Vicky_baba

Shankarabharanam is story of how music can bring together people from different walks of life.Melocholic,pure,brilliant and yet at times sad,the movie chronicles the life of a brilliant artist from the memories and thoughts of a fellow music lover.

Shankara Shasthry is a renowned carnatic singer of his time.At the height of his prominence, he is invited by communities near and far and felicitated by prominent people.After the advent of pop music however,carnatic music begins to recede in popularity and the great Shankara shasthry becomes an afterthought in the minds of young music lovers swayed by western culture.

Among his devoted listeners is a young woman who is of a geisha-esqe heritage.Even though the reason she is taught music is more for the practical purpose of enticing a potential benefactor,she develops a true love for music and in the process tremendous respect for the great artist.The two are brought together after the women seeks shelter away from people who are trying to exploit her.

The crux of the movie is that the world doesn't understand that the relationship between the teacher and disciple is purely platonic.Given the heritage of the disciple,society simply assumes to name a relationship at its lowest level, when the bond between the characters cannot be catogorized or described that easily.

Ironically society is so shallow and immature as to that it would rather let go of a esteemed member of their community rather than accept a lowly member into their very own.

The disciple soon realizes that her proximity to her teacher clouds the majesty of her teacher and she disappears into the darkness of the night.Years later,she returns with a child,a byproduct of a tragic rape.She intends to give her son the opportunity of tutelage under the great master unlike herself who never had the chance.This forms of the story arc of the movie.

The greatness of the movie lies in its purity of the message that it delivers and the relevance that it holds till date;i.e we are humans first,art unites, and the purpose of the society is to bring people together not divide on the basis of heritage or caste.

A movie told narrated more though music and silence,Shankarabharanam is timeless classic with music that is simply gold.

Don't be fooled by the credits.

Just because its directed and written by Trivikram,it isn't as brilliant as his earlier movies.

Just because it has Pawan Kalyan,it doesn't have the same charismatic character traits or the style elements of some earlier movie.

Jalsa is an average movie drowning in the expectations of people who see two big names and automatically add them and expect a mega super duper bumper movie that will run in theaters for longer than sholay and DDLJ combined.

Come on people,haven't we learnt anything from 'Jai Chiranjeeva'? Jalsa is good at times(partlu partlu ga chuste bagane undhi) Pawan Kalyan is hip,funny and cool.He is very preachy and is always discoursing something to someone throughout the movie,but his charisma is undeniable,so if the movie is a flop,it isn't his fault.

Trivikram the dialog writer is brilliant.The dialogs are very witty and the one on one scenes are remarkable.The comedy scenes are hilarious.Suneel rocks!Bramhandham rocks even harder! Trivikram the director is what went wrong and that is where the blame lies.The story is meandering,and on occasion even illogical.Almost every scene including the climax is a joke and nothing is taken seriously.

Why is there so much violence?What is this?Kill Bill 3? Whats with all the rape jokes?Whats his problem with transformers and current poles?Trivikram is a classy director.So why is he so desperate to please the 'mass'?Did he fear that what happened to Manmadhudu would happen to Jalsa? The heroines are OK.They are glamorous.From far.One close up shot of Kamalinee in the second half was terrifying.Rest was OK.

Overall,the movie is pretty bad.The comedy scenes are awesome.So don't watch it in a movie theater.Just wait for the comedy scenes to show up in You tube.Or if you have the patience they should show up in an year in 'Cineranjani'.

The only reason i Saw Micheal clayton was because Roger Ebert gave it four stars.He is right 99% of the time,but as in the case of fight Club and Gladiator,he is wrong.

Or maybe his opinion just doesn't match mine.Ebert calls Clayton an 'good exercise in the legal/thriller' genre.I fail to see how.

Watching Michael clayton is like walking into a conversation among strangers.Maybe you know what they are talking about or maybe you just done care.

Story aside, watching the movie is a complete pain.Keeping the audience guessing is one thing,to leave questions answered is another.

I read Eberts review and walked in knowing the story and yet,i felt irritated by the way it was put together.Its basically a 15 min story stretched into 2 hours,and those 15 mins is generic stuff that you find in TV dramas.

The story has gaping holes and makes glaring leaps and hopes the audience doesn't notice.Tell me something,if we are smart enough to piece together a jigsaw puzzle of a movie, don't you think we realize that throwing a watch and wallet into a burning car doesn't prove anything?Seriously.

Call me childish for asking for a smooth narrative with some real moral conflict.I think the movie would have made more interesting if it had been shown from the perspective of the lawyer who goes ballistic and runs naked through the snow.At least he seems human.

Chak De was highly recommended by most of my friends.They praised the movie for being a feel good movie that supposedly might have motivated the Indian cricket team to a World cup victory.

The movie, is about underdogs.From one angle its about hockey and from the other its about women,both examples of groups seeking equal rights.

But strangely,Chak de isn't a sports movie.Its more of a feel good chick flick.

Needless to say i had high hopes for the movie.I wasn't exactly disappointed,yet the movie didn't reach my expectations as it was touted as being one of the best sports movies of all times.

What is good about it: The team has wonderful chemistry.Every player is distinct and the roles are well etched.Their interaction feels real and their joy and sadness is easy to relate to.

Shah rukh khan isn't as annoying as in his earlier roles.For once his name isn't Rahul and he doesn't preen and stutter like a retarded peacock.For once he has picked up a role that asks for more that just looking intensely love smitten for 3 hrs at a stretch.

It doesn't have too many songs.Just a couple and they are well placed.

Whats not so good: The movie is essentially a fairy tale.when you truly wonder what it takes to beat a 7 time world champion you would think of two things:either fantastic talent coupled with good strategy that needs just three months of coaching,or stupendous luck to somehow scrape a victory at the final stage.

The movie assumes that its the former and there in lies the fallacy.The truth is even the most talented need more that pep talks and pats on the back to beat champions.

Too much time is devoted to teaching the ideals of teamwork.At no point does someone look at a piece of paper and discuss formations and combinations.Forget knowing the opposition well,it just assumes a blind belief that raw talent alone will prevail over any opposition.(In some ways, its like the Indian cricket team) Its all good for textbooks and on paper but if all it took to win was great speeches then every coach would be an orator instead of a strategist.

For a sports movie,it focuses on the wrong issues.For a hockey team,there is no talk of strategy.Teams can play without shoes but they cant win without strategy especially team sport like hockey.This aspect of the movie makes it loose credibility.The ending is far fetched and displays that the movie has a very commercial core.So much for being realistic.

Rocky isn't a great sport movie because Stallone won in the end.He didn't.Instead,he lasted longer in the ring than anyone expected and that gave the movie credibility like none other.I wish Chak de could have gone in that direction.

Chak De is a good movie for it gives its viewer their money worth,but it certainly isn't a great movie.

Spiderman 3 is definitely one of the most anticipated movies of recent times.Considering i thought spiderman2 was awesome,i sort of had high hopes for spiderman 3.Alas,it was not meant to be.

The third installment of the franchise supposedly deals with Peter parkers migration to the dark side.And his on going fight with the green goblin jr.and his love story with Mary jane.And his new enemy,the Sandman who supposedly killed his uncle.And his love triangle with Gwen stacy.And his other new enemy,Venom.

And that precisely is the problem with the movie.Too much 'Days of our life' drama and way too many characters.Weaving in through the trials and tribulations of 3/4 different characters the script lacks focus and everyone appears confused and dazed.

Some fight/CGI sequences are good through.Especially the one with the super white Gwen Stacy hanging from the skyscraper scene.Surprisingly the spiderman series has some really brave women.They keep hanging chicks from the tallest of buildings and they hardly brake a sweat.In fact the second they are rescued and placed on the ground,they are half way in falling in love.

If I had been hanging from such heights,i would have wet my pants and that if i am lucky.

Back to the movie,its disappointing.Nothing to clap about.Nothing worth writing about.But surprisingly, yet not a waste of money.Its engaging in the way a street brawl is.You want to know what happens the first time but you wouldn't watch it again.

'Sagara sangamam' refers to the meeting of the river with the sea.It metaphorically refers to many things such as the seeking and fulfillment of destiny,of the union of people meant for each other and even of a persons place in the world.

Sagara sangamam is the story of two star crossed lovers who sacrifice all for the happiness of each other.Balakrishna is a talented dancer with a passion for the arts(and dance in particular).His simple and honest soul doesn't permit him to attain professional success in a world that requires a certain level of moral flexibility.

Battling poverty yet hoping to someday fulfill his(and his mothers) dream of becoming a dancer,Balakrishna(Kamal Hassan) meets the beautiful Madhavi(Jayapradha).

Madhavi recognizes the talent inherent in Balakrishna and gives him the opportunities that would finally give Balakrishna the recognition he deserves.Before an important life changing performance tragedy strikes and Balakrishnas mother passes away.

Balakrishna never completely recovers this tragedy yet remains steadfast with courage that Madhavi is on his side.Madhavi seemingly accepts his love yet the river and the sea never meet.

Balakrishnas world slowly falls apart and he tries to escape it all through cigarettes and alcohol. Not until its all about to end does Balakrishna finally meet Madhavi again,through an unpleasant encounter with her haughty daughter.

Sagara sangamam is a great movie filled with such lyrical beauty it absorbs you entirely.Its greatness lies in its authenticity,simplicity and self conviction that its character portray so well.Kamal hassan portrays Balakrishna so well that its hard to imagine anyone else in his place.Some people are born to play some roles.This was one of Kamal hassans.Jayapradha(as Madhavi) is stunningly beautiful and a pleasure to the eyes.

The direction of great k.Vishwanath is flawless and dialogs by Jhandhyala are immortal.The music of this movie remains popular until this very day.S.P.Balasubramaniam completely deserves the national award that he won for this movie.Many scenes in the movie especially the drunken'rain dance' atop the well remains forever etched in telugu cinema culture.

I remember watching this movie at a very young age and it made no sense to me as to why everyone in my family loved it so much.It wasn't until recent times that I saw it again and realized how i had seen it all before yet realized so little until now.

Sagarsasangamam is a classic in every sense.

Bommarillu is the story of Sidhu's(Sidharth) struggle in dealing with a controlling father.Life moves along manageable well till the point where he gets engaged to a girl of his father choice and then goes on to meet the girl of his dreams,Hasini (Genelia).Sidhu who had been rebelling from within until then,finally finds a reason to bring out the rebel who had been hiding within him all along.

The movie moves at a steady pace and keep the viewer interested at all junctions.Lead performance by Sidharth and Genelia are commendable though Genelia occasionally stumbles from sweet to sappy.The supporting cast does a decent job but I found Prakash Raj a little tiring as he does the same thing he does in every movie with the tapping-forehead-with-four-fingers-thing.

Strong points for the movie include:- 1.Squeaky clean script:-Its thekind of squeaky clean that u can watch this movie sitting next to your maths professor without flinching.The lead pair rarely make bodily contact except for some dance moves.No double meaning jokes,no exposing,no innuendo of any sort.Kudos to the director for his effort to keep it this clean.

2.Story&Direction:-The approach is the same,but at least the story is different.the characters of Sidhu and his father are well fleshed and their portrayal is commendable.It would have been easy to dismiss Sidhu for being a wuss without a spine if it wasn't for the directors effort in showcasing the emotions that lurk withing a man without freedom.

3.Genelia:-The whole script rests on her likability.And she does her job pretty well.Sometimes she does stumble on the line between sweet and sappy, but she finds her balance pretty fast.

4.Music:-Another great job by the talented Devi sri Prasad.Engaging and fun.

Weak points:-

1.The comedy track is weak.

2.Kota Srinivas rao and Jayasudha are wasted.They do provide strength to the cast but they are too talented to be offered that little.

3.Occasionally over sweet script but they are minor glitches and overall don't effect the movie to a great extent.

Bottomline:-A very good movie to be enjoyed with the entire family.If this movie doesn't break records,it will certainly run in theaters for a long time.

Krrish is being promoted as Indias first superhero movie even though that genre is probably the oldest in Indian film history. The movie is a sequel to a big hit of former years called 'Koi Mil Gaya'.After the death of Rohit(Hrithik Roshan),its the turn of the son,Krishna(Hrithik again) to shine as he has inherited the powers of the father.

The movie starts with the grandmother(Rekha) discovering the remarkable powers of her grandson.Fearing that his 'shakthis' will not give her 'mukthi' as they will be a cause for his exploitation,she leaves the place with grandson in tow to a remote corner of the world.The kid grows into a stud along with his horse.He can leap like crazy and climb trees like Tarzan.He is also supposedly very smart and very strong. Yada yada yada.

In this Utopian setting 'drops in' the super exploitive heroine,Priya(priyanka chopra) and wisks Krrish away to Singapore where he crosses paths with Dr.Arya(Naseerudin shah),an evil scientist who supposedly discovered the palmtop 20 years back and now wants to create a 'computer that can predict the future using astrology,astronomy and technology'!!And what does he plan to do with it?Rule the world of course.

The rest of the movie(30 minutes of it) is about how the 'superhero' defeats this 'supervillan'. In the first half,I mistook Krishh to be a kid movie,meant for kids below 10 years of age.In the second half i realized its not even a kids movie..its just a bizarre dumb movie that has more holes in its script than most adults can count.

Plus points:-

1.The graphics:-Pretty good for an Indian movie though flawed in their execution.(everyone knows u have to push down to move up..but newtons third law of equal and opposite forces don't matter for Krishh).

2.Hrithik Roshan:-The hard work is evident,but he cant salvage a horrible script.

Negative points:- 1.Script:-Holeridden and immature. The story moves back and forth of 20 years with no changes, with just the help of hair dye.

2.Product placements:-Placing commercial products in the hands of actors and its done so many times that its pathetic...many scenes are just ads without the voice-over.Hrithik endorses Bounrvita, Rekha is seen holding a bag of Tide(!!) and you can see more hordings on screen than a world cup match.

3.Veterans:-Rekha and shah.Rekha overacts..Shah just doesn't care,so he kind of 'underacts'.The boredom on Shah face is a true reflection of the audiences emotions.

4.Songs:-One average song and 3 other ones that sound all the same.They slow down the pace of the already dull movie.

Though the movie has a few sfx laden scenes that will make you sit up and take notice,the rest of the 3 hrs are a complete waste of time.

Bottomline:-Lots of south indians watch Balakrishna movies just to see how he makes a fool out of himself.Lots of North indians do that at Mithunda movies.Continuing in that line is Krishh.....amusing but for all the wrong reasons.

Perhaps what is needed most for enjoying a movie is nothing but an open mind and optimism. I haven't seen any of the Superman movies of the past nor have i read the comics.My only rendezvous with the man in the red underwear was as kid watching the cartoons on Cartoon Network.I had heard bad things about the movie yet I retained some optimism,as all of those who had complained were people who had seen the earlier flicks and had gone in expecting something.

The movie, right from the start doesn't disguise the fact that its laden with graphics.Given the topic, I guess the director didn't have a choice.The plot is about the return of Superman after his abrupt departure from Earth.He returns to explain that he had wandered off to explore the remains of his ill fated home planet of Krypton.Why does it take 4/5 years for that?Maybe because the universe is large and he got lost and given Superman is a dude,he didn't want to stop to ask for directions.I am sure if he had looked hard enough he would have found a gas station run by a Desi dude to welcome Superman with the greeting "Hello sir,How am I to help u?"

Things haven't changed much for Superman,except that his girlfriend is engaged to his lookalike in deed and has a kid.But Superman is cool with that.Coincidentally on the other side, our villain, Lex Luthur(Kevin Spacey) has come up with a strange crazy plan to take over the world. He is seen amassing the ingredients for the cook up including Kryptonite,the one element Superman is vulnerable to.Lex along with his 30s style bimbo girlfriend come up with a plan to build a whole island that is ingrained with Kryptonite thus Lex can kill Superman and then rule the world as most people would have been drowned(i told u it was crazy).

Even though the movie lacks a decent plot and a sensible storyline,is not short on the graphics department.The graphics are excellent and if seen on a huge screen might make the movie worth while.I like the amount of attention that was paid to the details.It shows details like sonic booms,weightlessness,propulsions,thrust and it makes impossible stunts like saving a monstrous plane believable.And the movie has a lot of stunts and special effects so if u aren't hellbent on the emotional aspect of a movie,its a fascinating distraction.

Perhaps Superman can learn from Spiderman.In Spiderman 2 when Spiderman stops a train,he almost gets him arms ripped off.Somehow,the fact that spider-man had a limited amount of strength and had to rely on smarts to get by the day of battling supervillans made it a great watch.Superman returns doesn't have that.Superman relies on sheer strength and inbuilt functions to get people out of trouble.Yes,its fascinating to watch but its not as smart as Spidey.Superman is always stronger than the villain and Lex is not really a problem for him.Lex is just a small glitch,simply because Lex is just a bald human with a bad plan.

Positive:- 1.Great graphics...technically very sound and great production values.

Negatives:- 1.Hollow plot...i am sure they could have come up with a better plan for the villain......and come up with a bigger challenge for Superman.If one villain isn't threatening enough bring on two maybe three,but at least make it a balanced fight.

2.The cast:-Everyone does a decent job given they don't have much to do.Superman has almost as many lines as Arnold in Terminator.Not much chemistry between the lead pair or anyone else.

One of the best con movies of its time ,Heartbreakers is a sort a movie that doesn't come very often.The rating on IMDb doesn't do justice to this cool comedy abt the heists of a con team of mother and daughter.Weaver shows great penchant for comedy but Ray liotta disappoints as he looks like he still has a goodfellas hangover(or maybe thats how he is in every movie) Weaver and Hewitt work their stuff but Hackman takes it all away.In his short role as the chain smoking millionaire ,Hackman is absolutely hilarious and outshines the entire cast.Watch this movie for its script and interesting story but watch out for Hackman...terrific!

Its not very often we come across movies that make you forget the time.Nuvvu Nakku Nachav definitely belongs to that category.A fun family movie with crisp dialogues and breezy smart script,writer trivikram pulls out a comedy that stay with you for a long time. Ironically there is nothing brilliant in the movie,no great performances,no great drama but yet you will love it for what it is..a fun feel good movie that is almost magical in the department of making time pass.Venkatesh plays his role with optimal sarcasm,may not be his best performance but certainly one of the most memorable.Arthi agarwal is pretty and likablebut she lost it after this movie.In conclusion a movie for all occasions!