tanjotasu

They fight. They are feisty. They hate each other. Their father is a poor bloke who loves them but keeps them from fighting each other. They are two passionate sisters who are very cool. Film promises to pack a punch.

The actors do an amazing job, but the movie doesn't pack any real punches. The story revolves around stupid "plots" without ever getting into the emotional meat that it needed to. This movie had the potential to uncover some serious family scars - but doesn't.

Good: The electricity plot. Maybe more time could've been given to developing this issue, rather than just using it as a background. What kind of corruption happens? How is government involved? How else are locals suffering? I still enjoyed the second half purely due to good acting of Shahid.

The bad: Love triangle - The director had two movies in mind - one about a love triangle, and another about a very important social issue. Unfortunately trying to include both in the same movie ended up in a disjointed plot with two very unconnected halves.

Forced dialect - While the performances were good, for some reason a decision was made to overuse some local phrases "Thehar" and "Bal" to a point where they were distracting and borderline offensive of the population they meant to represent.

Overall the movie was watchable, but could've been much much better with further editing and better development of the central issue.

Strong performances leading up to a strong moral about how we should be careful about our prejudices. Imagine what goes on through the innocent family of a young man who commits a mass murder. Now imagine they are muslim. How do our presumptions change? The stories we create change? Our emotions change?

Not sure where the other horrible reviews are coming from - maybe they are paid, but this movie is not terrible. I went into it thinking it'll be a lame double role raunchy comedic slow motion scenes action movie. It turned out much more smarter than that. The story is really well done with a really huge twist in the middle. Siddharth's acting is great and he really fits the role. The actress was annoying at first since she can't act much or speak Hindi properly, but she too didn't distract much from the movie itself. The movie surprised me as I had low expectations, but it deserves much better ratings. It's a smart action movie. Must watch for fans of genre that makes you think of what happened!

I'm sure a lot of you have already read the reviews and are no way planning to watch this one. Then, some of you (like myself) are die-hard Imtiaz Ali fans, checked out the IMDb rating and want to just believe that the critics are all heartless paid robots who never would've understood the pain of Rockstar anyway. Or even better, you're die-hard Shahrukh fans who have been waiting for him to deliver that emotional blockbuster that you got so used to in your teens (DDLJ). Read through to the end for the main theory!

There has been a trend in Imtiaz Ali movies. His earlier work - Jab We Met, Rockstar, Highway, Love Aaj Kal, Cocktail - he sets the conflict/love story in a very detailed way. The movies beautifully lay out the feelings, reactions and issues of the characters and then yearns towards a closure. In Tamasha, there was something missing to explain why the main character was acting the way he did. Something small that would've completed the loop. Here, . a whole chunk is missing of why the characters are acting the way they did.

In this one, we're shown that Harry is a 51 year old travel guide who's hiding some demons from his past. His problem with womanizing is so extreme that he confesses to this client that he can't help her as they'll probably end up sleeping together. And as a result, she laughs it off saying that she can control herself - while he escorts her around Europe to look for her engagement ring.

Then she spends the rest of the movie flirting with him trying to get validated that she's sexy and not just cute. Eventually they fall for each other, in love that doesn't have it's roots in lust - like a nice seduction plot should, but roots in him showing the sort of romantic love that she never got from her fiancé. Meanwhile, he - being the cool suave six- packed, tattooed, missing top two buttons and chest hair middle aged man that he is - breaks down in random blabbering voices and moments of pure meltdown - where she ends up comforting him without understanding his issue.

So she's a nutcase that she's openly flirting with him even do he said please don't do so - "i'll get deported and we'll hurt each other" - and he's a nutcase since there's something in the past and present that is resulting in his meltdowns. They do happily end up together but Imtiaz cuts the scenes where he explains their nutcaseness. So I'm confused - and Mr Ali, if you're reading this - please let me know what you think. And why cast a 51 year old actor in a plot like this one where the man needs to be an eye candy who the engaged conservative Gujrati just can't resist? And why tell it out that seduction will go down - instead of showing it through chemistry and plot?

So my theory here to complete the loop - to explain the inception. Maybe we are looking at it in an incomplete way. Maybe Mr Ali was watching DDLJ and he said - damn... 25 years have gone by. Where would the Raj of today be? And suddenly a story hits him. Raj and Simran get married in DDLJ. He becomes a Sikh - changes his name to Harvinder (Harry). They settle down in Punjab. There's wheat fields. There's a chunni touching the wheat fields. There's a tractor. But then they could never have kids. Simran ends up getting addicted to drugs in her depression and eventually perishes.

Raj (now Harry) decides to run off to Canada to get away from everything. He gets deported but then escapes on a small ferry towards Europe. He uses a German girl to get a citizenship. Then he dumps her as she doesn't fulfill his longing for the past. He becomes a travel guide as he wants to relive that trip with Simran - again and again. He's elusive. Works out too much. Shaves his chest hair three times a day. Gets a tattoo of a giant tribal S on his chest. Girls find him mysterious. They easily sleep with him. But they're not Simran. He keeps looking and wandering.

Meanwhile, Simran's soul had traveled south to Mumbai and had entered a young Gujrati's body - Sejal (S!) - who somehow has a dream ever since she was little that she has to travel Europe. On meeting Harry in Europe, especially in his convertible, she has no idea why but she feels attracted towards him. Not in the usual way, but almost as if the soul wants to be close to another. She wants to feel wanted. So she starts flirting with him.

So in short. This movie is a sequel to DDLJ. Directed by Imtiaz Ali. Hope the backstory helps in understanding this one!

Just got back from watching HP 7.1 and 7.2 back to back. Let me first say that I've never been a fan of HP movies. I preferred the Dumbledore in first two movies. The new one wasn't calm at all, as the one in the book is. So, that had always put me off from the movies.

HP 7.1 - Once I saw it again tonight, I realized how boring the movie was. The story didn't move smoothly. It was as if the director had tried to cover the major plots from the book, but in a very spotty fashion. Also, I noticed how the actors had very blank expressions, and thought maybe it was done to maintain the dark and grim tone. Time and again throughout the movie I found myself picking out details and thinking "this was changed".. or "that whole part was missed!", etc.

HP 7.2 - The movie started exactly where the last left off. In that regards, it was good that we saw the first part right before this one. Right away I noticed that the flow of the movie was MUCH smoother. After the scene with Griphook and Ollivander, pace was maintained with the Gringotts scene. There were definitely some details missed, but this was the first movie where I didn't find myself being distracted by the differences in the movie and the book. I think it definitely held its own! The dragon sequence was amazing! The scene with Aberforth was done well too. I like how they mirrored his skeptical tone from the book and at that point, I think Daniel Radcliffe showed his improvement as he looked much more in control. There were some elements where I thought "What!".. Like when Harry jumped out and challenged Snape... or the long sequence of Harry fighting Voldy in the end.. or how the deaths were kinda skipped over (but still shown for important characters...) However, there were things that I think were done VERY well... such as ->

• The scene with protections being enabled around the school.. the bit of humor with Prof McG saying that she always wanted to try that spell!

• The scene with the ghost of Ravenclaw. I liked the interaction between Harry and her, as it was to the point, but still mysterious (only readers would've known she was pointing to the Room of Requirement!)

• Snape's memories. Yes i know a LOT was cut out! But I think the important bits all remained. It was cut out extremely efficiently. The bit about the eyes, the doe, his promise to Dumbledore.. I really liked how it was exactly what was needed.

• King's Cross scene. Yes. This was short too. But again... it mentioned exactly what was needed. It moved the story forward with a good pace. Dumbledore explained very well what the dying fragment of soul was..

Neville's speech and him killing the snake was a lil long winded. But understandable. It is Hollywood. The ending in the book was rather short. I was hoping that Harry would "vanish" like he did in the book and protect his friends. But I guess that would've taken time away from his wrestling match with Voldy.

Another thing I liked towards the end was.. how Voldemort could more and more feel that his Horcruxes were being destroyed (yes I know that was different from the book!).. This in turn made him look weaker and weaker. And at the last minute when Harry "resurrected", and Voldy was at his weakest, all his supporters started running away. I think that was good. Not sure that it was in the book. But I loved it. Showed how he was truly defeated, even though he wasn't yet dead.

Overall, for me, this was the only movie in the series which held its own. The rest of them made me pick at details, but this one allowed me the extra edge as a reader, while still enjoying the story. Now I hope JK Rowling loses all her money and has to write 7 more books to become a billionaire again! ;)

Since I haven't touched the book, so I can't make that comparison. I walked in the movie thinking this lady's going to find herself through her travels and somehow inspire millions of us.

It turns out that the movie is about a smart, successful, somewhat good-looking author who has a very loving husband, am amazing job that lets her travel the world - and is still confused about her life and what she wants.

I thought there was going to be some tragedy or something that makes her want to leave her life.. but nope.. she's just been looking for a way out the whole time and putting the responsibility on a medicine man's palm reading, she leaves her husband, and her life.

As we travel with her, we realize that she's not really taking in what each of these places have to offer (except maybe for the language and non-verbal communication in Italy). The only thing we saw in India was the traffic and the arranged marriage of a minor. And Bali was more of a tourist departments commercial.

Essentially she was a superfluous tourist who just went to three different places without really making any kind of real journey.

The ending is formulaic with no deep meaning. The pace of the movie was very slow. Slow pace can be very good, if it makes the audience think or empathize. In this case, it didn't manage to do either.

I really wanted to walk out of this one. And now I'm curious why the book was so popular?

I really loved the way this movie was different than the usual stuff. Liked how they had parallel stories. Was a big reminder of Lock Stock..

But... as awesome as the first half was.. the second half bogged the movie down. This seems to happen in every Hindi movie as the producers probably create the need to put in some overly dramatic sequence.. as well as some masala sequences..

the second half dragged on for a while.. i can't pinpoint which parts should've been removed.. but it could've been edited to be definitely more fast paced. And the ending.. with the consolidation of all the stories in the movie.. that could've carried more of a twist than an all obvious shootout and sacrifice from the "bad" brother...

Why do I get the feeling with most of "almost good" Hindi movies lately.. that the lack of some editing took their chance at being great. Got the same feeling with Delhi 6 when they turned the ending into a preachy farce.

Please commercial filmmakers in India ---- don't be afraid to get away from the usual masala routine. Look at Johnny Gaddar and 99... they both ended up being much more fast paced and engaging than this movie could ever be...

I picked up the book "Runaway Jury" couple of weeks ago. Thought it'd be an interesting read for a couple of flights. Soon I couldn't put it down. Halfway through the book, I came across this movie and decided to rent it. Just to see how well it did with the book.

Well.. what can I say.

Firstly, lets forget there ever was a book. From this perspective.. it's like any other (dramatic) Hollywood movie. Starts out with a young executive, living the American dream -- getting shot along with many others in a gun-crazed lunatic's shooting spree. His widow sues the gun company who have been allowing the black market of their weapons to increase profits. The classic case of "small man vs filthy corporations" ensues. Oh.. but this time around there's a twist. The jury contains a mole... who will definitely affect the verdict. Hmmm... Great acting after that with a wimpy Dustin Hoffman and strong Gene Hackman and Rachel Weisz. John Cusack was just there. Didn't really add to the "acting dept". Couple of chases. Weisz fights with a man for her survival. It's almost like every couple of moments there's another nail-biter action moment. Brilliant brilliant thriller! Probably one of the best after Air Force One or something.

Alright.. now lets get down to the other perspective. My perspective. I read half the book and then saw the movie. The reason I liked the book was the human element. The fun was in the subtle details. Nicholas slowly gaining the jury's trust since the first day of court. Finch's silent admiration of Marlee as he openly gets frustrated with her. I thought the movie was worth it until they had the big fight between Marlee and Finch's crook. What was the point of that? Also.. in the book, we understand exactly why Finch trusts Marlee. He knows why she will land him the verdict. In the movie, there's no reasoning. There's no buildup to it.. no back story. We're told that John Cusack's character is a class clown and wants to keep everyone happy... but we don't get that trust.. that feeling from him.

See.. I think the problem is not that this was made from a book. Its a hard task in any case. You can add so many levels of details in a book that you cannot in the limited 2 hours of a movie. So I understand the usual differences between a movie and a book and the problems involved. In this case, something that ticked me off was the "formula" movie making that resulted. The movie seems like one action/dramatic scene after another instead of actually developing characters or following a plot. This has been a problem in most of the popular Hollywood movies lately. They all follow the same formula.

So.. overall.. this movie's worth watching.. but please don't read the book BEFORE you watch the movie.. read it AFTER you watch it. It will help you understand the fallacies of modern Hollywood :)

I had high hopes from this movie. Just saw it for free at a screening. Seeing the 8.0 rating at IMDb, I thought that it would be a special fare. But.. disappointment is the name of the game.

Watching this movie was like watching a leaking glass of water. There were no surprises. None. You know what's going to happen the whole time. So, the whole movie.. the whole buildup is to nothing.

I guess it's a very slow fare for a few people who want to see an emotional Chris Cooper and that's it.. NO PLOT HERE! This should've been on the History Channel in their 30 minute slots... Not in a theater as a 2 hour movie.

It's about time! I've been tired of the usual romantic comedies -- guy in high-school/college/work falls in love with beautiful girl -- the courting.. the romanticism (i mean physical stuff! a lot of it!).. breakup.. rejoining.. happy ever after.

The usual formula.. it's followed since the start of time and it will remain there until the nukes destroy this world. BUT this movie had something different to offer.. of course there's a guy and definitely there's a girl.. and yES! he falls in love! that's obvious.. wouldn't be a romantic comedy without that..

One thing that is definitely different in this case is that the boy is a 10 yr old and the girl.. um.. 11 yrs..

So.. yeah.. a brilliant concept.. looking at love from the perspective of a kid. Something we saw before in The Wonder Years of course.. but much more. It gives you a very personal look at New York and Manhattan. The emotions and the feelings evoked by the whole affair in the situation is realistic and very funny.

Overall a feel good movie with a different twist on the physical side of love.. Please watch it! I'm sure you'll love every second!

I don't know how I ended up with this movie, but I found a copy and decided to watch it after a boring day of work. Boy was I surprised.

The story moves along at a fast pace with good editing. What I really loved about the movie were two things.. Firstly, the character development. Not much into the movie, you knew what each character was all about. This is a feat hard to achieve and kudos to Ed Burns for achieving it with this movie.

Second.. and the more important thing that I liked about the movie.. The relationship between the family members.. basically the siblings and the father. It was realistic to some degree.. but also there was a special feeling of together-ness.

Overall - this was a "different" romantic comedy.. with some really funny moments and a pretty unique story. It should be rated much higher than what it is.. and I would definitely suggest people to watch it!

In the above reviews, this movie has been described as a brilliant action movie. I have a simple comment on that - Are you kidding me?

Where's the action? The whole movie could be completed in 30 minutes if they hadn't slowed down every second of the movie. It's like a college student writing an essay in double-spaced with Courier font to fit the prescribed 2 pages.

This movie started off well... There was some reason there to carry on. But then very steep downhill road..

The girl looked good. She didn't wear a lot during most of the movie. Why? Overall, the movie was just like any other Indian movie. 20 guys with guns blaring can't shoot an unarmed hero. Rajnikanth couldn't have done a better job. If you guy's consider this an "action" movie.. then great. I think of it as a joke. Big joke to steal my money. Just look at the plot-holes and you'll understand.

:) 7.1 rating NOT justified.. should be in the high 2's

Just saw the screening here in AZ. Had to sit in the third row from front.. last seat next to the wall... neck is still stiff.. but whatever.. it was free..

The movie started off well. Didn't know it was a serious or comedy plot.. but soon it developed as a satire. With the terrorists in the Afghan-Pakistan border.. to the President of the US. I would say until the last scene, the movie played very well.. The ending was very weird.

Overall.. stereotypes.. and a lot of satire based on these stereotypes.. rich Arab immigrants... terrorists filming their training routines.. President's advisor's taking over his thinking process..

Hey Guys.. I'm a huge Harry Potter fan. HP Books that is.. and not the movies so much. This movie was good from a movie-for-non-hp-reader standpoint. But from a perspective of someone like myself who's read all the books 10 times, a lot of things just do not make sense.

Dumbledore is not this chaotic. He doesn't start yelling/trembling at every small thing. He's extremely calm. This movie just totally disregards that aspect of DD's character.. shows him as a nervous-angry lunatic who jumps to every sound.

Some more character development please. Please. Puhleese! Man.. I think it's going to be hard to like any of these movies.

Well, I saw the movie about four hours ago in a special sneak preview in Tempe, AZ. The movie was.. well.. different. The first movie contained something that's been locked in a room in the Department of Mysteries in the Ministry of Magic. It's a force that Voldemart hates and which Harry Potter possesses in abundance. It is the force of "COOL". Ocean's Eleven dripped with this force, and was the best heist movie I ever saw. Don't expect that from this movie.

You remember how in the 'Eleven' there was also the humor factor involved with the 'oomph'. Well, that's the other force 'Twelve' contains. This movie contains stories of different humans, involved in a situation. Yes, Benedict is on their case. He wants his money back. They have 2 weeks to get it back. You'll have drama. Excitement. Lots more 'Cool'. More thieves. More Cops. More relationships ( Clooney-Roberts, Pitt-Zeta Jones parallel), 'human' situations (which I like), of course some heisting and lots more fun.

I give it 9/10. I know my review doesn't conclude anything except the digits in the beginning of this paragraph, but watch the movie, it'll speak for itself. Overall, it's a good sequel.

Alright. I walked in the theater holding my free pass for the advance screening thinking about the possibilities. I had seen Troy recently, actually liked it to a certain extent, but hoped that this movie would top it all. Firstly, the subject. Alexander the Great! What more can an audience ask for, the story of the greatest "invador". The director, Oliver Stone. The mastermind behind JFK, The Doors, Platoon and many other classics. The actors: Val Kilmer, Colin Farrel, Angelina Jolie, Anthony Hopkins, and many other great ones (including some new talent). So the possibilities seem endless. Perfect choice of director, story, actors... would it work?? read on!

Well, the movie is 173 minutes. That's just under 3 hours. Well, I'm not going to post any spoilers yet. But I wouldn't pay for this movie. Let me say this first, this is not a bad movie, it is worse; due to the fact that it squashed all the hopes I had from it. It shows promise with all the elements described in the above paragraph, but then it looses it in actuality. Firstly, the story telling style was too random. They jump around history (myth?) so much that it gave me a headache. Secondly, the story this movie tells could be told in 90 minutes. It drags on. The first time in my life I wanted to walk out of the theater. It was a drag. Another thing was the editing. It was bad. The scenes were put together in a weird order. The moments of love were stretched too long, and some of the characters were given a lot of screen time, but no significance. Some elements of significance were not explained, just shown hastily. The music in the war scenes was more distracting than energizing.

The good thing about the movie was how it came around in the end to refer to earlier elements. You'll notice that in the movie. Anthony Hopkin's narration was fine, but his genius was wasted in the role.

overall, this was a feeble attempt at making an epic. Troy was a better movie by far. Colin Farrel and Val Kilmer tried hard.. but mostly failed more due to the screenplay and editing than their own editing. the melodramatic scenes were super extended.. with the action sequences cut down to minimum.. enjoy this movie once it comes on DVD.. or get a screener ticket as I did..

When I walk into any Night's movies, I'm on a constant lookout for clues and slip-ups to give away the perfect ending. Sixth Sense had a lot of them, Unbreakable didn't, Signs didn't have a Cliffhanger ending. The Village is the first movie of the lot that surprised me with the ending. The feeling was similar to the end of The Others. I felt stupid and awed at the same time. I think that this masterpiece of a movie should not be missed. I will not post any spoilers as yet as I believe that people should enjoy the full spectra of this flick. I give this movie a solid 9/10. It's scary, funny, very immersing, highly surprising and totally entertaining.

From the time I saw Spiderman, I've been waiting for the sequels. The biggest mistake a person might make while watching a sequel is to compare it to the original. This might not be the way to go for movies based on certain story lines.

The first Spidey flick was the introduction to the Amazing Neighborhood Spiderman. So, for obvious reasons it was equal to an exciting roller-coaster of events. The audiences jumped out of their seats when Peter Parker discovered his secret powers. The movie empathized with the common man as a face like Tobey Maguire's (which embodies innocence) is hiding behind the mask of a famous superhero. It was a perfect match. The characters fit perfectly in the puzzle, and the movie achieved it's purpose, a huge fan following.

The second movie is where the director Sam Raimi opened the emotional reins of the main character, and created those turmoils the central issue, instead of the usual villains.

<Spoilers>

It's been almost two years since Peter's Uncle was murdered. Peter is shown still very much in love with MJ (Kirsten Dunst), but can't convey his feelings due to the fact that he is Spiderman. His friend Harry Osborn (James Franco) is still highly agitated about his father's death, and keeps threatening Peter to choose between him and Spiderman. The main plot in the movie is that Peter Parker is really torn between his jobs and education and the duty of being Spiderman, that he's doing bad in everything. He gets fired from all his jobs, drops low on his grades and even is facing problems with his powers. He cannot spend time with MJ while she finds another man, John Jameson (Daniel Gillies), who is an astranaut and incidentally, Jonah Jameson's son.

The movie twists into a maze of Dr Octavius performing a fusion reaction and accidentally welding four mechanical arms to himself. Dr Octavius is played by Alfred Molina, who does an amazing justice to the character. He is rightfully innocent and understanding at certain times, otherwise being sinister and deceitful. Now, Spidey is tired of leading these two lives, and his powers have almost left him, so he throws away his suit and leads life simply as Peter Parker. Then the filmmakers show an amazing mindstruggle for our hero to either come back as a hero, or lead a normal life. Eventually, his choice is motivated by the kidnapping of MJ by the evil Doctor. Meanwhile, his trashed Spidey suit reaches the offices of the Daily Bugle to the hilarious Jonah Jameson, played by J.K. Simmons, who keeps it on his office wall. So, Spiderman steals his suit back and webs away to save his love. In the process, Dr Ock leaves a out-of control speeding train to fall over an incomplete bridge, and Spiderman is left to save the folks. Spidey loses his mask, but saves the people after using all his strength to stop the train. The passengers see his real identity and remarks such as, "He's just a kid!!" emerge from them.

There is a tender moment as little kids return the mask while promising that they wouldn't tell anyone. "I will not tell no one!" (I think using wrong English might make the kids sound cuter... sarcastic...) Anyways, Harry Osborn is given the limp body of the exhausted Spidey by Dr Ock, who is after a radioactive metal to build his fusion reactor. Harry finds out that Peter is Spiderman, and is too awed to speak. Spiderman goes back to Dr Ock's lair, and saves the day. Well, towards the end, Dr Ock turns good again, and sacrifices himself to save the city from the out of control reactor. Finally, to the major implications of the movie. Firstly, Harry finds a secret chamber in his dad's room leading to the Green Goblin's (his dad) lair. There the movie is left with the very possible presence of Hob Goblin in the Spiderman 3. Secondly, MJ leaves her fiancée, John Jameson standing on the alter as she runs to Peter Parker. This is another door to a possible opening to Venom, a character from the comic book which might be introduced in the next movie.

Lastly, Parker's professor with only one hand, might be an opening to Crocodile.

Overall I think this was an amazing movie, done with utmost care to details and which opened so many new possibilities. Hope you guys like it!!!!!!!!!!!!

I walked into The Terminal expecting a light comedy with a romantic twist. While being all that, it turned out to be a intricate, deep movie about human nature. While people try to come into the US to make their lives better, by any way possible, Tom Hanks plays a character who follows the rules. Stuck in the JFK terminal due to the fact that his own country ceased to exist while he was in air. The movie is strong due to the realistic performances by everyone involved in the process. It was funny at times, but mostly it just presented the innocent characters on a platter. There were some scenes when people around me couldn't stop laughing, while I was touched. It is an awesome movie with great performances. Tom Hanks has another Oscar coming his way!

10/10