SandeepLoyalka

A tediously long watch, the much awaited sequel to the world's most successful film of all time is a bit of a misfire. A fairly basic plot, embellished with Cameron's trademark gigantic action set-pieces, fails to impress largely because of how the minimal substance in hand has been stretched to beyond infinity. Also, while Cameron's vision & his execution of it are laudable, it's all a case of been-there-done-that. The first film was revolutionary in terms of pushing the envelope & giving audiences a never-before-seen technical extravaganza - & one with heart. In this film there is no breaking of boundaries, & its heart feels manipulative, not organic. Cameron basically throws in the kitchen sink & ends up losing focus. The story's emotional core - that family needs to be protected at all costs - gets drowned out by the inordinate length, slow pacing & over-emphasis on the technical razzle dazzle.

Tread with caution.

There are films that advertise - 'Nothing is what it seems'. Such films, when delivering on that promise, remain etched in memory as enjoyable mysteries that one can revisit often. 'Crimson Peak', purportedly a mystery, is unfortunately exactly what it seems. Everything the audience expects, happens. There are no surprises. This is its undoing - apart from a majorly flawed plot point (that I cannot reveal as it would amount to being a spoiler) that in fact renders the entire premise of the film redundant. All this is not to say that the film is without merit. There IS plenty to cheer. One can write paeans about the impeccable look of the film. From the immaculate cinematography, to the wondrous set designs, to the gorgeous costumes, to the haunting score - del Toro shows he's a master craftsman. The Gothic ambiance created by del Toro & his technicians is impressively spot-on. The performances are also uniformly excellent - Wasikowska & Chastain are particularly effective. The faint-hearted should note that the film has plenty of gore. But it's a strangely hypnotic gore, the kind you can't turn your eyes away from. However, as I said earlier, the perfunctory tale being told eventually leaves one feeling vaguely detached. A more complex story with unexpected twists & turns is what I went in expecting to see, but didn't get. Should make for a tremendous blu-ray demo disc though!

Having always loved Cecil B. DeMille's 'The Ten Commandments', I was quite looking forward to Ridley Scott's version of the story. Scott is a director I admire, & one who can never be faulted for a lack of vision. The trailers looked impressive & the cast even more so - Christian Bale, Ben Kingsley, Sigourney Weaver, John Turturro, Joel Edgerton. On seeing the film however, I have to admit at being disappointed. There ARE things to like in it - the opening battle against a rampaging Hittite army is stunningly staged, & the climactic parting of the Red Sea - despite the generous use of CGI - is quite a spectacle. It's everything in between that's a bit of a problem. The friendship & rivalry between Moses & Ramses - so well depicted in the DeMille epic - is barely developed here. Consequently, one is never emotionally invested in the proceedings. Also, the film moves at a snail's pace. Despite being over an hour shorter than the 1956 version, it feels as long. Never a good sign! Scott goes for a gritty, real feel, & his depiction of Egypt circa 1300 BC is far removed from DeMille's sanitised, colourful version. Talented actors like Kingsley, Weaver & Turturro barely get adequate screen time, though Bale & Edgerton make the most of their substantial roles. Bale is particularly good as the conflicted Hebrew leader, torn between the Godly visions he sees, & his own wavering mind. Edgerton, who could so easily have gone OTT, is adequately restrained & thankfully downplays the tormented Pharaoh. The production design is excellent, but the abundance of CGI was a bother - though that's an issue with most films nowadays. Overall, the film should work better with those not familiar with - or fond of - the older movie. Also, going in with lowered expectations would probably help.

First of all, let it be made clear that any attempt to effectively summarise 'Cloud Atlas' is futile. It is a film that is grand in vision & scope. It is a film that tells 6 stories spanning the years 1846 to 2346, with the same actors taking on different roles across the 6 segments. The actors play different ages, different nationalities & in some cases, different sexes! If there are any overt connections between the roles being enacted by a particular actor, they are definitely not apparent on first viewing. Perhaps repeat viewings may help in deciphering if there are, in fact, any connections at all! The first 20 odd minutes of the movie are often confusing as the various stories gradually unfold. Once past that initial hurdle, however, the film hits its stride magnificently. The 2 sets of directors - the Wachowskis & Tom Tykwer - deserve accolades for successfully conceptualising & executing what must have certainly been a logistical nightmare to shoot & edit. Despite its inordinate length, 'Cloud Atlas' is almost always absorbing. Special mention must be made of the immaculate art direction & breathtaking cinematography, which make every frame of the film come alive in impossibly beautiful ways. The actors are all, without exception, first rate. This is a film that is an acquired taste, pushing the boundaries of conventional cinema in hitherto unexplored directions...

Taken 2, a generic action/revenge thriller, is a ridiculously contrived sequel that exists solely due to the fact that the first installment unexpectedly made potloads of money at the box office. The first movie's kidnapping scenario is repeated, exception being that it's Neeson & his ex-wife Janssen who are captured this time around. Their daughter, Grace, then follows laughably specific (& complex) instructions from her father in order to help her parents escape. Shot in Istanbul, the gorgeous city is done a great disservice by showing only the dark back alleys & the grime & clutter instead of the more tourist friendly parts that could have added so much more allure. Every actor goes through the motions half-heartedly. The only thing to recommend are the occasionally diverting action sequences which, though reasonably well done, are reminiscent of (but inferior to) similar sequences in the very entertaining Bourne films. Makes the first film look like a masterpiece!

'Black Gold' is an old fashioned epic about feuding fiefdoms in 1930's Arabia, when oil had just been discovered in the region. Mark Strong & Antonio Banderas are the two rulers with a long standing rivalry that metamorphoses into a temporary truce, only to flare up again when their very divergent views inevitably come in the way. Tahar Rahim & Freida Pinto as their respective children, married to each other in what is essentially a politically motivated gesture, attempt to play the peacemakers. Performances - particularly Strong, Rahim & Pinto - are very good. Rahim, playing a Michael Corleone-ish character, does a commendable job. Pinto looks lovely, and Strong as the devout Sultan with a conscience, is nicely understated. As is customary in director Jean-Jacques Annaud's films, the locales & cinematography are breathtaking. The action sequences are crisp & filmed in a raw, realistic manner. Where the film falters, is in taking too long to tell a story that in fact needs far less time. Some passages get boring whereas others keep the viewer completely engrossed. It is this unevenness in the film's pacing that dents the possibility of it soaring high. Overall though, not a bad way to spend a couple of hours.

When you rent a movie that has been a resounding critical & commercial failure, you obviously go in with very low expectations. Normally what happens under such circumstances is that these low expectations are either met, or in some cases, exceeded. 'My Life In Ruins' definitely belongs to the latter category. An amiable, touristy jaunt through the beautiful Grecian landscape, it is a typical rom-com abounding in clichés - the obligatory mix of eccentric tourists, the nasty rival tour operator and the leading lady who can't seem to spot her one true love though he stands right before her all the time. However, the clichés here are fortunately only mild hindrances. Nia Vardalos' abundant charm & the picture postcard cinematography help immeasurably in easing any boredom that creeps through occasionally. Directed by veteran Donald Petrie in a strictly functional manner, the movie is a pleasant enough diversion from the crash-bang-wallop of most other summer blockbusters. Trust me, you could do much, much worse!

Roaland Emmerich brings to us another of his signature spectacles. After Stargate, Independence Day, Godzilla & The Day After Tomorrow, he has managed to dream up new vistas to er...explode. To his credit, its all done quite nicely. There is an appropriate sense of the fun & dread of adventure permeating throughout the film. An adequate score & a suitably enigmatic voice-over by Omar Sharif also help immeasurably. Snowy mountains, lush jungles, arid deserts, woolly mammoths, sabre-toothed tigers, pterodactyl/dinosaur hybrids, cavemen hunters, African tribes, ancient civilizations, giant pyramids, mysterious cults, cryptic soothsayers, mystical prophecies and men-on-a-mission....What's not to like....?!

This is a film that was undeservedly thrashed commercially & critically on its initial release. It has since gained a cult following and rightly so. 'The Chronicles Of Riddick' is a weighty, action epic that attempts to fashion a mythology based upon the character created by star Diesel and director Twohy in their earlier collaboration, 'Pitch Black'. But where that film was more an intimate thriller, 'The Chronicles Of Riddick' is an extravaganza in the truest sense of the word. Boasting immaculate set design, stunning costumes and fabulous CGI-rendered backdrops & SFX, it is enthralling entertainment. With its obvious Biblical and Shakespearean undertones, 'The Chronicles Of Riddick' consistently delights not only as a sci-fi action adventure, but also as an interesting, well-rounded story that really needs/deserves to be taken forward. Diesel, with his limited acting abilities, seems to have found the perfect role, which helps showcase his deadpan expressions to his advantage and underlines his ability to deliver one-liners very effectively. Thandie Newton, essentially playing Lady Macbeth, is deliciously evil whereas Dame Judi Dench, albeit saddled with a small part, is truly ethereal. David Twohy directs with an assured hand and never allows the glitz to overpower the absorbing tale being told. Watch it...you won't be disappointed!

The first direct sequel ever in the Bond franchise, Quantum Of Solace continues in story, tone & character from where its illustrious predecessor, Casino Royale left off. The complicated plot follows Bond trying to uncover the mystery behind the death of Vesper, the woman he loved & lost, while at the same time attempting to thwart the nefarious ambitions of chief baddie Dominic Greene (Mathieu Amalric). In this mix is the sensual Camille (Olga Kurylenko), a woman with her own agenda. The stunt work is flawless and the action sequences put breathless audiences practically in the middle of the action! For this, the film has to be commended. The negatives crop up due to the often difficult-to-follow storyline and the distinct feeling that the movie seems a bit episodic - a part of a whole & not really a stand-alone product. Also, though I fully appreciate the tonal shift to a grittier, dirtier & more real Bond, the sense of fun that I feel was such an essential part of the series, is now sadly missing. But that apart, most Bond fans are more than likely to find this installment quite satisfying and the promise in the end-credits that 'James Bond will return' already looks a salivating prospect!

I first saw this film as a 20 year old in the late 80's on VHS & ended up thoroughly disappointed. Every scene seemed to stretch to near-infinity and the action was too sporadic for what I normally expected from a western. Now, however, things are different! I saw it again a few days ago after reading so many positive reviews & I must admit to pretty much being bowled over! 'Once Upon A Time In The West' is not your traditional shoot-em-up western. Its an acquired taste and I wouldn't be too far off the mark if I say that it resembles a dish with near-perfect proportions of ingredients, slow cooked over an intense fire. Director Leone doffs his hat to several classic westerns and ends up with a film thats greater than the sum of its parts. The lovely Jill McBain (Claudia Cardinale) arrives in the old west to join her new husband & family only to find them all brutally shot dead. Clues apparently point to the bandit Cheyenne (Jason Robards) though the dastardly deed has in fact been perpetrated by the magnificently evil Frank (Henry Fonda). Also in this lethal mix is a mysterious harmonica-playing stranger (Charles Bronson) with his own covert agenda. From the classic opening scene to the explosive climax, 'Once Upon A Time In The West' sucks the viewer into its vortex of emotions as layers upon layers are gradually peeled away revealing each characters true motivations. Featuring a stellar cast who have probably never been better, and a haunting, evocative score by maestro Ennio Morricone, 'Once Upon A Time In The West' is mandatory viewing for all film aficionado's. My only (small) complaint is the occasional self-indulgence displayed by Leone when he tends to give style precedence over narrative.

'Kung Fu Panda' is an absolute delight! A comic underdog story that satisfies on pretty much every level, its a film that is not only a riot for kids but a joy for adults as well. Our protagonist is Po - a big, cuddly Panda living with his surrogate father in China & working as a noodle maker/server in the Valley of Peace. This, however, is clearly not where he belongs as the big guy dreams of becoming the ultimate master of kung fu...only he has no plan or physical attributes for the same. Opportunity knocks when Po is picked by the sage-like master of the kung fu temple as the chosen one to face the evil Tai Lung. All manners of hilarity ensue as Po is put through the wringer by his trainer Shifu (the excellent Dustin Hoffman). Featuring an elaborate & spectacular prison-break sequence where the fearsome Tai Lung escapes, 'Kung Fu Panda' consistently regales with stunning artwork & detailing. The colour palette used is striking indeed and every character is imbibed with lifelike ticks and mannerisms. The voice-over work is superb. Jack Black as Po and Ian McShane as Tai Lung are particular stand outs. A family film to be enjoyed & treasured, 'Kung Fu Panda' is no.3 in my hierarchy of animated features - after 'Shrek 2' & 'The Lion King'.

The best super hero movie ever? Na...that would be Spiderman 2...but a pretty good super hero movie anyway? Yes! Chris Nolan has crafted an extremely dark, brooding film that takes the Batman franchise into hitherto unexplored territory. This is not to suggest that the film deviates from the pre-requisites of a summer blockbuster - big action set pieces & impressive SFX are woven into the narrative seamlessly. The matte painted, Gothic Gotham City that we have become accustomed to seeing in most Batman films is replaced by a very real, everyday American city that in fact adds to the creepiness by making the goings-on seem that much more identifiable. As the Joker unleashes terror on the city, its upto Batman & upright D.A. Harvey Dent to try & stop him. But can a man who has nothing to loose & is not motivated by greed be stopped? As Nolan explores issues of morality & conscience, the film descends into a nightmare world where the Joker is the puppeteer & the good guys his puppets. Though every actor excels, the film truly does belong to Ledger. While his sinister make-up and Nolan's very astute direction do help, credit has to be given to Ledger for the sheer energy and madness he brings to the role. The action, whenever it bursts forth, is indeed a big adrenaline rush. Of particular note is a stunning extradition sequence in Hong Kong & the Batcycle-Monster truck chase through the streets of Gotham that ends with a spectacular pay-off. The film however, does have its flaws. Most importantly the length. 20 minutes of trimming (particularly in the latter half) could have made it a much more streamlined product. Also, the excessively dark tone often weighs too heavy and makes one crave for the occasional relief. But gripes aside, 'The Dark Knight' is a rewarding night at the cinema - one that provides entertainment with a dollop of intelligence.

'Maria Full of Grace' is an excellent choice for the serious film-goer. A harrowing account of how the poor are lured into smuggling drugs into the U.S., the film pulls no punches and gives it like it is. Despite the dark premise however, the film is never overtly murky and in fact ends up as a cautionary tale with the proverbial light at the end of the tunnel. Catalina Sandino Moreno as Maria is, in one word, exceptional. She handles the complexities of her character with the ease of a seasoned pro & her luminous beauty only adds to the empathy that the audience inevitably feels for her. Joshua Marston directs with a documentary like sensibility, making viewers feel like flies on the wall as they watch the lives of the characters unfold before them. Not a fun evening at the cinema but a very rewarding one nonetheless...do watch it!

Its Robert Downey Jr.'s day in the sun as he absolutely nails the character of Tony Stark! The playboy billionaire who develops a conscience seems to be the part that Downey was born to play. Often, a problem with first super hero outings is that the backstory establishing the origins of the hero gets cumbersome. As a result, action is compromised and one waits for the sequel which one hopes will hit the ground running. While an elaborate backstory is depicted in Iron Man as well, it never gets tedious. The action, when it arrives, is all metal & testosterone and while the climactic battle could have done with a bit more flair, there really isn't much to complain about. The always reliable Jeff Bridges as Iron Man's nemesis is excellent & so are Gwyneth Paltrow and Terence Howard as the allies. Despite the predictability that inevitably plagues the comic-book-superhero genre, director Jon Favreau injects a freshness into proceedings & never loses his grip on the pacing. A couple of hours well spent!

I confess..I am drawn to B movies like moths to a flame! Despite having missed out on the earlier 2 films of the trilogy, I rented this on a lazy evening and got pretty much what I expected - bonus being some sheer eye candy in the form of the gorgeous Ali Larter and the equally lovely Milla Jovovich! The movie is a pretty straight forward zombies vs humans clash and not many surprises are in store. The familiar boo moments and obligatory gory killings compliment the action set-pieces, at least 2 of which (a vicious crow-attack & an expansive shootout set in a desolate, devastated Las Vegas of the future) are quite impressive. The plot, if you can find one, is a mere excuse to deflect any criticism that might come one's way for having the gall in listing a director/screenwriter for the film and not just an action choreographer! Watch it if you're in the mood to satiate a craving for blood, gore & guts - not if you seek food for thought...

Why are most big blockbusters bereft of any substance? Why do they all rely on SFX that more often than not look patently ridiculous? Why do big studios and bigger stars greenlight such projects when it is so obvious that stories with natural running times of 45 minutes are being stretched to 90 minutes & beyond? Apart from a not-easy-to-digest premise, where our hero is ostensibly the last man on earth after a human-engineered cancer cure goes horribly wrong wiping out all mankind and leaving only some hideously deformed light-sensitive mutants who come out at night to prey on whoever/whatever they can find, the film suffers from shockingly low-grade SFX - something just not expected from a studio tentpole release of this magnitude. This is bite-sized category entertainment masquerading as a 4-course meal. Why has it made so much money? Search me...I AM CLUELESS!

After the first two films of the trilogy,I was expecting a whopper. Alas! 'Sympathy For Lady Vengeance' is a straight-forward revenge story with none of the trademark flair or chutzpah displayed by director Park Chan-Wook in the earlier films of the trilogy. It's all quite dull and predictable, and I would advise staying away if you are in the mood for watching something intelligent with twists and turns. The plot moves in a straight line until it reaches an over-the-top denouement that shocks more because of its tired inevitability rather than the ingenuity which one normally expects from a Park Chan-Wook film. As a stand-alone film, it's not really a disaster, but suffers due to the inevitable comparison with its more illustrious predecessors.

The story of Marie Antoinette is a well documented one.We know that she ascended the throne of France as a very young teenager,led a luxurious but vacuous life as empress,and was eventually a victim of the French revolution.Director Sofia Coppola presents this rich - but ultimately empty - existence in her absolutely gorgeously mounted film.The problem lies in the fact that she takes too long to relate this tale.The ennui of life at the French palaces was probably all too real,but to be shown on film,it needs to be presented in an entertaining manner.It is here that Coppola fails.The film appears to be merely a montage of sequences depicting the repetitiveness and weariness of life in the royal halls and galleries of the French monarchy.While Kirsten Dunst in the eponymous role and Jason Schwartzman as her husband,King Louis XVI,are undoubtedly good,the film often gets cumbersome.On the flip side,however,is the stunning location filming,the remarkable art-direction and the absolutely sumptuous costume-design.In fact,I will have to concede that this is perhaps the best looking film I have ever seen! The much debated modern musical score does jar occasionally but is certainly not as much of a hindrance as I had anticipated it to be.Coppola is certainly a thinking director who seems to have inherited her legendary father's genes,but I really hope she picks scripts with a little more meat on them.

This film is best described with two seemingly unrelated adjectives - beautiful and gut-wrenching.Both these adjectives can in fact be used to depict the two faces of human nature as shown in this outstanding film.A harrowing account of the true-life genocide that occurred in Rwanda in 1994, 'Hotel Rwanda' is a remarkable effort in every sense.Don Cheadle as Paul Rusesabagina,the manager of a Belgian-owned hotel in Kigali,Rwanda,gives an exceptional,career-defining performance.The dignity he brings to the part,and the determination and resourcefulness of his character make for truly compelling viewing and I often found myself choked with emotion as I watched one disturbing sequence after another unfold.Supporting performances by all are excellent, with a special mention for the amazing Sophie Okonedo.Terry George's direction has the required lucidity and delivers solid solar-plexus punches as the story moves along at a (surprisingly) brisk pace.At the end of it all,we are left with a deep sense of regret at our insensitivity towards anything that doesn't directly affect us.Cinema this moving doesn't come along everyday and I recommend it highly for all discerning viewers out there.

This is a film that hits the ground running and never lets up at all! It's the only film I've seen that actually left me breathless by the time the end credits rolled! Directors Mark Neveldine & Brian Taylor have made a film for hardcore action buffs that eschews weighty substance for an adrenaline fuelled ride of violence and mayhem.Chev Chelios (Jason Statham) has been injected with a poison that leaves him with one hour to live..it is in this hour that he needs to find (and kill) the man who has left him in this state.The only way to prolong life is to pump up with as much adrenaline (artificial or otherwise) as possible. Everything about the film - be it the characters,the stunts or the situations - is so OTT that suspension of belief is mandatory.One is expected to just go along for the ride as one incredible incident after another unfolds at breakneck speed! Watch it in the right spirit..and you won't be disappointed!

The first and obvious question has to be - Why? The original film has been a cross-generational favourite thanks to its easy accessibility via cable and home video.Almost anyone who is even remotely interested in the horror genre would be more than familiar with the source material.Having said that,I must admit that as a stand-alone film,this is a reasonably solid piece of entertainment.Sure,we've all become more de-sensitised and cynical since 1976 - the year of release of the first film - but a cracking good yarn always remains a cracking good yarn.Whereas the underlying feeling of doom that pervaded the first film is sadly absent in this version,the lush visuals and the inherent sense of foreboding in the tale somewhat make up.Liev Schreiber lends a quiet dignity to his part and its good to see the under-rated Julia Stiles in a role that gives her something to chew on.Mia Farrow as the evil Mrs.Baylock borders on hamming while Seamus Davey-Fitzpatrick as the Anti-Christ glowers a lot but is effective nevertheless.Director John Moore serves up many more boo-moments than in the original,and while his reasons for attempting the film may be questioned,his commitment to the material certainly can't be faulted.

To all the people of the world who've loved this film - 'What movie did you guys see?!'This has to be one of the dullest,blandest and most irritatingly sterile film's that I've watched in my entire movie-going life.Based on a short story by Annie Proulx,it should have remained just that - a short story.But screenwriters McMurtry and Ossana in their infinite wisdom have seen it fit to 'flesh-out' the story in order that it become 'filmable'.Although the story spans 20 years,the main leads don't seem to look any older than their younger selves and,in particular,the horrendous and amateurish wigs worn by all the protagonists appear positively laughable (don't miss the stick-on sideburns!).Heath Ledger's 'fantastic' performance amounts to spending the whole movie speaking from the south-west corner of his mouth so that audiences go back not having understood a word of what he said.The pace of the film is,to put it politely,leisurely,and I found myself looking at my watch once too often to check on the seemingly endless passage of time.To top it all,although this is supposed to be a love story,it distinctly comes across more as a lust story.I'm practically speechless as to why this movie has got so many raves.It's probably going to sweep all the major awards and I guess I'll have to enroll in some film-appreciation classes to perhaps 'understand' and fully appreciate this kind of cinema.As was the case with director Lee's earlier monumental bore 'Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon','Brokeback Mountain' left me cold and completely unmoved.If this seems less like a review and more like a rant,then I guess it just points to the fact as to how passionately I detest this piece of trite.The 2/10 rating is only for Rodrigo Prieto's breathtaking cinematography.

Pent-up frustrations,simmering racial tensions...and redemption.That,in essence,is Paul Haggis' brilliant 'Crash'.A layered,richly textured screenplay,outstanding performances from the incredibly talented ensemble cast and impeccable direction make 'Crash' one of the finest films of the year.Several completely absorbing stories run parallel with each other,moving along towards a conclusion filled with hope,despair and a deeper understanding of oneself.This is certainly not escapist fare.Its a film that makes you think and think hard.Its a film that questions our day-to-day urges and motivations.Its a film that simultaneously makes you want to applaud and deplore the human spirit.Haggis sets himself up as a writer-director to reckon with and I would certainly be disappointed if his efforts are ignored during the coming awards season.A must-watch!

If you've seen Ong-bak,you've really seen it all.Director Pinkaew and star Jaa try hard to top their previous outing but are done in by the sense of deja-vu that pervades this film throughout.Thai village boy Jaa goes to Sydney in pursuit of his beloved baby elephant which has been kidnapped by some mean looking thugs!Obviously the story is a mere excuse to basically substantiate the elaborate action set-pieces.A few of these set-pieces are admittedly impressive but the general feeling one gets is that of tired repetition.Whereas Ong-bak was a jaw-dropper thanks to its originality(all 'real' action without any wire-work or CGI),Tom Yum Goong unfortunately loses out on that appeal and ends up as a case of 'been there,done that'.Still,if you haven't seen Ong-bak or have nothing better to do,you could watch this and come away feeling reasonably satisfied.