Baahubali 2 – The Conclusion Review

Baahubali was a cultural standpoint in Indian cinema. In Indian cinema, full of washed up romantic musicals with old gags, the arrival of Baahubali blurred the lines of real and reel life – everyone was experiencing that same hope that the people of Mahistmati felt with the arrival of Mahendra Bahubali, the offspring of Amarendra Bahubali. The excitement for Baahubali 2 was quadrupled with the cliffhanger climax of the first installment and ‘Why did Kattapa kill Baahubali ?’ was the question hanging on everyone’s minds. And now we have the answer.

The dread that I carried in my mind since the release of the first installment unfortunately is now validated. The dread was that the sequel wouldn’t hold up. Everything about this movie is way over-the-top than it should have been, with the actions scenes reaching the limit of hilariousness. The action sequences of the first installment were original in terms of their choreography, however the ones in the second installment are repetitive, ridiculous and borrow heavily from Lord of The Rings- Two Towers.

The restraint that SS Rajamouli showed in Baahubali is completely missing in this work. The final work seems like the work of a toddler who was given all the crayons to paint a picture. Moreover, just painting characters as bound by their moral codes and drawing parallels to the epic Mahabharata so as to hide the shallowness of the central romance is just a very sleazy effort. The first installment was riveting, the second one is derisory.

Watching Baahubali 2 was seeing Murphy’s Law in action – everything that can go wrong did go wrong. But believe me, all fun is not lost. Go watch it with your friends, the ones who excel in sarcasm and rip every frame apart. Sitting alongside with me were a bunch of college kids who had bunked to watch this movie. Listening to their expletive-filled rants was the best time I had at the movies in recent memory. Unfortunately, I cannot say the same with respect to the movie. It sucked.

RATING : 4.5 / 10

THANKS FOR READING. IF YOU HAVE LIKED/HAVE DIFFERENT VIEWS / HAVE ANY  DOUBTS, PLEASE SHARE. I WILL RESPOND TO IT AS SOON AS I CAN. AND PLEASE SUBSCRIBE FOR MORE. YOU CAN FOLLOW ME ON MY FACEBOOK PAGE TOO https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100011549616628 YOU CAN ALSO E-MAIL ME ON castlebang786@gmail.com OR favebook2011@rediffmail.com

Photo Rights : Google Images, Wikipedia

Copyright : All written content on this site, unless otherwise noted, has been created by the website owner. As such, the content is the property of the website owner. This content is protected by Indian and international copyright laws. If you wish to reproduce, re-post, or display any of our content on your own site please only do so if you also provide a link back to the source page on this website and properly attribute authorship. Our preference is that you seek our permission before doing so. If you see anything on this website that has not been properly attributed to its originator please contact me. In response, I will attempt to correct the attribution of the offending material or remove and/or replace it. All material on this website is posted in accordance with the limitations set forward by the Information Technology Act, 2000. If a documented copyright owner so requests, their material will be removed from published display, although the author reserves the right to provide linkage to that material or to a source for that material. As a website devoted to discussing and reviewing movies and television I will at times, for illustrative purposes, present copyrighted material, the use of which might not always be specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available  for purposes such as criticism, comment, and research. The website owner believes that this constitutes a “fair use” of any such copyrighted material because the articles published on this website are distributed for entertainment purposes.

Little Miss Sunshine Review

The greatest feeling a viewer can experience after watching a movie is feel thankful for every second of his existence leading up to the point where the ending credits roll, a thankfulness for being alive just to watch this movie. I felt it after The Shawshank Redemption the last I remember. Here I am, with tears in my eyes I swear to Nolan, writing about Little Miss Sunshine.

It is about a journey these six characters, all starkly different from the other, undertake to contest in a beauty pageant called ‘Little Miss Sunshine’. What ensues in this trip is complete mayhem and how the characters reconnect with each other after a huge dramatic twist. Each of these characters have such an inexplicable adorable vibe to them that I walked out of this movie wishing a stand alone movie for each of them.

Alan Arkin is mind-blowing as the swearing, heroine-snorting horny grandpa whose advice to his grandson Dwayne, an individual who has taken a vow of silence adhering to the principles of Neitzsche, is ‘fuck a lot of women‘. The ones offended by this is naturally the father of the boy, Richard, a man who is reminiscent of Walter from The Big Lebowski. While Walter’s mojo was Vietnam, Richard can relate anything in the world to a nine-step program he has devised for attaining success. In the midst of all this maelstrom is probably the cutest character of 21st century cinema, Olive Hooper played by Abigail Breslin, who with her rimmed glass and a heart-melting smile plastered a smile on my face throughout this movie.

This movie meant a lot to me personally because the underlining theme is about how failures make a man. Each of the characters here deal with unfulfilled dreams about aspirations and standard of living. Yet, as the movie progresses, the realization dawns upon how family always comes first, apparent from a climax which is as hilarious and heart-warming as any sequence in cinema can be.

My heart burst out with joy after watching Little Miss Sunshine. The opening shot is of Olive watching a beauty pageant and mimicking the actions of the winner. Tears rolled down my face with that very shot itself. That beautiful marriage of visuals, music and the innocence of Olive reminded me of those times when I pretended to win an Oscar. No moment in cinema has ever meant that much to me. It was a perfect shot.

RATING :- 9.5 / 10

THANKS FOR READING. IF YOU HAVE LIKED/HAVE DIFFERENT VIEWS / HAVE ANY  DOUBTS, PLEASE SHARE. I WILL RESPOND TO IT AS SOON AS I CAN. AND PLEASE SUBSCRIBE FOR MORE. YOU CAN FOLLOW ME ON MY FACEBOOK PAGE TOO https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100011549616628 YOU CAN ALSO E-MAIL ME ON castlebang786@gmail.com OR favebook2011@rediffmail.com

Photo Rights : Google Images, Wikipedia

Copyright : All written content on this site, unless otherwise noted, has been created by the website owner. As such, the content is the property of the website owner. This content is protected by Indian and international copyright laws. If you wish to reproduce, re-post, or display any of our content on your own site please only do so if you also provide a link back to the source page on this website and properly attribute authorship. Our preference is that you seek our permission before doing so. If you see anything on this website that has not been properly attributed to its originator please contact me. In response, I will attempt to correct the attribution of the offending material or remove and/or replace it. All material on this website is posted in accordance with the limitations set forward by the Information Technology Act, 2000. If a documented copyright owner so requests, their material will be removed from published display, although the author reserves the right to provide linkage to that material or to a source for that material. As a website devoted to discussing and reviewing movies and television I will at times, for illustrative purposes, present copyrighted material, the use of which might not always be specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available  for purposes such as criticism, comment, and research. The website owner believes that this constitutes a “fair use” of any such copyrighted material because the articles published on this website are distributed for entertainment purposes.

Cache Review

What if someone is watching and documenting every day of your life ? That is the question Haneke poses through this slow-paced exercise of watching the troubles which commence when a family discovers that someone is taping the exterior of their house and even private conversations, every single day.

Haneke weaves a web of lies and flashbacks around us which leaves us transfixed towards the screen throughout the movie, without any regard to its slow-pacing. The monotonousness of the composition of the shots establishes an everlasting dread about the nature of the events that transpire in front of us. Is this a tape or is this really happening ? The non presence of a background score further accentuates the tension of the movie.

Much credit for the brutal realism of this movie goes to the brilliant performances. Daniel Auteuil appears as an enigma wrapped in a mystery. Juliette Binoche’s beauty and acting is a work of nature, and her performance here further builds up my case of her being one of the greatest actresses of all time.

What Haneke demands us to introspect is that even the most respectful of human beings have skeletons in their closet. The characters in Cache have nothing to hide, yet when these seemingly harmless tapes surface, they do fear. Of the horrors of the past we leave behind with no trail to link them back to us, those horrors we pretend to forget about and lead a normal life. Yet, there is no denial that they haunt every human being and the characters in Cache are no exceptions. The tapes are just the stimulus and hold no value.

Yet, where it succeeds as a drama, Cache fails as a mystery. If you had no knowledge about its end, I inform you that it is an incomplete one. It leaves you the job to draw out the conclusions based on the information given. To be honest to you, I was enraged by this, for I don’t know what else qualifies as artistic fraud. A movie justifies its ending. In a movie like Inception to say, it had left me with enough answers about all questions of importance, leaving me with only a query which even if unanswered would not take the essence out of the movie. When the credits rolled in Inception, I knew in my heart that Christopher Nolan knew what actually happened. When the credits rolled in Cache, I doubted if I knew more than Haneke.

RATING :- 5.5 / 10

THANKS FOR READING. IF YOU HAVE LIKED/HAVE DIFFERENT VIEWS / HAVE ANY  DOUBTS, PLEASE SHARE. I WILL RESPOND TO IT AS SOON AS I CAN. AND PLEASE SUBSCRIBE FOR MORE. YOU CAN FOLLOW ME ON MY FACEBOOK PAGE TOO https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100011549616628 YOU CAN ALSO E-MAIL ME ON castlebang786@gmail.com OR favebook2011@rediffmail.com

Photo Rights : Google Images, Wikipedia

Copyright : All written content on this site, unless otherwise noted, has been created by the website owner. As such, the content is the property of the website owner. This content is protected by Indian and international copyright laws. If you wish to reproduce, re-post, or display any of our content on your own site please only do so if you also provide a link back to the source page on this website and properly attribute authorship. Our preference is that you seek our permission before doing so. If you see anything on this website that has not been properly attributed to its originator please contact me. In response, I will attempt to correct the attribution of the offending material or remove and/or replace it. All material on this website is posted in accordance with the limitations set forward by the Information Technology Act, 2000. If a documented copyright owner so requests, their material will be removed from published display, although the author reserves the right to provide linkage to that material or to a source for that material. As a website devoted to discussing and reviewing movies and television I will at times, for illustrative purposes, present copyrighted material, the use of which might not always be specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available  for purposes such as criticism, comment, and research. The website owner believes that this constitutes a “fair use” of any such copyrighted material because the articles published on this website are distributed for entertainment purposes.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hush Review

The opening act of Hush is one to be studied. Everything that assumes importance in the second and third act are made acquaintance with the viewer in the first act itself without focusing on any of it. The dread that grips us seems so distant, yet when it does, it hits us with the pace of a peregrine falcon. Hush is the kind of thrillers which do not get made nowadays, it uses silence to create the feeling of utmost dread.

Kate Siegel gives a visceral performance as Maddie. It was so convincing that I actually thought she was mute and deaf. To see her transform from a scared soul to the ravage she transforms into towards the end is chilling. John Gallagher, who I have admired since his act as Jim in The Newsroom, sheds his charm and transforms brilliantly into a psychopath.

The editing is spell-binding, keeping us transfixed on the screen throughout the run time. I love the sharp-focus shots, and the rapid editing makes the pace quicken.

The only problem that I did have with this movie is the third act which seems sagging, and weak in terms of the first and second act. But it seems like a minor hindrance. I watched Hush with a good turnout of audience. And believe me, they were very interested.

RATING :- 9 / 10

THANKS FOR READING. IF YOU HAVE LIKED/HAVE DIFFERENT VIEWS / HAVE ANY  DOUBTS, PLEASE SHARE. I WILL RESPOND TO IT AS SOON AS I CAN. AND PLEASE SUBSCRIBE FOR MORE. YOU CAN FOLLOW ME ON MY FACEBOOK PAGE TOO https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100011549616628 YOU CAN ALSO E-MAIL ME ON castlebang786@gmail.com OR favebook2011@rediffmail.com

Photo Rights : Google Images, Wikipedia

Copyright : All written content on this site, unless otherwise noted, has been created by the website owner. As such, the content is the property of the website owner. This content is protected by Indian and international copyright laws. If you wish to reproduce, re-post, or display any of our content on your own site please only do so if you also provide a link back to the source page on this website and properly attribute authorship. Our preference is that you seek our permission before doing so. If you see anything on this website that has not been properly attributed to its originator please contact me. In response, I will attempt to correct the attribution of the offending material or remove and/or replace it. All material on this website is posted in accordance with the limitations set forward by the Information Technology Act, 2000. If a documented copyright owner so requests, their material will be removed from published display, although the author reserves the right to provide linkage to that material or to a source for that material. As a website devoted to discussing and reviewing movies and television I will at times, for illustrative purposes, present copyrighted material, the use of which might not always be specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available  for purposes such as criticism, comment, and research. The website owner believes that this constitutes a “fair use” of any such copyrighted material because the articles published on this website are distributed for entertainment purposes.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Noor Review

To appeal to the young-audiences who fill up most of the seats for any film up for release (for getting selfies in those seats with their dates is another reality), mainstream Bollywood has been diverting its focus towards making youth-oriented cinema. Since the release of Shuddh Desi Romance in 2013, which paved the way for characters who are emotionally and sexually liberated, many movies have followed the suit and Noor is one of them. Unfortunately, this effort to break the shackles of a formulaic plots has also resulted in a formula and Noor falls an unfortunate prey to that.

It’s major quandary is an inability to surf from comic to tragic elements. Dramedys take a huge risk for they are two movies emulsified into one, and more often that not they come off as phony, which is what Noor feels like throughout its run-time. Predictability is a curse of cinema, and Noor is jinxed with it. It adopts a Ferris Bueller’s Day Off structure, yet has none of the charm it exuded. When will screenplay writers understand that comedy isn’t witty one-liners wrote off as dialogues ? There needs to be scenarios created so as to make these dialogues effective as well and Noor lacks them in ginormous amounts.

The other quandary is its take on journalistic integrity. It takes shares and retweets on social media as a scale to measure the popularity of a news item. And believe me, there is even a one minute scene where all that flashes on the scene is a number of hashtags, status updates and like counter. I can’t imagine how a film-maker even thought in his wildest dreams that this is not cringe-worthy. The film for some inexplicable reason tries to accommodate the entire life of its character in a bunch of hashtags. In a world where even someone saying ‘Damn Daniel’ repeatedly gets viral, I have rights to assert that social media is the least of all mediums to be used to illustrate the impact of a news item.

However, even in the midst of all this ruckus, Sonakshi Sinha stands tall. This movie really did not deserve this amazing performance.The few chuckles I garnered was for the odd charm she brought into the character with her adorable mannerisms. I have high regard for her and I wish she does more of such phenomenal work, however with better scripts. Kanan Gill is fabulous as the comedic and emotional relief, and the movie does an excellent work in exploring the romantic undertones of their relationship with a gradual pace.

Maybe the reason why I am writing so despondently about this movie is I expected more. I walked into this movie actually holding high hopes, and except for the performances and cinematography, I was let down. I would however recommend you to give it a go without holding high hopes. Maybe you might love it as much as I loved Sinha’s performance. You can walk into the cinema hall just to watch her, and it still wouldn’t be a waste of hard-earned money.

RATING : 5.5 / 10

THANKS FOR READING. IF YOU HAVE LIKED/HAVE DIFFERENT VIEWS / HAVE ANY  DOUBTS, PLEASE SHARE. I WILL RESPOND TO IT AS SOON AS I CAN. AND PLEASE SUBSCRIBE FOR MORE. YOU CAN FOLLOW ME ON MY FACEBOOK PAGE TOO https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100011549616628 YOU CAN ALSO E-MAIL ME ON castlebang786@gmail.com OR favebook2011@rediffmail.com

Photo Rights : Google Images, Wikipedia

Copyright : All written content on this site, unless otherwise noted, has been created by the website owner. As such, the content is the property of the website owner. This content is protected by Indian and international copyright laws. If you wish to reproduce, re-post, or display any of our content on your own site please only do so if you also provide a link back to the source page on this website and properly attribute authorship. Our preference is that you seek our permission before doing so. If you see anything on this website that has not been properly attributed to its originator please contact me. In response, I will attempt to correct the attribution of the offending material or remove and/or replace it. All material on this website is posted in accordance with the limitations set forward by the Information Technology Act, 2000. If a documented copyright owner so requests, their material will be removed from published display, although the author reserves the right to provide linkage to that material or to a source for that material. As a website devoted to discussing and reviewing movies and television I will at times, for illustrative purposes, present copyrighted material, the use of which might not always be specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available  for purposes such as criticism, comment, and research. The website owner believes that this constitutes a “fair use” of any such copyrighted material because the articles published on this website are distributed for entertainment purposes.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Apocalypse Now Review

Apocalypse Now is loosely based on a book named ‘In The Heart Of Darkness’. Francis Ford Coppola in this 153 minute lacerating experience attempts one of the most ambitious and perilous endeavor in cinematic history – to transport his viewer right in the middle of the savagery which unfolded in Vietnam.

Apocalypse Now is more about the human mind rather than the war. It is easy to be fooled by this, since it does actively pursue its plot. But it is those abhorrent images which transpire on the screen that are the actual narrative. One could make the case, and to much success I presume, that Apocalypse Now has probably the greatest cinematic footage ever shot. The camera of Vittorio Storaro concots a pirouette of death all over. But even in the amidst of this violence, the screenplay by John Milius and Coppola still holds a spotlight over a bunch of characters towards whom we foster a sense of emotional attachment.

Coppola attempts to explore in Apocalypse Now, the concomitants of violence on the human mind. Take the scene with the Playboy bunnies which brings forth the animalistic libido fostered in men in continuous combat. However Coppola draws a line between the soldiers who fleet through this movie and the crew on board the boat. The crew that stays throughout this journey, a descendence from sanity to insanity, make an effort to preserve their humanity. There is an extremely heart-warming scene where Lance (Sam Bottom) takes on board a puppy which he finds in his ambush and takes care of it.

I have often come down hard on war movies while talking about them, and this maybe due to the fact of my personal beliefs that war holds no nobility or morality. Francois Truffaut once said ‘It’s not possible to make an anti-war movie, because all war movies, with their energy and sense of adventure, end up making combat look like fun’. However, Coppola seems to turn the tables on him, for the war here does look like fun, just not to the viewer.

Apocalypse Now belongs to the history books and it feels to me that whatever I talk about in praise of this movie will amount to nothing more than if I praise water. But sure as hell, I will never forget this movie. It held me spellbound and gaping at the violence that unfolds in war, and I couldn’t help but feel sorry for anyone who had to witness it. It is not an anti or pro war movie, but it sure is a pro-human movie.

RATING :- 9.5 / 10

THANKS FOR READING. IF YOU HAVE LIKED/HAVE DIFFERENT VIEWS / HAVE ANY  DOUBTS, PLEASE SHARE. I WILL RESPOND TO IT AS SOON AS I CAN. AND PLEASE SUBSCRIBE FOR MORE. YOU CAN FOLLOW ME ON MY FACEBOOK PAGE TOO https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100011549616628 YOU CAN ALSO E-MAIL ME ON castlebang786@gmail.com OR favebook2011@rediffmail.com

Photo Rights : Google Images, Wikipedia

Copyright : All written content on this site, unless otherwise noted, has been created by the website owner. As such, the content is the property of the website owner. This content is protected by Indian and international copyright laws. If you wish to reproduce, re-post, or display any of our content on your own site please only do so if you also provide a link back to the source page on this website and properly attribute authorship. Our preference is that you seek our permission before doing so. If you see anything on this website that has not been properly attributed to its originator please contact me. In response, I will attempt to correct the attribution of the offending material or remove and/or replace it. All material on this website is posted in accordance with the limitations set forward by the Information Technology Act, 2000. If a documented copyright owner so requests, their material will be removed from published display, although the author reserves the right to provide linkage to that material or to a source for that material. As a website devoted to discussing and reviewing movies and television I will at times, for illustrative purposes, present copyrighted material, the use of which might not always be specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available  for purposes such as criticism, comment, and research. The website owner believes that this constitutes a “fair use” of any such copyrighted material because the articles published on this website are distributed for entertainment purposes.

The Shining Review

A book and its movie adaptation should be treated as two different entities when they are talked about. This is a principle I have always adhered to when I have reviewed any book adaptation on this blog. This may be due to the fact that in the case of every book adaptation I have reviewed here, I watched the movie first and book later. In the case of The Shining, the case was different.

And to be honest, the workings of these two are so divergent that it is impossible to treat the movie with the same mindset as one might treat the book. First of all, Kubrick is a visual suzerian, so he treats the subject matter with that mindset. The images in The Shining and perplexing, especially the layout of The Overlook hotel. There are windows and doors where there should not be, carpet designs so abstract and asymmetrical in terms of their color scheme that seem to have a convulsing effect on the subconscious. It feels like the unfulfilled dream of Alfred Hitchcock, who envisioned to trick the subconscious with images and sound to create horror.

The camera seems more menacing than Jack throughout the movie. The steadicam gives an eerie feel to the shots, of a silent intruder who is always behind the heels of these characters tiptoeing his presence into their minds. However, this entire effect is atrophied by the background score which got on my nerves with its untimely explosions. Instead of creating a feeling of distress which I believe was its objective, it atrophies the entire feeling of dread. The most brilliant scenes are Jack and Grady’s conversation and Jack’s encounter with the girl in the tub, devoid of any noise. Silence, as I have repeatedly said without any avail, is the most scariest tool in the arsenal of any film-maker who aspires to make a horror film.

The reason why I found the movie less effective than the book seems to be Kubrick’s mindset that the true evil is Jack. He explores him as a non compos mentis from the first scene itself, a man who is hostile and distant to his family. This seems to take the very essence out of what was the actual horror of Stephen King’s work, which was to paint Jack as a tormented and pitiful soul who loves his family and how The Overlook and its ghosts eventually wear all humanity out of him. In the novel, the effect is distressing because we actually care about Jack as an individual and actually do feel contrite when he gradually goes down the spiral.

Kubrick’s movie however raises serious questions on the reliability on the mental state of its characters, which in turn, raises questions on the presence of any real supernatural entity in the hotel. The book by Stephen King gave us characters which seemed to consider the Overlook as a redemption to their diabolical lives and induced a feeling of claustrophobia and cabin-fever with its slow-pacing which made me feel as if I was shut in by the ghosts the Overlook seemed to house, creating a feeling of utter distress and eventual terror. On the other hand, Kubrick’s movie grows on to you and then lets go and oscillates with these feelings throughout, in the end creating an impersonal work which is at times chilling, but rest of the times, making an effort to be.

RATING :- 5 / 10

THANKS FOR READING. IF YOU HAVE LIKED/HAVE DIFFERENT VIEWS / HAVE ANY  DOUBTS, PLEASE SHARE. I WILL RESPOND TO IT AS SOON AS I CAN. AND PLEASE SUBSCRIBE FOR MORE. YOU CAN FOLLOW ME ON MY FACEBOOK PAGE TOO https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100011549616628 YOU CAN ALSO E-MAIL ME ON castlebang786@gmail.com OR favebook2011@rediffmail.com

Photo Rights : Google Images, Wikipedia

Copyright : All written content on this site, unless otherwise noted, has been created by the website owner. As such, the content is the property of the website owner. This content is protected by Indian and international copyright laws. If you wish to reproduce, re-post, or display any of our content on your own site please only do so if you also provide a link back to the source page on this website and properly attribute authorship. Our preference is that you seek our permission before doing so. If you see anything on this website that has not been properly attributed to its originator please contact me. In response, I will attempt to correct the attribution of the offending material or remove and/or replace it. All material on this website is posted in accordance with the limitations set forward by the Information Technology Act, 2000. If a documented copyright owner so requests, their material will be removed from published display, although the author reserves the right to provide linkage to that material or to a source for that material. As a website devoted to discussing and reviewing movies and television I will at times, for illustrative purposes, present copyrighted material, the use of which might not always be specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available  for purposes such as criticism, comment, and research. The website owner believes that this constitutes a “fair use” of any such copyrighted material because the articles published on this website are distributed for entertainment purposes.