkal starrer received a satisfactory response at the ticket window, and the Hindi version starring Salman Khan and Kareena Kapoor was a hit too. While the earlier three versions were directed by Siddique, Anand wielded the megaphone for the Kannada remake.

In fact, he returned to direction after a long time. The film suffers on many counts.

The artists selected for lead roles are miscast. Actor-director Guru Datt, who plays heroine's father, doesn't fit the bill either.

Jaggesh, who does well in comedies, doesn't look good in his role. Poor production values has also affected the film badly.

Though the Kannada version has followed the Malayalam original, its screen presentation is of low quality. The melodramatic twist in the last 20 minutes is certainly a treat for the viwers who have not seen the original or the other two versions.

Jaggesh has tried his best to salvage the film by his comic timing and peculiar dialogue delivery. But Jaggesh's effort will not overshadow the weak points in the film which includes lack of depthness in the narration.

The film moves at snail's pace and crucial sequences are marred by poor writing. When a politician is attacked by his opponents, safety of his and his family members becomes an issue.

So, Ashokanna hires Jayakrishna as his daughter Ammu's bodyguard. Jayakrishna accompanies her even to her college, which makes things awkward for Ammu.

Ammu pretends to love Jaykrishna and even calls him from a private number. But Ammu's pretence becomes reality and she actually falls for her bodyguard.

Meanwhile Ammu's friend Poorna plays a spoil sport. How Jayakrishna and Ammu are united in the end forms the rest of the story.

Daisy Shah looks artificial and her performance leaves much to be desired. Spoorthi is just okay.

Sadhu Kokila shines in comedy sequences. Ashok's camera work and Vinaya Chandra's music are much better when compared to other technical work in the film.

Body Guard is just an average flick which can be enjoyed only by ardent Jaggesh fans. Tweet (less)

If we go by this theory, most audiences of this film will walk out of the hall as rockstars, since the movie will largely leave them heartbroken. But for heartbreak, it is imperative to fall in love first and that's exactly what director Imtiaz Ali does.

He starts off the film on a promising note and just when you fall in love with the amazing first half, the narrative nosedives with a stagnant second half. So you have the naive Janardhan Jakhar (Ranbir Kapoor) who aspires to be a rockstar like Jim Morrison .

His yearning for heartbreak gets him close to Heer (Nargis Fakhri), as they bond over soft-porn cinema and country liquor. Soon after, the girl is married off to some NRI, the boy is thrown out of his house, he seeks solace in a dargah and next you know he's a singing sensation rechristened as Jordan.

A foreign tour reunites him with Heer and their passive passion rekindles until Jordan is obsessed with her. What follows is another tribute to Devdas or rather Dev.

D with the neurotic, lovelorn protagonist unable to get over his mixed emotions and confused definition of love. But that's not all as the plot meanders to culminate into an undesired arena of Erich Segal's Love Story .

Imtiaz Ali is known for his old-wine-in-new-bottle brand of cinema. Rockstar is very much engaging as far as it is in that familiar territory, where the director adds a refreshing touch to the regular romance drama.

The casual chemistry that he induces between the lead pair through their wacky and eventful escapades has its moments of charm. The passion-play between them when they reunite after years is spontaneous, smoldering and yet tastefully achieved.

Their reunion is also faintly reminiscent of the Jab We Met reunion, where the character-conduct is reversed with the burbling boy now trying to make the gloomy girl's life more exciting. And like Love Aaj Kal , Imtiaz Ali kick-starts the film with a montage song highlighting select significant sequences from the entire film.

But beyond that when the director ventures into uncharted zone, the narrative loses track. While one can still overlook the Dev.

D influenced intoxicating attitude of the proceedings (which you can somehow attribute to the convoluted rockstar protagonist), the subsequent terminal illness conflict takes the film towards an unwelcome and undefined end. After an interesting graph to the narrative in the first half, the story almost turns stationary in the second half.

The screenplay seems stretched and gets monotonous with repetitive media-bashing scenes and flashback shots of what has been already served to you. Another problem with the plot is that it is neither a standalone story about the rise-of-an-underdog who becomes the biggest rockstar nor is it merely a love story with a rockstar backdrop.

The director somewhere attempts to correlate the rockstar's rise with his romance but isn't able to achieve that impeccably. In fact the original one-liner plot with which the movie starts (a painful heartbreak gets out the real artist inside you) goes for a complete toss by the end.

One can never clearly perceive when Jordan's heart is broken in the assorted scheme of events and that's where the film loses objectivity. The storytelling pattern of the film is needlessly intricate for a simple romance-drama genre.

While it is very much linear, the frequent use of multiple montages can have you confused. Initially the montages aid brisk storytelling but subsequently there are so much of them that it gets puzzling.

Editing the film would surely have been a difficult task. Anil Mehta's cinematography is brilliant as he captures the beauty of Kashmir, Italy and Delhi with panache.

AR Rahman's wide range of music has numbers which are instantly infectious ( Sadda Haq ) and others that take time to grow on you. If Rockstar keeps you engaged even after you have given up on the story by the end, it is only because of Ranbir Kapoor.

From his innocence in the opening reels to his arrogance in the climax, Ranbir breathes life into Jordan and keeps you riveted. Whether he adlibs his songs, gives a dance-tribute to Shammi Kapoor or dictates the concert crowd, Ranbir gives cent percent to his character.

How much ever you try to ignore, but Nargis Fakhri fervently reminds of Katrina Kaif through her looks, acting, lip movements (and seemingly also has the same voice dubbing artist). Nevertheless she is likeable and shares good chemistry with Ranbir.

Kumud Mishra as Jordan's advisor-turned-manager is impressive. Aditi Rao Hydari is confident but marred by a short-lived character.

Piyush Mishra makes for an animated-yet-interesting negative lead. And it's pleasing to see Shammi Kapoor is his last decent cameo.

Rockstar rocks you but only partially thanks to the star called Ranbir Kapoor. Verdict: Above Average (less)

But the sequel, more or less, turns out to be a remake or rather rerun of the original. So in this sequel to their 1978 film Ankhiyon Ke Jharoke Se , almost 80% of the screen-time is an exact replay of the original film.

So it doesn't matter whether you have watched the original film since you get to see most of it in the sequel. But that's precisely why the sequel doesn't work for you either, because with the repeat telecast of the original, it sets a direct contrast and thereby highlights the mediocrity of the sequel.

After losing the love of his life Lily (Ranjeeta) to cancer in the prequel, it is but obvious for the affluent Arun Prakash Mathur (Sachin) to start a cancer hospital in her name. He is a philanthropist and unable to forget Lily, has remained single so far.

What follows is the most convenient way to initiate a sequel. A lookalike of Lily is introduced in the form of novelist Asha (Ranjeeta).

And coincidentally Asha is commissioned to pen a biography on Arun. Arun agrees and narrates his personal account through liberal flashback footages from the original film.

Predictably they fall in love by the end. While Ankhiyon Ke Jharoke Se was based on Eric Segal's popular novel Love Story (which was also made into a Hollywood film in 1970), the sequel Jaana Pehchana is a mundane plot of falling for the lookalike of your lost love, witnessed zillion times in Bollywood from Kasme Vaade, Agar Tum Na Hote to Kaho Na Pyaar Hai .

The sequel's basic brainchild of falling in love with the facsimile, in a way, stresses on the film's shallow belief that love is more of physical attraction. The beauty in the narrative of the prequel lied in its tragic culmination, which made it an immortal and elementary love story.

Sachin, who doubles up as the director this time, attempts to start-off the sequel from where the original ended (tragedy) and take it forward to a happy ending. But that's where the film loses, both, its original essence and charm.

Not just extensive scene footage from the original is revisited in the sequel, almost every song is replayed too. Though Ravindra Jain's compositions are soulful, one can easily see through the commercial considerations of the sequel in exploiting the popularity and purity of the original, since it doesn't has much of its own merit.

With the prequel footage serving as an obvious reference point, one can't escape noticing age having caught up with both the leads. The natural charm of Ranjeeta is replaced by her plastic beauty and Sachin's youthful appeal is substituted by his venerable conduct.

While the chemistry between Ranjeeta and Sachin was youthful and charming in the original, here there is no palpable camaraderie between the two. The film is replete with regular Rajshri brand elements like conflict-free screenplay, convenient writing and slow pacing.

Also there are customary characters like the doting Ramu kaka and a gajar-ka-halwa making neighbour. And god forbid, even Lily's spirit is revoked in the climax.

Comparisons with the prequel are inevitable and both Ranjeeta and Sachin are plain average in retrospect. Also one can't really say it's a pleasant surprise to see yesteryear actors like the jaded Junior Mehmood and the bespectacled Birbal in itsy-bitsy parts.

Irrespective of whether you have watched Ankhiyon Ke Jharoke Se or not, it's no point seeing the sequel. Eyes wide shut for this! (less)

When the founder of the hip hop network, Adhi, and rapper and beatboxer Bharadwaj Balaji aka BBB, were invited to a popular radio show, they performed one of their most popular tracks 'Clubulla Mabbu'. The video that someone recorded at a city radio studio was uploaded on the radio station's website.

"Our fan Yogendar Das posted the video on Youtube and Facebook on the evening of November 19," informs Adhi. What the video managed to do was not only get featured on the homepage of YouTube India below 'Why this Kolaveri di', (it still has managed to hold on to its place there!) but also get a whopping number of 54,000 shares on Facebook and 75,000 views on YouTube by the end of the first 48 hours.

"Over 50,000 shares within two days - we never expected that!" exclaims BBB. As on November 25, "Clubulla Mabulla" had over 2,05,000 hits and over one lakh shares on Facebook, with the numbers continuing to steadily rise.

"I had no idea about it until later that night on November 19 and when I did check the video, it already had 317 views on YouTube and 217 shares on Facebook," he says. BBB and Adhi were content with what their video did in the first couple of hours of its presence online and little did they know that they were on their way to creating an amateur video revolution.

Adhi shared the video on his Facebook page before calling it a day. When he woke up the next morning, it took him more than a few minutes to fathom what stared back at him from his computer screen.

"The video had 25,000 views when I woke up that day and by the end of the day, it had 38,600 shares on Facebook and 44,000 hits on YouTube," says Adhi in almost disbelief. "We thought of it as some sudden online craze and left it at that.

We never expected anything more," he adds. "After the video went viral, we have had five record labels asking us to sign with them and even got a couple of movie offers," says an excited Adhi.

"It is all very exciting and tempting, but we are not going to take up any movie offers right now as we are focusing on our album. We want to prove that independent artistes can also shine without the help of cinema," he says, but not without pride.

But do they feel that Kolaveri might have stolen their thunder a bit? "Kolaveri is an official film song and for us to achieve a percentage of what they did with an unofficial amateur video is a great thing," says Adhi, diplomatically. Makapa Anand, the popular Radio Mirchi RJ, who hosted a 'Hiphop Tamizha' interview also happens to feature in the video.

"I was the first one who had them on my show, after which many other people began inviting them. I love all their songs, especially those from their upcoming album and also their youth election anthem," he says, excited for the band.

Anand, who seemed to have no trouble remembering the lyrics of the song, is also obviously a fan. "I am very happy for them, but I hope Adhi changes his mind and takes up movie offers," he says.

Well, at least for this song, we know a good reason why it went viral. Tweet (less)

Born in a conservative Muslim family, Zainab is the eldest amongst half a dozen daughters of Hakim saab (Manzar Zehbai). The father's quest for a male successor in his family is thwarted when a son is born but with effeminate traits.

As the son Saifee (Amr Kashmiri) grows up amidst sisters, the father almost disregards his presence in the family. Director Shoaib Mansoor uses this family as a paradigm to address almost every concern correlated with the community.

The film primarily objects to the idea of reproducing human beings into this world (blinded by faith and self-centered intentions) without taking complete responsibility of their existence. Concurrently it also highlights the regressive attitude of a male-dominated society that offers no liberty to woman in choosing life-partner, refusing reproduction, gaining education or working independently.

And the concerns are very much contemporary with the film set in modern-day Lahore . At the same time, the film never stereotypes the state or its citizens but attempts to represent the intellectual illiteracy of a vast majority who haven't upgraded with times.

Almost all the issues are brought to light by the conformist characterization of the father figure. And with the outlook of the film focused only on domestic issues, the director refrains from giving any political overtones to Hakim's characterization and attributes his extremism to his orthodox upbringing and bigoted beliefs.

His fanatic philosophy makes him renounce his earnings from a plebeian pimp even in desperate times. You hate his chauvinistic attitude as much as you pity his penniless state.

While he is the only breadwinner of an extended female-dominated family, his ancestral physician profession is losing charm and clientele in an era when medical science has much evolved. So while on one hand you detest the fact that he doesn't allow his daughters to find employment, you also sympathize with him for having to stoop to the panderer's demands.

At several instances, the narrative smartly underscores the irony of life. While we have often witnessed woman getting into the flesh trade for survival, here the male species falls prey of the situation.

The fact that all his offspring were only girls, which had always been his biggest weakness, turns Hakim's strength when he gets money to impregnate a courtesan (Iman Ali) with a girl child. So while on one hand his second daughter gets secretly married to the boy-next-door (Atif Aslam), on the other hand the father surreptitiously ties the knot with the courtesan.

Like Khuda Kay Liye , Shoaib Mansoor's take on the subject is comprehensive and despite the long runtime, the narrative never gets tedious. The writing is riveting, and the dialogues in particular, are crisp, clear and caustic.

Despite the serious demeanour of the film, the director infuses sporadic moments of unusual humour, like in the scene when the siblings are fighting over an India-Pakistan match and the father believes that the sincerity of their prayers would be solely responsible for their country's victory or defeat. Even when the sissy brother is physically abused, the film never gets into titillation mode and remains refined.

There are portions in the narrative that the director never touches beyond a menial mention, like Zainab's failed marriage. But there is so much and more that the film explores that you never bother to learn about the omitted chunks.

A rock-concert number by Atif Aslam seems somewhat out of place in this film. Also the entire media circus and bureaucratic drama surrounding Zainab's death sentence could have been avoided.

Nevertheless, while the film could have easily started and ended as Zainab's story, the director intentionally takes it to legislative level to make a strong statement on national level. The film ends with an epilogue, which, despite being a little too optimistic, shows a ray of hope.

Bol is blessed with superlative performances by seasoned actors. Manzar Zehbai, undoubtedly, is the scene-stealer in his fanatic father characterization.

He remains in his character of a stern, angry and frustrated personality but never hams. Humaima Malick is absolutely brilliant in her author-backed rebellious character.

Amr Kashmiri never goes overboard even for a moment, a common tendency while playing an effeminate and stammering character. Atif Aslam doesn't get much scope but is decent in his part.

Mahirah Khan Askari is charming. Iman Ali looks alluring and is graceful in her short role.

Shafqat Cheema as the brothel proprietor convincingly alternates from being a friendly person to a menacing foe. Zaib Rehman as the vulnerable mother is compelling.

Shoaib Mansoor voices a strong and progressive viewpoint with Bol . Some good 'word of mouth' for his bold cinema please! (less)

But beyond that when it strays into entirely different terrain, the movie loses its audience. Vidyadhar (Vinay Pathak) works in a private company but lives (as an illegal tenant) in a government colony in Mumbai.

Mehek Malvade (Neha Dhupia) who works as a backup dancer in films shifts next doors. She is anything but the girl-next-door and her cheeky conduct initiates enmity with her neighbour.

When a vigilance raid renders her homeless, Mehek moves in Vidyadhar's apartment, much against his wish. As their initial hostility is replaced by a friendly bond, they come close.

But the ambitious Mehek is besotted by glamour world and will stop at nothing to make her starry dreams come true. Writer-director Saurabh Shukla starts the film on a promising note and though it never gets outrageously funny (like one expects it to be), it doesn't bore you either.

The pace is slow and the tempo keeps dropping every now and then. The Bambaiyya v/s Banarasi attitude of brawl between Vinay Pathak and Neha Dhupia defines their cross-connected chemistry here.

The tone of humour is inconsistent ranging from some hilarious moments to some plain passable ones. But beyond humour, the film focuses more on the heartwarming bond that it subtly develops between its odd pair.

But as Mehek's journey to reach the stars takes over, the film loses focus. Going on a completely different tangent, it highlights the turmoil of a struggling actress and how her family disapproves of filmdom.

Furthermore it distances her from love. Disillusioned in the city of dreams, Vidyadhar moves back to his hometown and the film attempts to give an insight on the urban-rural divide.

Until Naseeruddin Shah (reprising a role immortalized by Anupam Kher in Bollywood ) persuades his son to seek true love. And just when you presume that a seemingly lecherous producer (Rajat Kapoor) would make a pass at Mehek, he plays agony uncle guiding her to true love.

Finally when the end credits roll in a film-studio, showcasing the behind-the-scene existence of the movie industry, one wonders why the film needlessly treads into Zoya Akhtar's Luck By Chance zone. What was the central plot after all? The murky side of movie world? Despair in city of dreams? What point did the film attempt to make after wandering off into so many offshoots, when we were always under the impression that it was a minimal tale of mismatched romance? The performances are perfect.

Vinay Pathak doesn't fall prey of overdoing his underplaying act and is poised in his character. Neha Dhupia completely justifies her meaty role with an audacious act.

Rajat Kapoor is restrained as usual in his small bit. Naseeruddin Shah gets a cliched character.

Brijendra Kala and Sanjay Mishra lend decent support. The film ends with an off-track moral to the story - to accept a person without expecting them to change.

But it's difficult to accept this partially engaging film, unconditionally! On that note this pappu doesn't pass muster. Alas pappu fail ho gaya ! Verdict: Average (less)

So the film's actor-writer-director Shubh Mukherjee plays Aniket, who with his group of friends, aspires to make a documentary film on terror attacks. And you can actually see Aniket's attempt at making a college project film resulting into an amateurish filmmaking attempt by Shubh Mukherjee.

While taking random video shots within the international airport vicinity, the boys are taken into custody by police and detained at airport under suspicion of being terrorists. A potbellied anti-terrorist officer (Saurabh Shukla) comes to investigate.

Amidst all this, one Omama Bin Laden, who heads some terrorist group Al Bakaida, is planning an actual attack at the airport. Noise, disorder and confusion ensue for hours until Shubh comes to the point - to launch himself as the hero.

And for that he just has to diffuse a bomb by snipping off one of the red-green-blue wires - a trademark gimmick of the 80s potboilers. Only if bomb diffusing and filmmaking were so easy, a lot more souls would have been saved.

Despite starting on a promising premise, writer-director Shubh Mukherjee isn't able to develop the plot in an interesting way and the potential for a fresh comedy is substituted by a formulaic film. The boys remain detained for more that half of the film and with nothing substantial happening through their confinement (other than repeated and redundant interrogation sessions), the narrative turns static and one-dimensional.

The remaining film turns into a (supposed) comedy of mistaken identities inside the airport premises with beings and bags shifting hands every ten minutes. The tone of the comedy, though not slapstick, is juvenile, inconsistent and ineffective at places.

Neither is it supported by witty lines, nor by good comic-timed performances. The second half goes on and on and seems like an endless exercise where every character shouts their lungs out.

An India-Pakistan live cricket match that plays in parallel has no relevance whatsoever with the central plot. Shubh Mukherjee makes an earnest effort but gets the tone of humour wrong as the director.

As an actor his dialogue delivery is suggestive of Shahid Kapoor, his acting is reminiscent of Riteish Deshmukh but, in totality, he comes across as a cheap imitation of Ali Zafar. Chitrak Bandhopadyay, employed as a prototype to the fat-bearded comic sidekick in films like Hangover or Delhi Belly , is not half as amusing.

The only thing he makes noise for is his flatulent farting and fake firang accent. Child actor Pratik Katare isn't partially as funny as he was in Paa .

Harsh Parekh lacks screen presence. Saurabh Shukla keeps 'shouting' at everyone around to lower their voice.

Raghuvir Yadav appears malnourished. Pretty face Umang Jain is underused in an inconsequential role (once again after Love Breakups Zindagi ).

Aamna Shariff is hardly there. And why is Joy Sengupta even there.

The film essentially had in it to be a humble entertainer but it's unfortunate that the potential couldn't be tapped appropriately. So Shakal Pe Mat Ja.

..

apni akal lagaa . Verdict: Below Average (less)

Bete joins the list of extremely bad films that have hit the screen this year. Sreenivasa Kaushik had showed some promise in his first film, Yaaradhu .

But in Bete , it has been an overall failure for this youngster who exhibits his lack of knowledge in narrating a story that revolves around cyber crime. It becomes clear within minutes of the film's beginning that Kaushik has not worked properly in collecting the necessary data for a serious subject.

There are a lot of loopholes in the way he narrates the story on screen. The best example is the way the heroine is projected on screen, holding the job of a print media journalist.

Besdies these two unrealistic elements in the film, Kaushik's direction clearly proves that he has no control over the media. Added to these aberrations in naration, the characterisation also suffers.

The way talented artists like Anant Nag and Pavithra Lokiesh have been used in the film is utterly laughable. There is not even one sequence in the film which is worth mentioning as a good piece of creative work.

The film's heroine, Ayesha, plays the role of journalist Ashwini Chengappa, who has the uncanny ability to expose many scams. Ashwini's investigations have been successful in getting many criminals inside prison.

While her father appreciates her daring acts, her own sister is not proud of her achievements. One day, her sister comitts suicide, causing agony to the whole family.

Ashwini suspects the suicide theory and wants to take the case to a logical conclusion. She starts searching for the people who are responsible for her sister's death.

In the process, many secrets surface including illegal transporation of girls to Dubai, and then using them as sex workers. Ayesha shows her prowess in fights, but falters in her performance.

Ishitha Vyas is used for adding a little bit of sex appeal to the film. Anant Nag and Pavithra Lokesh are wasted.

Akshay, who had made a debut in Ganga Cauvery has been given a different type of role in the film. Harish Rai, Aadi Lokesh, Killer Venkatesh and other villains are not scene-stealers in the roles they perform.

The film is very poor in technical quality with music composition and background music hitting the doldrums. Camera work is also of poor standards.

Tweet (less)

Don 2 , the sequel starts off almost from where the earlier episode ended and while it attempts to maintain some continuity with the last installment, it fails to bring back the intelligence of the original. Don (Shah Rukh Khan) emerges in Malaysia and gets himself arrested only to get the convicted Vardhan (Boman Irani) out of jail.

Vardhan has keys to a video footage which they use to blackmail a bank vice president (Alyy Khan) to get access to a German bank's security systems. The big plan is the old-fashioned and formulaic robbery of the currency printing plates from the bank.

So the sequel to Don merely boils down to being a heist film. The film, more or less, starts as an action flick with Don's one-man-army introduction in Thailand , a convenient escape from Malaysian prison and some conventional car-chase sequences in Germany.

None of them excite much until you realize you have already reached the interval. The plotting and scheming starts in the second half with an easy induction of a hacker (Kunal Kapoor) who can not only barge into the security systems of the vault but also seems to have blueprints of the bank building to the minutest details.

The writing by Ameet Mehta, Amrish Shah and Farhan Akhtar is more style over substance attempting to camouflage cliches with the cool quotient. Even the central heist seems confusing and convoluted but Farhan Akhtar intentionally keeps the pacing swift enough, leaving no time for the viewer to notice any loose ends.

However, the more he makes the situation easy to suit his script, the more it becomes difficult for the audience to digest things. Even the robbery seems mundane Hollywoodish exercise with no moments of thrills in particular.

However the highlight isn't the heist per se but Don's hidden agenda behind it. While it isn't much difficult to decode the mystery, it makes for a decent climax.

The director mercifully keeps mush away from the major proceedings though he can't resist the temptation in the climactic portion in his attempts to induce chemistry between Don and his rival, Roma (Priyanka Chopra). But Don would have been better-off as the suave and stonyhearted killer rather than a 'Rahul' prototype.

Thankfully the chemistry is peripheral and never blooms into romance. Also one would have preferred to see Don as more brain over brawny hero but the director makes him a jack of all trades giving him James Bond kinda complete-man characteristics.

Vulnerability is alien to Don, essentially making him larger-than-life. But despite being an unethical drug-lord, Farhan Akhtar's treatment is such that you still adore him as the hero over abhorring him as an outright villain.

Don 2 never gets into the good v/s evil battle. The cinematography by Jason West is striking.

However Shankar-Ehsaan-Loy's musical score doesn't leave a mark this time and the background score has to repeatedly resort to the theme-piece from the original for some impact. Farhan Akhtar's punch-lines in dialogues are initially amusing but with a Don-ism in every second line, it sounds hackneyed and hollow after a point.

Shah Rukh Khan is in his comfort zone as the Don bringing more charm than cruelty to his character. He rules supreme and the film's indulgence with him is as much as Don's obsession with himself.

Everyone else is overshadowed. Priyanka Chopra is passable.

Lara Dutta , as the Don's moll, is simply a substitute for Isha Koppikhar from the prequel and is hardly there for a few scenes. Boman Irani is underused.

Kunal Kapoor fails to register any impact. Om Puri, Alyy Khan and Nawab Shah are plain functional.

Sahil Shroff irritates. Don 2 ends with the promise of Don 3 (that's what the number-plate of Don's bike reads) and the trademark dialogue ' Don ko pakadna mushkil hi nahi, namumkim hai ' (It's not just difficult to catch don, it's impossible).

But we would surely want to 'catch' up with a more worthy sequel to this. It's not impossible Farhan.

Is it? Verdict: Above Average (less)

It may have backfired like in Easan . But by and large, it has worked out for the duo.

Poraali , which Samudrakani has scripted and directed, and Sasikumar has produced and played the lead in, is one such off-the-routine fare that engages you for the most part. The struggle of two men Kumaran and Nallavan, to eke out a living in the city, forms the core of the plot.

Working at a petrol bunk, Kumaran hits on an innovative idea. Getting into the business of making door deliveries for a small price, it is about the transformation it brings in the duo's lives, the changing relationship with their neighbours, the women in their lives, and the past casting its shadow.

All narrated with humour, sentiment and action. As the reticent angst-driven Kumaran, Sasikumar gets to sport two different looks.

He brings out impressively the various nuances of his character. A perfect foil is Naresh as Nallavan (a strong comeback after Kurumbu ), who makes an impact in the moments where a terrified Nallavan battles his inner demons.

The colony has some interesting characters with their own quirks, who add to the humour quotient. The women get their space too - whether it's Bharathi (a cute Swathi) whose dislike for Kumaran turns to affection; or the gutsy rural belle Selvi (a very impressive Vasundhara) who fights his cause.

The flashback of Kumaran and his avaricious relatives could have been trimmed. If it's Ganja Karuppu who regales us as the duo's slippery friend in the earlier part, it's Suri in the latter.

The plight of the mentally challenged at an institution and the callousness of the relatives is touching and insightful. The finale fight is well choreographed.

Shifting his ambience, bringing in multi characters and issues, the script may seem a tad loosely etched at times, unlike his earlier Nadodigal . But Samudrakani manages to get his grip back on the narration, knotting it all up into a fairly engaging whole.

Tweet (less)