Page03.com - Bollywood News

Just a thought before I review this film… When you saunter in for the screening of a movie directed by a celebrated film-maker, a movie which has had a good run at film festivals, a movie which tilts towards art house cinema, it is expected that the critic shower the film with lavish praises and speak of it in glowing terms.

If you don’t, get ready to be ostracized by pseudos masquerading as messiahs of parallel cinema, get ready to be labelled a nincompoop by netizens, get ready to face the constant bitching and loose talk by the ‘Balcony Class’ presswalas. Believe me, a few people are in awe of such cinema and feel they need to prove how cerebral they are by praising such films.

Now to the review! Either the film works or it doesn’t. It’s all about the story and how convincingly the storyteller narrates it. If the story is absorbing, you can’t take your eyes off screen. If it isn’t, you break into a yawn, you fidget with your cell phone, you start looking at all places, except the screen.

What you’re attempting to say, is important. But how many people actually follow what you’re saying, is even more important. ROAD, MOVIE narrates the journey of a young man and the people he encounters on his way. But the problem is, what is ROAD, MOVIE trying to say? You’re clueless!

Is it about the water mafia? Is it about a touring cinema? Is it a love story between an educated youth and a gypsy? Is it a road movie? The sole factor that stands out in this film is its breath-taking locations/visuals. They are more striking than the story. And that’s the sad truth!

Also, why is it that India is often projected as a land of snake charmers, as a poverty-stricken, hunger-stricken, drought-stricken country with beggars and slums all around? Is that what India is, in their eyes? Is this what we are trying to sell to the West and the world in general? That’s really sad!

Final word? ROAD, MOVIE caters to a very, very, very, very tiny section of movie-going audience, who have an appetite for ‘festival films’.

Vishnu [Abhay Deol], a restless young man, itches to escape his father’s faltering hair oil business. An old truck beckons, which Vishnu sees as his ticket to freedom. As he sets off across the harsh terrain of desert India, he discovers he’s not merely transporting a battered vehicle, but an old touring cinema.

Along the way, Vishnu reluctantly picks up a young runaway [Mohammed Faizal Usmani], a wandering old entertainer [Satish Kaushik] and a gypsy woman [Tannishtha Chatterjee]. Together they roam in the barren land, searching for water and an elusive fair. The journey turns dire when they are waylaid by corrupt cops and a notorious water lord.

ROAD, MOVIE starts off very well, but loses focus midway. Abhay’s interaction with the kid and also Satish Kaushik is thoroughly enjoyable. But as the story unfolds, the movie loses its grip and starts going in circles. The plot works till Abhay and Satish screen the movie for the cop, but the portions thereafter aren’t engaging, except for a sequence or two in between.

The portions depicting the fair leaves you confused. Was it for real or a dream sequence? Also, the sequence with the water mafia [Yashpal Sharma] is absurd. This sequence - when Abhay trades off water for hair oil - doesn’t gel well with the mood of the film. Even the romantic track between Abhay and Tannishtha looks far from convincing. The finale too lacks clarity and the remix version of ‘Tel Maalish’ is hardly there.

Director Dev Benegal seems to have concentrated more on visuals than narrating a gripping story. Frankly, the story is so fragile that it’s difficult to hold your attention in those 90 odd minutes. The screenplay is bland and what makes it worse is the fact that the plot unravels at a lethargic pace. Dialogues are well worded at places.

Abhay Deol is a complete natural and this film proves it yet again. Satish Kaushik is first-rate. Mohammed Faizal Usmani impresses. Tannishtha Chatterjee does well. Yashpal Sharma is wasted. Virendra Saxena is efficient.

On the whole, ROAD, MOVIE is more for the festival circuit and some connoisseurs of art house cinema, who may savour it. That’s about it!

Read the original post

Comments(0)

(No Ratings Yet)

 Loading ...

Just a thought before I review this film… When you saunter in for the screening of a movie directed by a celebrated film-maker, a movie which has had a good run at film festivals, a movie which tilts towards art house cinema, it is expected that the critic shower the film with lavish praises and speak of it in glowing terms.

If you don’t, get ready to be ostracized by pseudos masquerading as messiahs of parallel cinema, get ready to be labelled a nincompoop by netizens, get ready to face the constant bitching and loose talk by the ‘Balcony Class’ presswalas. Believe me, a few people are in awe of such cinema and feel they need to prove how cerebral they are by praising such films.

Now to the review! Either the film works or it doesn’t. It’s all about the story and how convincingly the storyteller narrates it. If the story is absorbing, you can’t take your eyes off screen. If it isn’t, you break into a yawn, you fidget with your cell phone, you start looking at all places, except the screen.

What you’re attempting to say, is important. But how many people actually follow what you’re saying, is even more important. ROAD, MOVIE narrates the journey of a young man and the people he encounters on his way. But the problem is, what is ROAD, MOVIE trying to say? You’re clueless!

Is it about the water mafia? Is it about a touring cinema? Is it a love story between an educated youth and a gypsy? Is it a road movie? The sole factor that stands out in this film is its breath-taking locations/visuals. They are more striking than the story. And that’s the sad truth!

Also, why is it that India is often projected as a land of snake charmers, as a poverty-stricken, hunger-stricken, drought-stricken country with beggars and slums all around? Is that what India is, in their eyes? Is this what we are trying to sell to the West and the world in general? That’s really sad!

Final word? ROAD, MOVIE caters to a very, very, very, very tiny section of movie-going audience, who have an appetite for ‘festival films’.

Vishnu [Abhay Deol], a restless young man, itches to escape his father’s faltering hair oil business. An old truck beckons, which Vishnu sees as his ticket to freedom. As he sets off across the harsh terrain of desert India, he discovers he’s not merely transporting a battered vehicle, but an old touring cinema.

Along the way, Vishnu reluctantly picks up a young runaway [Mohammed Faizal Usmani], a wandering old entertainer [Satish Kaushik] and a gypsy woman [Tannishtha Chatterjee]. Together they roam in the barren land, searching for water and an elusive fair. The journey turns dire when they are waylaid by corrupt cops and a notorious water lord.

ROAD, MOVIE starts off very well, but loses focus midway. Abhay’s interaction with the kid and also Satish Kaushik is thoroughly enjoyable. But as the story unfolds, the movie loses its grip and starts going in circles. The plot works till Abhay and Satish screen the movie for the cop, but the portions thereafter aren’t engaging, except for a sequence or two in between.

The portions depicting the fair leaves you confused. Was it for real or a dream sequence? Also, the sequence with the water mafia [Yashpal Sharma] is absurd. This sequence - when Abhay trades off water for hair oil - doesn’t gel well with the mood of the film. Even the romantic track between Abhay and Tannishtha looks far from convincing. The finale too lacks clarity and the remix version of ‘Tel Maalish’ is hardly there.

Director Dev Benegal seems to have concentrated more on visuals than narrating a gripping story. Frankly, the story is so fragile that it’s difficult to hold your attention in those 90 odd minutes. The screenplay is bland and what makes it worse is the fact that the plot unravels at a lethargic pace. Dialogues are well worded at places.

Abhay Deol is a complete natural and this film proves it yet again. Satish Kaushik is first-rate. Mohammed Faizal Usmani impresses. Tannishtha Chatterjee does well. Yashpal Sharma is wasted. Virendra Saxena is efficient.

On the whole, ROAD, MOVIE is more for the festival circuit and some connoisseurs of art house cinema, who may savour it. That’s about it!

Read more here

Comments(0)

(No Ratings Yet)

 Loading ...

Horror films made in India follow standard rules and guidelines. Every possible ingredient that viewers have witnessed since the Ramsay era automatically finds its way into horror films even today. ROKKK too borrows everything available on the shelf.

ROKKK hinges on a half-baked script, but what saves the film from complete breakdown is the execution of the material by debutante director Rajesh Ranshinge. The proceedings may be far from innovative, but keep you hooked nonetheless.

Anushka [Tanushree Dutta] weds an elderly man Ravi [Sachin Khedekar], who has remarried after the death of his first wife. Anushka’s mother [Nishigandha Wad] refuses to accept their relationship.

Anushka and Ravi begin their journey in a beautiful home that Ravi gifts Anushka. However, strange and quirky things start happening there. Anushka tries to share her experiences with Ravi, who in turn thinks that his wife is hallucinating. They decide to move back to their earlier home, but the incidents don’t seem to stop.

Anushka seeks advice from a healer [Arif Zakaria] and tries to discover the motive behind these unexplainable incidents. The story takes a turn when Anushka murders her husband and sister-in-law. Ahana [Udita Goswami], Anushka’s sister, begins her journey to rescue her.

Horror movies ought to have a great start and a pulse-pounding finale. Unfortunately, ROKKK has a lacklustre start and a convenient finale, with the makers leaving scope for a sequel, if the film works. The film suffers due to inept writing, with several questions remaining unanswered till the end.

No reasons are offered why Tansuhree marries a man much older to her, except a fleeting reference by Udita. No reasons are offered when Tanushree enquires about the circumstances that led to the death of Sachin Khedekar’s first wife. That’s not all, Tanushree even manages to escape from the asylum even though the spirit almost gets her. Now that’s difficult to gulp!

But things do stabilise in the post-interval portions. The spirit now set her sights on Udita and the sequence in the elevator sets the ball rolling. Ditto for two more sequences - [i] Arif Zakaria wanting to free the mansion from the spirit and [ii] Ashwini Kalsekar’s story of how the blood-thirsty spirit came into being.

With the film holding your attention in the second hour, you expect the finale to reach its zenith, but it does an about-turn and touches the ebb. Tanushree’s re-emergence on the scene is formulaic and ruins the impact. If the writing is patchy, the effects are tacky and the background score relies on the same sounds that one has come to expect from horror films.

Both Tanushree and Udita try to make the proceedings watchable. Udita is efficient, while Tanushree uses her eyes effectively to express fear. Shaad Randhawa is decent. Sachin Khedekar is okay. Ashwini Kalsekar is the best of the lot. Murli Sharma and Nishigandha Wad don’t get much scope. Arif Zakaria is perfect.

On the whole, ROKKK is ordinary at best!

Here is the original post

Comments(0)

(No Ratings Yet)

 Loading ...

Mumbai, The man behind last weekend’s theft in actress-politician Hema Malini’s house here has turned out to be a member of her staff. It’s difficult to find trustworthy staff, she rues.
“It’s very worrisome. But we can’t seem to find the staff we can trust,” Hema, who spent Holi dealing with the police, told IANS.
“The [...]

Read the original post

Comments(0)

(No Ratings Yet)

 Loading ...

Have you ever received a call from yourself? Is it possible in the first place? There are several theories doing the rounds about the two Karthiks in this movie. So what is it? Is Karthik hallucinating? Does he have a double role? Or a split personality? For most parts of the film, you actually buy the explanation that Karthik does receive calls from, well, Karthik.

Let’s accept the fact that a concept like this instinctively generates curiosity in the film. But the real test is to make the story work in those 2 hours. Also - this is vital - the identity of the caller should come as a jolt when the film concludes.

KARTHIK CALLING KARTHIK works in parts, but during the penultimate part, when the story shifts from Mumbai to Kerala, the sand castle, so beautifully built by debutante director Vijay Lalwani, gets washed away.

One doesn’t want to challenge the behavioural patterns of a person with a certain disorder, but when it comes to the big screen, when you are narrating a story on celluloid, you need to do a lot of spoon-feeding and make it look convincing. In this case, unfortunately, the finale is just not convincing and therefore, acts as a spoilsport.

Meet Karthik [Farhan Akhtar], an introvert by nature and shy by choice. Karthik suffers with huge confidence issues and is miserable at his average job that yields less than average results. His boss [Ram Kapoor] treats him like dirt. Shonali [Deepika Padukone], his colleague, who he secretly loves, doesn’t even know that he exists. Karthik is a loser. He knows it. He accepts it.

Suddenly, one night, the phone rings. And Karthik speaks to someone he never thought he would. He speaks to a man who also claims to be Karthik. The man on the phone says he’s here to change Karthik’s life. Karthik accepts the phone in his life and soon it becomes his guide, his mentor, his friend, his guardian.

KARTHIK CALLING KARTHIK is a love story as also a suspense fare that teases your mind. Any love story works if the chemistry and also the moments between the on-screen lovers looks real and the chemistry between Farhan and Deepika works well.

Correspondingly, a suspense film works if the viewer keeps guessing what the culmination to the story would be. The mystery only deepens when not only Karthik, but also his girlfriend and psychiatrist are engulfed in this storm. All hell breaks loose when Karthik’s life goes upside down and Karthik is back to square one. But from this point onwards, the graph of the film only goes downwards.

Debutante director Vijay Lalwani knows his job well, but he’s letdown by his own writing. The second hour not only looks stretched [two songs flow one after the other, with the story coming to a grinding halt], but the pace also gets excruciatingly slow at this juncture. The climax, as mentioned earlier, is a complete downer.

Shankar-Ehsaan-Loy’s musical score is an asset. The film has some lilting tunes. Cinematography [Sanu John Varughese] is perfect. Dialogues are simple mostly and at times, very witty.

This is Farhan Akhtar’s third film as an actor and it must be said that he takes giant strides when it comes to acting. The story throws several challenges at him and fortunately, he emerges trumps in the most difficult moments. This is, by far, his best work.

Deepika Padukone looks bewitching and acts natural throughout. Ram Kapoor is fantastic. Why don’t we see him so frequently on the big screen? Shifaali Shah is excellent. Vivan Bhatena is good. Tarana, Vipin Sharma and Yatin Karyekar are serviceable.

On the whole, KARTHIK CALLING KARTHIK is a decent product with an unconvincing conclusion. Watch it for the wonderful performances of Farhan and Deepika, if you have to. Caters to the youth in metros mainly.

Read more

Comments(0)

(No Ratings Yet)

 Loading ...

A lot of present-day directors seem inspired by Hrishikesh Mukherjee and Basu Chatterjee’s movies. The veterans told simple stories in the most simplistic manner. Director Kedarh Shinde, one presumes, also seems inspired by their master works and attempts to narrate a story that’s identifiable and at the same time, dipped in humour.

But TOH BAAT PAKKI is not as invigorating as one expects it to be. The film has some wonderful moments, some old-world charm, but the humour, at several points, falls flat. Especially towards the penultimate portions.

Final word? It’s a half-baked fare!

Rajeshwari [Tabu], married to Vinay [Ayub Khan], dreams of getting her sister Nisha [Yuvika Choudhary] married to the most suitable boy within their Saxena community. Also, Rajeshwari is against the dowry system.

Rajeshwari finds a good Saxena boy studying engineering and has prospects of a promising future. Rahul [Sharman Joshi] is a good proposition for her sister and she even gets him to move into her house as a paying guest.

However, when Rajeshwari learns that Rahul is not interested in marriage, she smartly devices a plan to bring her sister and make them get to know each other. She’s confident that once he meets Nisha, there is no turning away. They fall in love. Rajeshwari is happy. Marriage is fixed.

Things take a turn when Yuvraaj [Vatsal Sheth] lands up at Rajeshwari’s house. Yuvraaj is also a Saxena. He has a good job and is waiting to move into his house. Rajeshwari can’t believe her luck. This is a better prospect. The story takes a turn when Rajeshwari tries to set up Nisha with Yuvraaj.

The problem with most storytellers is, the story they choose may sound convincing at narration level, but what eventually unfolds on screen is half as convincing. On paper, the 4-para synopsis of TOH BAAT PAKKI holds promise, but the screenplay, spread over two hours, has its share of hiccups.

For instance, the portions depicting Sharman helping Tabu during the marriage celebrations are far from convincing. In fact, the screenplay starts losing its grip from hereon. Even Sharman’s attempts to poison Himani Shivpuri and Vatsal Sheth’s mind appears childish. Ditto for the abduction drama towards the end. The Sharat Saxena track also looks forced.

Kedarh Shinde’s direction holds your attention at a few places only. Especially during Tabu and Sharman’s portions towards the first half. But the patchy writing lets him down. Pritam’s music doesn’t work, except ‘Jis Din Mera Byaah’. Dialogues are too flowery at times.

Tabu is a pleasure to watch. She’s natural and it must be said that it gets difficult to move your eyes when she’s on screen. Sharman, again, is likable and gets it right. Vatsal does fairly well. Yuvika doesn’t get much scope. Ayub Khan is passable. Himani Shivpuri and Suhasini Mulay are as usual. Upasna Singh is loud.

On the whole, TOH BAAT PAKKI has a few interesting moments, but not enough to keep you hooked. It will have to rely on a strong word of mouth, especially from family audiences, to stay afloat.

Original post

Comments(0)

(No Ratings Yet)

 Loading ...

MY NAME IS KHAN makes two strong statements…

The first: B.C. and A.D. are designations used to label years in the Julian and Gregorian calendars. There’s a third designation now - 9/11.
Post September 11, the world stands divided. Terrorist outfits continue to strike in the name of religion and the common man, not even remotely associated with these groups, is bearing the brunt. The world is not a safe place anymore.

The second statement: There’re two sets of people in this world - the good and the bad. No matter how strong the evil forces are, good always triumphs.

MY NAME IS KHAN mirrors the era we live in. Not a day goes by when you haven’t heard/read/watched news of terror attacks and innocents being killed. We live in turbulent times. Also, the movie states - and states very strongly, without mincing words - Not all Muslims are terrorists.

Karan Johar’s cinema got more real from KABHI ALVIDA NAA KEHNA onwards. In MY NAME IS KHAN, the storyteller attempts to make a social statement and succeeds completely. At the same time, it takes no sides. If the protagonist says ‘My name is Khan and I am not a terrorist’, it also exposes those who misadvise the youth with inflammatory and rabble-rousing speeches.

Karan’s take on the issue deserves the highest praise, since a subject like this is difficult to attempt. Final word? MY NAME IS KHAN is Karan, SRK and Kajol’s best outing to date. Do I need to add anything more?

Rizvan Khan [Shah Rukh Khan moves to San Francisco and lives with his brother [Jimmy Shergill] and sister-in-law [Sonya Jehan]. Rizvan, who has Asperger’s syndrome, falls in love with Mandira [Kajol]. Despite protests from his brother, they get married and start a small business together. They are happy until September 11, when attitudes towards Muslims undergo a sea-change.

When tragedy strikes, Mandira is devastated and they split. Rizvan is confused and upset that the love of his life has left him. To win her back, he embarks on a touching and inspiring journey across America.

Let me alert you. The story unfolds feverishly from the very start itself. So if you miss a scene or two, chances are you would’ve missed some vital links in the story. The fact is, there’s too much happening in the first half. Although the narrative tends to get leisurely-paced at times, the wheels continue to move from one episode to another.

A number of sequences are endearing. For instance, the romance between SRK and Kajol is subtle, yet charming. But it’s SRK’s relationship with Kajol and their kid that’s one of the best parts of the movie. Your heart bleeds when an accident occurs and their lives are torn apart. Kajol’s outburst - first, when her son meets with a catastrophe and second, when she confronts SRK - are truly shattering.

MY NAME IS KHAN’s strength lies in the fact that you root for Khan all through. At the same time, you are weighed down when he’s in a vulnerable situation, especially when he’s labelled a terrorist and thrown behind bars. You don’t realize it, but the fact is that you, as a spectator, have already got entwined in Rizvan and Mandira’s lives.

There’s a slight hitch in the second hour, when SRK returns to Georgia to save a hurricane-ravaged hamlet. Also, the media exercise tends to add to the length of the film. Nonetheless, it’s a minor hiccup that doesn’t rob the film of its punch.

There’s just one word to illustrate Karan’s direction - exemplary. One of the finest storytellers of our generation, he deserves brownie points for deviating from ‘Karan Johar brand of cinema’ and attempting a film that knocks on your heart and stimulates your mind. With MY NAME IS KHAN, Karan takes rapid strides as a storyteller.

Shibani Bathija’s screenplay is truly arresting. Shibani and Niranjan Iyengar’s dialogues are noteworthy and many a times, applaud-worthy. Ravi K. Chandran’s cinematography is awe-inspiring. Shankar-Ehsaan-Loy’s music gels well with the nature of the film.

When a film stars two of the finest talents of the country, you expect nothing but the best. SRK, well, how does one describe his performance? To state that this is his best work so far would be cutting short the praise he truly deserves. In fact, no amount of praise can do sufficient justice to his portrayal of Rizvan Khan, who has Asperger’s syndrome. His latest work is several notches above anything he has done before. The only compliment that I can think of is, SRK has a new screen-name now. Raj is passe, Rizvan it is.

Kajol is pure dynamite and casting her for this character was the most appropriate decision. No other actress could’ve matched SRK in histrionics the way Kajol has. In fact, SRK and Kajol compliment each other wonderfully well and this film only proves it yet again. It’s a powerhouse performance from this supremely talented actress.

The film boasts of a number of capable actors, but the ones who leave a rock-solid impact are - in this order - Zarina Wahab, Sonya Jehan, Jimmy Shergill, Arjun Mathur, Parvin Dabas and Arif Zakaria. Sugandha Garg is confident. Navneet Nishan supports well. Vinay Pathak leaves a mark in a brief role. Tanay Chheda [young SRK] and Yuvaan Makaar [SRK and Kajol's son Sameer] are excellent. The American actors, especially the kid who plays Sameer’s friend, deserves mention.

On the whole, MY NAME IS KHAN is a fascinating love story, has an angle of religion and a world-shaking incident as a backdrop. It not only entertains, but also mesmerises, enthrals and captivates the viewer in those 2.40 hours. At the same time, a film like MY NAME IS KHAN is sure to have a far-reaching influence due to its noble theme. I strongly advocate, don’t miss this one!

Read more here

Comments(0)

(No Ratings Yet)

 Loading ...

The recipe is simple and uncomplicated…
Take MY FAIR LADY.
Add DULHAN WAHI JO PIYA MAN BHAAYE.
Spray NASEEB APNA APNA.
Sprinkle DILWALE DULHANIA LE JAYENGE and RAB NE BANA DI JODI.
Hey presto, DULHA MIL GAYA is ready to serve.

In fact, MY FAIR LADY has been a hot favourite of Bollywood. Recall MAN PASAND [Dev Anand, Tina Munim] or HUM TERE AASHIQ HAIN [Jeetendra, Hema Malini]. Similarly, a number of storytellers have rehashed Rajshri’s all-time hit DULHAN WAHI JO PIYA MAN BHAAYE [Prem Krishen, Rameshwari] in various avtaars, over the years.

DULHA MIL GAYA is a mix of the above-named films. Like they say in filmi lingo, it’s old wine in new bottle. So what? How different can a love story be, since this genre has been done to death in Bollywood? Point noted, but the narrative ought to be engaging if it has to strike a chord and that’s where DULHA MIL GAYA falters.

Merely assembling A-listers and filming the movie at panoramic locations isn’t enough. The film ought to have meat and that’s missing here.

Let me elaborate. Debutante director Mudassar Aziz, who has also penned the script, borrows from the past, going for the tried-and-tested stuff, but the narrative, already low on fuel, comes to a grinding halt by the time it reaches its finale.

Donsai [Fardeen Khan], a young commitment-phobic debonair, is petrified with terms like marriage and long-term relationships. Samarpreet [Ishita Sharma] is a quintessential Punjabi girl, for whom relationships are to be cherished.

Shimmer [Sushmita Sen] is a diva from the world of glamour for whom love and relationships aren’t important in life as independence and success are. Pawan Raj Gandhi/PRG [Shah Rukh Khan] is a suave multi-millionaire whose heart still remains larger than his bank balance and for whom winning love is the only victory there is.

When paths cross for these four characters, they not only land up influencing each other with their outlook on relationships, but also get influenced themselves and learn a whole new meaning of the term.

Something that got ignited with D.D.L.J. continues to shimmer to this date. Our stories continue to travel from firangi land to the fields of Punjab. DULHA MIL GAYA too does that [initially], before MY FAIR LADY and RAB NE BANA DI JODI take over.

To give the credit where it’s due, DULHA MIL GAYA has some interesting moments, but the problem is they are few and far between. One expects things to perk up when SRK’s character is introduced [in the post-interval portions], but your hopes go crashing as nothing worthy of note occurs.

The writing has gaping flaws, which are difficult to absorb after a point. The girl travels all the way from Punjab to Trinidad and Tobago, but not once do her concerned parents call to enquire how she is. Strangely, even the girl doesn’t feel the need to inform them. If that’s not enough, Sushmita takes upon herself to tame Fardeen, giving you the impression that she thinks from her heart. But when it comes to her relationship with Shah Rukh, she behaves in a rather odd manner. SRK, on the other hand, seems completely besotted by her, even though she never reciprocates his feelings. Hence, her somersault in the end - just because Ishita has given her some bhashan - doesn’t look convincing.

Mudassar Aziz’s direction is a shade better than his writing. And that’s not saying much. Given the fact that newer stories are being attempted in these fast-changing times and in view of the fact that he had some of the best talents on board, Mudassar should’ve seized the opportunity and told a refreshingly different and absorbing tale. But he doesn’t. Sure, a few sequences are clever and smart, but that’s not enough.

The music is of a mixed variety. ‘Akela Dil’ is groovy, while the title track is strictly okay. Cinematography is appealing.

Sushmita excels in a role that demands her to be hoity-toity. She enacts her part effortlessly. One wishes to see her more often on the big screen! Fardeen does a good job, especially towards the end when he’s about to confess something vital to Ishita. Ishita delivers a sincere performance. It’s a pity that a superstar like Shah Rukh is terribly wasted in an inconsequential role. It may not go down well with his fans.

Mohit Chadha has screen presence, but gets no scope. Johny Lever is wasted. Ditto for Tara Sharma. Suchitra Pillai and Howard Rosemeyer are passable. Parikshit Sahni, Bina Kak and Viveck Vaswani are as usual.

On the whole, DULHA MIL GAYA doesn’t work!

See the original post

Comments(0)

(No Ratings Yet)

 Loading ...

Mumbai, Shahid Kapoor feels his struggling days were difficult — from renting a number of houses to spending a night in a second hand Maruti 800 to giving 100s of auditions and getting rejected — yet memorable.
“All these things are a memory. I am very happy and proud of the fact that God has been [...]

Excerpt from

Comments(0)

(No Ratings Yet)

 Loading ...

Mumbai, She is smart, glamorous and one of the most sought after actresses in Bollywood, but Priyanka Chopra says it was difficult for her to portray a simple, beautiful girl in forthcoming film “Pyaar Impossible” and still try to hold the interest of audiences.
“When you do characters like one in ‘Aitraaz’, ‘Fashion’ or ‘Kaminey’, there [...]

Original post

Comments(0)

(No Ratings Yet)

 Loading ...