technomania

REVIEW:-
The film was written 10 years back and a different director was planning it with SRK and Aamir in lead roles

The film finally was made now with Vipul Shah directing it And Ajay and Salman starring together after a decade HUM DIL DE CHUKE SANAM(1999)

The movie however falls short due to it's 90's handling and worst it's loopholes

The film tries to pack in too many commercial ingredients and we also hav the love triangle

Everything is predictable and filmy and too clichéd

There are loopholes like how Ajay runs away from London Airport and makes a place for himself with no one? even the way he starts his band is not convincing The second half gets better with the twist in the tale of Ajay destroying Salman but sadly the climax falls short and the film ends on a bad note.

Direction by Vipul Shah is ordinary to below average Music is the worst point, most songs are mediocre

Amongst actors Ajay gives his best shot though he isn't convincing as a Rock singer yet he does superb as the negative role Salman however irritates with his punjabi and talking nonsense he only impresses when he gets drugged and thereon Asin is nothing great just a show piece Ranvijay should stick to MTV Om Puri is okay.

REVIEW:-
Rajkumar Santoshi has given the bollywood film industries a lot of serious films over the last couple of years for e.g Family: Ties of Blood, Halla Bol etc. But now he returns to make another comedy flick in the form of Ajab Prem Ki Ghazab Kahani. his early comedy film which was Andaz Apnaa Apnaa was a great hit and is one of my favorite comedy movies of all of time. The same however cannot be exactly said about APKGK but it is still a very good effort on the part of santoshi.

Ranbir kapoor once again proves why acting is in his blood by giving another show stealing performance he play the character of prem so well that you will end up falling in love with the character by the end of the movie. Katrina Kaif also proves why she is one of the best bollywood actresses of this generation with her performance in this film and new york she proved that she can play both a comic and a serious role in a film. The supporting cast also does a fine job Upen Patel was decent he was not involved enough in the plot enough to get any big sort of recognition. Govind Nao was OK still feel like his character was completely destroyed in this film however the people who played Prem's friends and his parents still deliver good performances.

The plot of the film is decent it is just another love story between a boy and a girl who meet, become JUST friends and the boy suddenly falls in love with the girl but can't confess, the girl loves him but she doesn't realize it and finally does after the boy leaves her forever and she misses him and feels lonely that is when she realizes that she really loves him. Well at least the plot is not a rip off of another romantic film which the bollywood industry seems to do very often.

The comedy is silly and over the top but it will make you laugh and entertain you nonetheless. Santoshi proves that he will go to any limits to make his audience laugh and entertain them. It is very hard to make the audience of this generation laugh very easily, silly over the top comedy wouldn't work so well but this film will still make you laugh more than any other comedy film has done in the last few years. the romance is the film is only captured during two songs during the movie and the dream sequence between Ranbir and Katrina and by the end of the film. But the on screen chemistry between the lead couple is fantastic.

ALl the songs in the movie are awesome apart from Prem Ki Nayaa which is decent. All the songs in the movie have beautiful lyrics and music and amazing singers like Javed Ali and Atif Aslam. The soundtrack of this movie is definitely one of the finest Bollywood movie soundtracks to come out this year.

Overall APKGK is very good film which has a very good and funny first half but pales and drags in the second, the comedy is still over the top and silly but will still make you laugh, there is not much romance in the movie but the on screen chemistry lives up for that. So overall i would say despite its flaws this was a very entertaining and good movie and one of the better bollywood movies to come out this year.

8/10

REVIEW:-
"The International" is about an evil bank and begs the question; do these fricken things come in any other way? It's a fairly interesting story that got a major boost from current events last September once we learned that banks actually do have shadier dealings than expected. Only the ironic part now is will people be willing or even able to pay to see this movie. My recommendation would be wait for the DVD. Director Tim Tykwer ("Run Lola Run") does a decent directing job and for a while "The International" crackles with suspense but soon the interesting idea posed by the script, by Eric Singer, just fizzles out.

Clive Owen plays Louis Salinger, an Interpol agent whose been trailing the business practices of one of the biggest banks in the world, the IBBC, for what seems like years. Just when he manages to find witnesses, they either end up dead or manipulated into silence. He teams up with Manhattan District Attorney Eleanor Whitman (Naomi Watts) to bring the bank to justice but she's getting added pressure to shut this whole investigation down because the two are coming up with next to no evidence. The bank's trail of money, used for everything from arms deals to murder, sends Salinger and Whitman globe-trotting from Berlin to Milan to New York to Istanbul but one dead end could shut the case down for good.

I'm usually not very cognizant of camera shots so the fact that i'm saying Tykwer really makes you think about perfect camera movement and angles really says a lot for what he does here. Not only does he start the suspense up early with strong verbal encounters/hard stares between characters but the way he frames and pans along the beautiful design of places like the Guggenheim Museum and the IBBC headquarters or the ancient buildings, narrow, bustling streets, and rooftops of Instanbul is fantastic. Nearly every scene has a lively visual quality. His one mistake actually comes with the movie's one big action sequence. It's a bloody shootout inside the Guggenheim but it just seems messy and hard to make out, a Paul Greengrass imitation without the exciting energy of a "Bourne" movie.

The screenplay by Singer is more than partly to blame. His story starts out well, catching our attention with the bank's deceptive and shady practices and building up a healthy dose of paranoia as well. The problem is the screenplay then lets itself off far too easily. Instead of focusing on how the bank creates slaves-to-debt and how the whole process works, the movie just vaguely and complicatedly brushes over those issues in favor of lazy, generic plotting. Salinger and Whitman soon find that their best option is pinning a murder on IBBC, just you would think a major bank could do better than hiring such an easily track-able killer. And where the movie really goes wrong is the conclusion, which doesn't go into how the bank is actually taken down as much as it just satisfies the audience's need for bloodlust. You can tell that no one knew how to end this thing.

Casting Clive Owen is a good idea. He brings a determined, serious demeanor to Salinger though with the type of roles he has played recently, you wonder why this guy turned down James Bond. He seems like a natural for it. The rest of the cast struggles with poor character development. Naomi Watts gets a role so useless that it could have easily been played by my grandma. Armin Mueller Stahl shows up as a former communist whose lost his way and now works with the bank as a consultant or something. He gets one well written scene, going man-o-e-man-o with Owen but otherwise not that many impressions are made by the cast. Unfortunately for the movie, try as Tykwer and Owen might, it also fails to make much of an impression as well.

REVIEW:-

I went to the this most recent remake of Pelham 1-2-3 (most don't even recall the made-for-TV version filmed in Toronto - with good reason) with an open mind. I was weened on Godey's book when 8, and saw the original film when it was released a few years later. I've committed practically every line and scene to memory. I'll admit.... I'm biased. I felt the original could not be successfully remade... the gritty feel, the outstanding David Shire soundtrack, the believable performances of the ensemble cast..... and I was right. I did not go into the theater hoping to hate the remake, but instead to like it. I REALLY wanted to like it. I have always enjoyed both Denzel Washington and John Travolta in their various endeavors and thought the chemistry might work fine here. While entertaining, it became almost tiresome after a while. I felt no tension, no "edge of the seat" sensation that the original brought, I found myself disliking most of the characters and really not caring what happened to them. It passed the time, had some thrills, but that was about it for me.

The '09 version is entertaining, with some excellent action scenes and more than a few decent dialog exchanges between characters, but it is nothing more than a Tony Scott action movie dressed up as "The Taking of Pelham 1-2-3". While starting off liking Washington's character (now disgraced MTA administrator-turned dispatcher Walter Garber, as opposed to Detective Zachary Garber in the book and original screen incarnation), I found, as the movie progressed, that he went from believable to just another two-dimensional action movie hero who, if he was what as he really started out as being, would not have ended up doing what he did in the film. Sorry, no spoilers here gang. You'll have to go judge for yourselves.

Travolta was dynamic, putting in a great performance, but I found his manic characterization not befitting as the supposed master-mind of the criminal plot involved. Remarkably, there were three other hijackers in the movie. I don't know why Scott even bothered including them. They were not only ineffectual characters with lackluster performances, but totally lacked the dynamic presence and interplay between the hijackers of the original film so much so that you barely even noticed them - or cared. Oh well, I guess it would not have been practical with only one hijacker....

The dizzy camera-work and stylized production were tedious at times and distracting. The soundtrack was, IMHO pure garbage.

Like I said, I found it entertaining, but despite some opinions that the "updated" and "freshened" plot was exhilarating and an improvement on the '74 incarnation, I honestly don't think the Matthau/Shaw/Balsam version need worry about being eclipsed by this remake. Go see it though, as it is fun summer fare and if you have no ties to the original, you'll probably find it relevant. Afterward, do yourself a favor and rent the original. You'll see the way the story was meant to be done.