Faisal-Hashmi

G-Force, the family adventure by producer Jerry Bruckheimer (Pirates of the Caribbean), isn't a bad movie by any count and works as a fun kids movie. But a tired and formulaic plot means the movie is no 'must-watch' by any means and caters mostly to the little ones. The story follows a specially trained team of secret agent guinea pigs that work for the US government. Their mission is to stop an evil billionaire (Bill Nighty) who manufactures home appliances from taking over the world through a microchip he has planted in them.

To begin with the positives, the animation is top-notch. The guinea pigs look very photo-realistic and after a few minutes you forget they're CGI. There is an inherent cuteness factor to them, and just like last year's Alvin and the Chipmunks, the filmmakers know that this will be the biggest draw for kids and their parents. There are plenty of jokes to keep a smile on your face (although the toilet humor gets old after a while).

But that brings me to the story. How many times have you heard this: "Evil genius wants to take over the world and only the unlikeliest of heroes can save the world."? Too many to count, I imagine. And G-Force fits right into that category. The plot is tired and doesn't attempt to bring anything new to the table. There are subplots strangely similar to last year's Bolt, and the finale has an uncanny resemblance to Transformers. Aside from being predictable from the very start, the biggest problem here comes out in the final reels – the villain's motivations are laughably ridiculous. As if it wasn't hard enough to stomach the improbability in an evil billionaire's plan to take over the world by installing timed microchips in every home appliance he manufactures, the final act tries to implement a twist so ridiculous and far-fetched that one wonders what was going on in their mind when coming up with it. Sure, kids will chew it up, but adults are sure to gasp at the screen at the stupidity of it all. Still, lessons are learned and there's a bit of emotional quotient towards the end that makes partially saves it.

Another problem is the action scenes. There are too many of them, and most of them are uninvolving. The movie opens with a 10 minute long covert operation that gets tiring a quarter of the way through. And every other ten minutes or so comes another chase or mission that only serves as eye-candy and gets monotonous and unfocused, especially in the finale. The special effects are great, but what's the need for exploding cars and buildings in a kid's movie?

The voice acting is impressive. Sam Rockwell, Penelope Cruz, and Nicolas Cage do a great job bringing their characters to life. Bill Nighty plays a stock villain with no character development or motivation, and it comes across badly. Zach Galifianakis impresses as the leader of the team, but Will Arnett is wasted in a small and too serious of a role for a comedian of his caliber.

So is G-Force recommended? Mostly if you have kids or are between 3-13 years old. It's not a bad movie by a stretch (it's much better than last year's Beverly Hill Chihuahua) and you will not get bored in the theaters, but it's a shame that the movie could have been so much more. They had an interesting bunch of characters on screen, but unfortunately they settled on making cookie-cutter Hollywood fare than something truly unique.

Rating – 2.5 out of 5 stars.

I went into Butterfly Effect: Revelation with very low expectations, especially after the mediocre sequel. But it is a surprisingly well-plotted and thrilling puzzle of a movie that has it share of great moments, but the twist can be guessed by most and it changes up the rules of the first two.

We follow Sam who lives whose girlfriend Rebecca was murdered 5 years ago. Like the previous movies, he has the ability to travel back in time to key moments to gain some new information and sometimes even alter the past. He uses this to help the FBI catch killers beforehand. Only this time, the movie adds a few new elements: 1)Sam can travel back to ANY moment in the past, whether he was present there when it originally happened or not. 2) He doesn't need to use journals/pictures to travel back and can do so at his will anytime. 3) A few more but they are spoiler territory.

But once he gets the information that the killer who is behind bars for Rebecca's murder is wrongly convicted, he decides to break his own rule of not altering his own past to travel back to the night of the murder, but through a mistake creates a serial killer for the world.

Unlike the second movie which had a large amount of plot holes and ridiculous decisions by the protagonist, this one is for the most part well-plotted, presented as a puzzle piece instead of a traditional thriller, and creates suspense by adding the element of guessing the killer's identity. It has a lot of thrilling moments, particularly in the last half hour. Unfortunately, the twist the movie tries to pull is predictable in the movie if you are paying attention. Although that doesn't mar the experience, it ruins the element of surprise. Also, some fans of the original may not like the changes to the rules of the first. The actor's did a surprisingly good part in the movie. The dialogue was good, although the little attempts at humor failed more than worked.

Overall, this is a recommended thriller, especially if you are a fan of the original. It tries to do something different by adding the element of a serial killer into the mix and gives the protagonist much more stake in the movie rather than just saving the life of a loved one. If only it wasn't for the predictable twist, my rating would be higher.

I went into the movie not expecting much, and ended up being completely satisfied. Babysitter Wanted, unlike countless DTV horrors, is genuinely creepy and has an original plot that will stay with people. A great surprise! Angie (Sarah Thompson) moves into a small town to study in college. She meets people there, but also has a feeling that someone is stalking her. She takes up a babysitter position at a farm house one weekend, and the horror begins.

The first half of the movie is in the vein of the Strangers and When a Stranger Calls. And it's equally effective, if not more. It's easy to identify with Angie's situation. The scares are consistent, although SFX is a little overused. Tension is mounted throughout.

A great twist midway turns the movie into a different direction. Without spoiling anything, the movie veers into a supernatural angle and is equally chilling as the first half although might be too gory and disturbing for some. The plot from here on is original, leading to a satisfying ending which makes room for sequels too.

The acting is surprisingly good from everyone. The productions values are great for a low budget movie, although there are a few lighting issues in the second half.

All in all, Babysitter Wanted is a welcome surprise and horror fans will have a great time with it. Recommended.

I caught Chandni Chowk to China in my local theater today, and went in with medium expectations (I was wary of an Akshay Kumar tent-pole after Singh is Kingh)

But this movie is an all time low for commercial movies, and a career ruining highlight for Akshay Kumar. Chandni Chowk to China is riddled with a highly disjointed and nonsensical plot, mostly awful and unfunny gags, and unbelievable decisions that makes this the first disaster of 2009.

The highly pretentious and over-complex plot goes something like this - Years ago, there was a Chinese warrior named Liu Sheng, who was killed by an evil ruler called Hojo. Prophecy says that he would be reborn in a different state and country years later.

Cut to present day, and we have Sidhu (Akshay Kumar), a failed cook who tries hard at being lucky but is conned by people. One day, through a string of convoluted sequences, a group of Chinese people in India recognize him as Liu Sheng. A conman, friend to Sidhu, scams him and tells him that he is the reborn ruler of China, which makes him happy and excited to go to China and change his luck. But when he realizes his true identity, the fate of China's rule depends on him.

From here on, the plot turns into something out of four completely different stories jammed into one, with half the pages missing. I dare you to make sense out of this highly convoluted storyline (SPOILERS FOLLOW)- A TV ad girl called Sikhi (Deepika) fools Sidhu at the route to China, and visits there instead. When Sidhu finally reaches China, he finds a revamped Sikhi, who's called Meow Meow, a twin sister of Sikhi. Turns out their parents were killed by Hojo at some point, and Sikhi escaped to India and Meow wants to avenge their death. But wait, halfway through the movie, we find out their father is alive, but has lost his memory of being a policeman, and now is an old beggar. When Meow finds out Sidhu is Liu Sheng, she tries to kill him (WHY she would do that is never explained, and instead of simply stabbing/shooting him, she decides to put acid on her lips and try kissing him.) But wait, she fails, and through more convoluted events, Sikhi sees Meow whom she presumed died ages ago. And wait, Hojo realizes Liu Sheng is here as Sidhu, so he publicly slaughters Sidhu's guardian who happens to be in China at that moment in front of Sidhu (why he didn't kill Sidhu himself, we'll never know). Defeated, Sidhu meets the FATHER of the twins who then REGAINS his memory of being a POLICE OFFICER through unfunny comic events, and decides to TRAIN Sidhu with Kungfu. I could go on with numerous huge plot holes and laughable action sequences for the sake of them, but to cut short, more nonsensical events follow, leading to the overblown and imbalanced climax of this mess.

Akshay Kumar's antics, unfortunately, do not save the movie this time. The only two redeemable moments of the movie are his final training sequence (that manages to be hilarious), and a few scenes on his way to China. The rest of the movie tries hard at being a slapstick comedy as well as a action drama, but falls flat on both levels. There are moments where the characters are supposed to be serious, but they act comic (such as after the death of his guardian and the final fight). Deepika gives one of the worst female acting I have seen anywhere. Her twin persona falls flat, but the blame is entirely on the disastrous script.

It's as if the filmmakers didn't even try. At all. First it is shown to be a fist-fight kung-fu movie, then in the middle of it, it turns into Akshay Kumar and Hojo having magical powers, including one where they LIFT WATER OFF THE SEA. These moments, supposedly trailer shots for the sake of showing the budget and CGI, instead end up being laughable and amateur. Dozens of huge problems in believability aren't explained, and the movie sags along to it's finale, hoping the audience won't notice.

Overall, Chandni Chowk to China should be avoided by almost anyone looking for even a mindless entertainer, except for die hard Akshay Kumar fans. Even then, you will end up feeling cheated and disappointed throughout the movie, and wonder how so many problems were overlooked during this rushed production.

3 out of 10.

I consider myself extremely lucky to have taken the time to watch "The Wrestler". It's a deeply heartfelt and powerful tale about the personal life of an aging athlete and how he balances his profession with his relations.

In case you didn't know, the movie is about Randy "The Ram" Robinson, a professional wrestler who is now past his prime, and works in the independent circuit. With a daughter who hates him and a bad day job, Randy handles his life outside wrestling while dealing with his deteriorating health.

The movie deals with real human drama about relationships, the personal problems faced by a glossy wrestler and how his real life is anything but. From daughter issues to love life to fulfilling fan expectations, the screenplay tackles these with brilliance and provides insight into an athlete's life. The ending is especially powerful and nails the theme of the movie into the ground.

Darren Aronofsky does a great job directing the movie. The camera looks raw and the angles follow Rourke around, which helps look into the minute details of his life. The matches are professionally shot, and add to the glamor of the sport.

The real gem here is the knockout performance of Mickey Rourke. Taking on a hard role, he provides the believability and emotion to the character and takes the intensity to a whole new level. Marisa Tomei plays her part brilliantly, also supported by Evan Rachel Wood in a great performance.

Overall, do not miss "The Wrestler". It's one of the best films of 2008 and I wish Rourke best of luck in the future.

Let me tell you this up front - if you are expecting the usual action movie from Van Damme here, you will be sorely disappointed. JCVD is an intelligent comedy with some heist elements thrown in, which makes interesting arguments about the personal life and issues faced by an aging action star.

Jeane Claude Van Damme plays a different version of himself where he is tied up in legal custody of his child, going broke, and is unhappy about the current slate of movies that he has worked in. All these issues lead him to visit his hometown Belgium to start things over, when he is involved in an ongoing heist and is mistaken to be the oppressor by the police.

The acting is top-notch. Van Damme shines in every scene he is in, especially in the monologue he gives which really highlights his dramatic range to the fullest. The rest of the cast also impress with their zany characters and hilarious satire.

Perhaps the greatest praise goes to writer/director Mabrouk El Mechri. The movie works great because of a tightly focused script with interesting questions raised about the public's perception and respect of an international action star, and how the star himself is no different than others in his problems. It would really help if you know more about Van Damme's history to get some of the inside jokes made towards his career.

The direction is slick, with impressive production values. The non-linear narrative keeps you glued and interested, and the great use of camera angles and different shots are suited to the movie.

Overall, JCVD is a gem which should be seen by everyone. It's Van Damme's best and holds an interesting theme which is explored in a number of effective ways. Highly recommended!

Whatever way you look at it, Max Payne disappoints. A movie that was marketed as a complete action movie which was also based on an action game is actually a dull and bland mystery movie with elements of action embedded.

On of the reasons for that is the first half. Given the premise of the movie - A detective looking for revenge of his family's murder - the first half is incredibly boring and devoid of any suspense or tension. All we get is either cops talking about Max Payne and his past, or a very sorry-looking Max Payne going about the city looking for clues in very disjointed and badly edited sequences. Nothing important happens as all we get is exposition and introduction of unnecessary characters.

Speaking of unnecessary characters, played by Ludicrous was a very useless character and didn't have any use in the story other than for flashbacks which should have been removed. Olyga Kurenko is also a forgettable character that was included only for sex appeal.

Another reason is the plot issues. Without spoiling anything, the plot feels disjointed and doesn't tie up in the end as many questions remain unanswered. The ending is also very abrupt and unsatisfying.

The saving graces of the movie are the visuals and the final act. John Moore has succeeded in giving the film a noir look which is beautiful. The final act of the movie is the only place where you will find all the trailer action moments. They look amazing and this is the act where the story is actually moving forward to a finale.

Overall, Max Payne isn't a very bad movie. It's just disappoints given it's premise and source material.

Vantage Point is a wonderfully made movie. From the first scene itself, it makes use of its premise and introduces the plot, and from there on, the movies starts going into a loop, revealing other characters, and with each loop, revealing important new secrets, which change how you look at the plot.

You might think, or must have read that it is grating to see the same thing happening all over so many times, but believe me, each time, the story focuses on a different character, and doesn't just show the same thing all over again, but instead, adds new angles and details to the plot.

As for performances, almost everyone involved did a good job in the movie, and deserve credit. On the flipside, the only complaint one could have is that the movie gets a little to far-fetched as it progresses, but thats nothing compared to the great time you will have watching it. Must watch for any action thriller fan.

Hit-man, while its plot may not be anything new, is the best video game adaptation ever made, and definitely a great action movie you should see.

The "Hitman" is a genetically-engineered, elite assassin known only as Agent 47. But even 47 couldn't anticipate a "random equation" in his life exactitude: the unexpected stirrings of his conscience and the unfamiliar emotions aroused in him by a mysterious Russian woman.

To start off, the movie looks great. From all the locales, camera angles, costumes, the production values are mind-blowing and give it the high-budget vivid look. If you are a gamer, you may already know the origins of 47, and you should really know it, because the movie doesn't elaborate on 47's background.

Why is this a great movie? Because it does what all video game movies in the past had missed - have a plot which matters. Though it might be a bit confusing, this is actually a well-structured plot line. As far as acting goes, many gamers had criticized choice of Timothy Olymphant as 47, but he does full justice to his role, thankfully. Rest of the cast does a great job too.

On the flip-side, the only negative points of this movie can be that it lacks stealth action from the games, which might disappoint some gamers, and some of the movie looks similar to the Bourne movies in terms of music and some locales, but Bourne movies are amazing so no complain there.

Overall, this is a must see for the gamer, and also a great action movie people should check out, regardless of what critics think of it.

Meet the Spartans is an important movie. It goes a long way to prove how bad the comedies of this generation can go, and people will still probably watch it. It is an insult to the spoof genre, and believe me, it makes Epic Movie look much better.

Firstly, there is no comedy at all. What the writers have tried to do is try to cram in every reference to a pop culture element of the modern times into the movie, regardless whether it suits the scenes or not. It leads to sad and painfully unfunny random references like :

• The Pit of Death: Britney Spears, K-Fed, and even Sanjaya randomly appear into the movie and get kicked into the pit.

• American Idol judges comment on Leonidas' kick

• Sparta's Next Top Model judges a Spartan

• Xerxes playing Deal or No Deal with the Spartans

• Leonidas in Grand Theft Auto: Hot Gates

• Paris Hilton as the hunchback traitor (!?)

• Xerxes turning into a transformer

• Ugly Betty as the oracle

• Carmen Electra (Queen) turning into Venom and Traitora turning into Sandman

• Other painful references to Ghost Rider, Rocky, Rambo, Dancing with the Spartans, Stomp the Yard, Shrek, Lindsay Lohan's rehab, popular Youtube videos and more.

Also, the movie relies primarily on a one-joke gag on the implies homosexuality of the 300 Spartans, which we have already heard before, and it is stretched to such a limit in this movie that it is bland and annoying. The cast tries very hard to make something out of the movie, but miserably fails due to the god-awful scripting. The movie starts lame and ends on a lamer note.

Overall, do your best to avoid this movie, unless you are a director who needs to see all the ingredients of a bad comedy to avoid. Even then, they are better ways to learn so. I tried a lot to like the movie as I love spoofs myself, but this one missed the mark by a mile.

Tighten up, and enter the theater for one of the best movie-going experiences of all time. Cloverfield is an intense and brilliantly made horror/monster movie, highly stylized in direction, and handled with successful execution.

The film follows five young New Yorkers who throw their friend a going-away party on the same night that a gigantic monster attacks the city.

Though the movie takes it time to start off with introducing the characters, it takes a split-second in the movie to start right off to the point, and takes the fast pace and suspense all the way to the last frame. The special effects are brilliantly handled, making the movie all the more believable, with its handycam view, though might be distracting for some, is actually a great way to show the movie through the eyes of the victims, rather than using aerial shots and pans.

Overall, this is a must-watch for the new generation who even have a passing interest in the genre, and sets a new milestone in movie-making.

I am an avid Saw fan. I have watched all the Saw movies in the theater, and this one was no exception. The first Saw was truly refreshing, a genuine quality thriller movie with one of the most truly shocking endings I have seen. The second Saw wasn't all that good, as the suspense from the first movie was missing, although the twist was still awesome. The third Saw was better than the second one, a bit more dramatic with flashbacks and a little over the top with the traps, but ended the movie with an amazingly strong closure. Now comes Saw 4, which has a near-incomprehensible plot and a messy script, is a decent movie but nothing compared to previous Saw movies.

Saw IV focuses most on SWAT Commander Rigg (Lyriq Bent), who is haunted by the loss of his colleagues -- especially Detective Kerry (Dina Meyer) -- at the hands of Jigsaw. Rigg is abducted by Jigsaw's mysterious new helper and finds himself engaged in a game engineered by Jigsaw from beyond the grave. Since Rigg is obsessed with saving people, Jigsaw has set a series of interconnected traps that force Rigg to question his obsession and ask whether people must save themselves.

Now to start with a few good points of the movie: the traps are still amazing and inventive, which has always been the strong point of the Saw movies. The whole background story about Jigsaw's past is done well, which gives you a greater depth on his character. That is pretty much it.

Now to the problems: the whole idea of mixing flashbacks with concurrent events of the movie is very confusing to the viewer in the first viewing at least, and it is very difficult to follow. The whole purpose and reason of Jigsaw's killings is not even implemented here, as he is killing many innocent people off throughout the movie. The ending, without spoiling anything, is confusing and not satisfactory, as it proves Jigsaw wrong in his theory even more, and doesn't add anything to look forward to, but leaves space for another Saw movie.

Overall, this is a decent torture movie, but is stale compared to the other previous Saw movies. Worth the ticket price only for avid series fans, the rest should wait for a rental.

I am Legend, starring Will Smith, is a feature film adaptation of Richard Matheson's 1954 novel of the same name. And the movie is quite a good one, successfully portraying the feeling of isolation, post-apocalyptic dread, sufficient acting, and a tight storyline for the most part, it suffers from a cliché-ridden finale that weakens the experience a bit.

The movie is about virologist Robert Neville, who thinks he may be Earth's only human not affected by a man-made virus. He works to create a cure while living in a city inhabited by mutant victims of the plague.

The film starts off great, with a little flashback to how the infection began, and then moving towards the present when Will Smith is the only man on Earth. Throughout the movie, the movie goes back in time and tells what really happened and led to the current state of humankind. This was a great way to start off, and the idea of how the infection spread is unique from other zombie movies, and makes you think too.

Talking about the vampires in the movie, they do not look most convincing as they would have if they would have been human, but thankfully, that doesn't detract from the experience so much. Will Smith gives a good performance as an isolated scientist looking for a cure, so does the rest of the cast (a few to speak of) It is after the first act that the experience starts to be marred. Midway, the movie adds a few drawn-out Castaway inspired sequences which we all have seen, not to mention the one with the dog. You will know it when you see it. They are well-shot, but we have seen them before done better.

As a few other characters are introduced, the movie falls for a very cliché-ridden ending, which is the weakest point for the movie. Not spoiling anything, I can just say that we have seen the very ending in countless zombie movies like 'Dawn of the Dead', 'Shaun of the Dead' etc.

Overall, I am Legend is a fun ride for the most part, and though the clichéd ending is a letdown, the movie never fails to entertain. Worthy of the ticket price.

Dhamaal is an entertaining movie. However, one can't shake off the fact that the movies LIFTS scenes and story lines from AROUND 5-6 Hollywood MOVIES, right from the first scene.

First scene is a rip-off of Johnny English, the third scene is copied from one of Mr.Bean's episodes. The whole damn storyline is EXACTLY IDENTICAL to 'Its a Mad Mad World' and 'Rat Race'. Later one, the movie lifts the bridge scene from 'Road Trip', the tiger roar scene is from a movie called Without A Paddle, and the whole soap gun scene is from 'Small Time Crooks'. On many occasions, it is also inspired by Starsky and Hutch.

UPDATE - Just watched 'Dude, Wheres my car?' and the pizza scene is copied directly from there.

However, the second half is where we see some originality, and ironically, the most original scenes are the most entertaining. The movie goes for a clichéd ending, however, which is a downer.

THE GOOD

• Great performances from the cast, especially Arshad Warsi, Ritesh, and Jaffrey.

• Some very entertaining original parts, especially in the second half.

THE BAD

• You won't have much fun if you have watched the above-mentioned movies.

• Some jokes, like the airplane one and the cliffhanging one, are stretched to a point where they are not funny anymore.

• Not so great music.

• Disappointing ending.

Overall, Dhamaal is a decent entertainer, but stumbles badly on originality, as the copied jokes have been done much better in the original movies.