Movies You Watched This Month – December 2014

GoneGirl Official Synopsis:
GONE GIRL – directed by David Fincher and based upon the global bestseller by Gillian Flynn – unearths the secrets at the heart of a modern marriage. On the occasion of his fifth wedding anniversary, Nick Dunne (Ben Affleck) reports that his beautiful wife, Amy (Rosamund Pike), has gone missing. Under pressure from the police and a growing media frenzy, Nick’s portrait of a blissful union begins to crumble. Soon his lies, deceits and strange behavior have everyone asking the same dark question: Did Nick Dunne kill his wife?

The clue scenes are good. Scenes of the TV host Ellen Abbott (clearly modeled on Nancy Grace) where she insinuates that Nick is in a inappropriate relationship with his sister and that he is the murderer are good. The planning scenes are excellent especially with the voice over. The best scene of the movie is definitely the final scene of Desi Collings (Neil Patrick Harris).

Screenplay by Gillian Flynn who is the author of the actual novel is good for the most part. The dialogues are very good especially the ones explaining the planning or the ones on marriage. Some of the scenes seemed a bit implausible like the smart psychopath being so stupid with money or people not recognizing someone whose pictures are all over TV. Fooling the security camera in a house filled with so many security cameras seemed a bit too much. Nick’s actions also seemed a bit implausible at times like the way he walks off when told that his wife was 6 weeks pregnant. Not disclosing the gifts in the woodshed after having discussed it seemed unbelievable.

Ben Affleck is very good as the husband who is suspected by everyone of having something to do with her disappearance. Rosamund Pike is absolutely brilliant as the wife Amy and she deserves an Oscar nomination for her excellent performance. Carrie Coon is very good as Nick’s sister. Kim Dickens is good as the cop investigating Amy’s disappearance. Tyler Perry is very good as the lawyer in a cameo and Neil Patrick Harris is good in a small cameo. Rest of the supporting cast is good too. Background music by Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross is excellent.

David Fincher’s direction is excellent for the most part. There is dark humor in many of the scenes and there are also some sarcastic observations on modern marriage. The suspense is revealed midway through the movie and it then becomes a movie on a psychopath. Actually one can guess what happened pretty early on if one pays attention to what Amy says about the similarity between her and her literary Amy character (Amazing Amy). As mentioned above there are some parts where the movie seems too implausible but then its supposed to be a satire. The media scenes at the end seemed a bit repetitive and could have been edited better. Even with these flaws its a highly enjoyable thriller. Its definitely the best movie of the year so far.

Tags:
172 Comments
  1. Author
    sputnik 5 years ago

    @ritz,

    “Gone Girl – Awesome movie. Gripping. Ben Afflect is good but loved Rosamund Pike. Her acting reminded me of Louise Fletcher’s acting in One flew over cuckoo’s nest. The characters are different but she conveys so much through her eyes – her cunning ways and its chilling to see her here.” Link

    Agree. It reminded me of Louise Fletcher’s acting in One flew over the cuckoo’s nest too. I was reading IMDB threads and someone mentioned that in the novel he nearly strangles her to death which is my favorite scene from One flew over the cuckoo’s nest.

  2. Author
    sputnik 5 years ago

    @shan,

    “Gone girl : Brilliantly directed film by David Fincher. Altho a tad stretched, the movie keeps you hooked right till the end and the actors nail their parts. Ben Affleck is excellent, Rosamund Pike is chilling, Carrie Coon does really well as Nick’s twin, Margo. Tyler Perry shines in a cameo and Neil Patrick Harris does his bit well. The bgm by Atticus Ross and Trent Reznor raises the movie’s impact by several notches. Although the story is a little far-fetched, it is a good work of fiction and a thrilling watch.”

    Agree with you.

    Yes it is a tad stretched and it could had been edited better.

  3. Baba 5 years ago

    Good review. Where is review of interstellar?

    • Author
      sputnik 5 years ago

      Haven’t seen it yet.

      Decided to watch Gone Girl and write a review for that as you already wrote a review for Interstellar 🙂

      • Baba 5 years ago

        it was not a review. i just questioned few scientific aspects of interstellar and surprisingly no one came with a rebuttal.

        • Author
          sputnik 5 years ago

          I read your review and also @ritz’s comments and @rex’s rebuttal about Interstellar. I have not commented on Interstellar because I haven’t watched the movie yet. But based on what I have read I had a feeling I won’t like the movie much.

          Yesterday I had to decide between Gone Girl and Interstellar and I chose Gone Girl as I had a feeling that I would like it from the trailer and the couple of comments I read.

          Forget Interstellar. Watch Gone Girl. I think you will like it too.

          • Baba 5 years ago

            ok i wil see gone girl but dont skip interstellar totally. watch it at some point of time. you skipped all the big films in hindi this year. but i ma quite sure you will see pk in first weekend 🙂

          • Author
            sputnik 5 years ago

            I will watch Interstellar soon.

            Ha Ha I will see PK in first weekend coz I am a Aamir fan 🙂

            But seriously I have not liked the teaser and the songs (video wise) and I have a feeling that Aamir is going to be very irritating. I might still watch it because of Hirani.

          • Baba 5 years ago

            you were the first person to see talaash on tq. you saw dhoom 3 much before me. 🙂

          • Author
            sputnik 5 years ago

            I did not remember that I was the first person to see Talaash on TQ. I checked and you are right.

            “you saw dhoom 3 much before me. :)”

            I guess. You wrote the review and I just wrote my review as a comment in your review post.

  4. Baba 5 years ago

    might see action jackson this weekend. just loved prabhu deva moves in this song

  5. cr7 5 years ago

    The young and prodigious TS spivet – A heartwarming,visually stunning movie . Its always nice to see a movie where child is main protagonist and the whole story is from his POV . This movie did it with perfection . Performances were decent, Helena Carter stands out .

  6. Author
    sputnik 5 years ago

    Almost Famous
    In the early 1970s, William Miller writes about the band Stillwater on a cross-country tour, learning about friendship and love along the way.

    Very good coming of age movie set against the backdrop of a rock band from the 70s. It takes its time and drags at places but its a feel good movie. The movie is supposed to be semi autobiographical with the director/writer Cameron Crowe himself having been a teenage journalist for Rolling Stone. Cameron Crowe won an Oscar for Best Original Screenplay.

    Patrick Fugit was excellent in the lead role of the 15 year journalist in awe of the rock band and its members. He looked completely believable as a sweet naive kid who loves Kate Hudson’s character. I did not recognize that he was the same actor who played a cop role in Gone Girl.

    Kate Hudson looked very pretty and was very good as Penny Lane. She was deservedly nominated for an Oscar for Best Supporting Actress. Billy Crudup was very good as the guitarist Russell Hammond. Frances McDormand was good but am surprised that she was nominated for an Oscar for Best Supporting Actress for such a small role. Jason Lee was good as the lead singer of the band. Zooey Deschanel looked pretty in a small role as William’s sister. Philip Seymour Hoffman was very good as the senior journalist mentoring William.

    —————–

    P.S. @cr7,
    Have you seen Almost Famous? I think you will like it.

    • cr7 5 years ago

      Haven’t seen .Sounds good .Will watch it soon .

  7. Author
    sputnik 5 years ago

    Out of Time
    The small town of Banyan Key, Fla., is shocked by a double homicide, and the beloved chief of police races against time to solve the murders.

    Even though the movie had Denzel Washington it had a very TV movie vibe to it. Its a ok movie with a lot of cheap thrills. Denzel, the police chief, has to stay one step ahead of the other investigators as the evidence might make him a suspect.

    While watching it I was thinking that this could be remade in Bollywood. Searched for the movie name here and found @hithere’s comment saying that they already copied it as Zeher.

    Denzel Washington was good as the police chief. Eva Mendes looked pretty but acting wise she was not that good. She is the Priyanka Chopra of Hollywood – too much show off and trying to be cool. Sanaa Lathan and Dean Cain was ok. John Billingsley was good in a somewhat comic role.

    • hithere 5 years ago

      An koi Race jiski copy hai usko dekh le. I have recommended that movie multiple times but I haven’t seen any comments :).

      • Author
        sputnik 5 years ago

        I have been wanting to watch that since a long time. I don’t think its on Netflix or else I would have watched it by now.

  8. Author
    sputnik 5 years ago

    The Quick and the Dead
    In this offbeat Western, a lady gunslinger arrives in a frontier town seeking revenge for the murder of her sheriff father by town boss John Herod.

    Had watched this some years back on cable TV and liked it a lot. Have recommended the movie to others in the past. Revisited it after a while.

    Its a good entertaining western. Its directed by Sam Raimi of Evil Dead fame. So there are some characters with almost horror movie like make up. And there are a couple of scenes with gunshots that make holes through head/body which felt odd.

    Sharon Stone looked very pretty but did not like her acting/character that much. She looked scared in many of the scenes which seemed somewhat unnecessary. Gene Hackman was absolutely brilliant in the role of Herod and he was the star of the show. Russell Crowe was very good too. A very young Leonardo DiCaprio was very good as the bragging son of Gene who wants to earn his father’s respect.

    • hithere 5 years ago

      Saw this in Kanpur when I was studying. I was not aware of Wild West concept. Seen it multiple times since 2000 and like it.

  9. Author
    sputnik 5 years ago

    Watched Seven again and liked it even more this time. This was my comment from last time.

    “Seven A seasoned homicide detective and his new partner are on a desperate hunt for a serial killer whose gruesome crimes are based on the Seven Deadly Sins: greed, gluttony, sloth, lust, pride, envy and wrath.

    Excellent thriller (though slow paced) except for the ending. I was able to guess what the ending would involve from previous scenes and could not believe that it does not strike them. I wanted a more unexpected/profound ending.

    Morgan Freeman was very good. Brad Pitt was good. Kevin Spacey was excellent. Gwyneth Paltrow looked gorgeous.”

    http://tanqeed.com/movies-you-watched-this-month-november-2013/comment-page-1/#comment-131358

    The last time I saw I was able to figure out what the ending would be and so I was kind of disappointed with the ending. But this time I just went with the flow and liked the ending too. Its definitely one of the most shocking/depressing endings ever.

  10. cr7 5 years ago

    Predestination- One hell of a concept .Very unique and interesting .But unfortunately not a very well made film .Its far fetched,confusing ,silly at points .But definitely worth a watch .

    • cr7 5 years ago

      Kept thinking about the movie .So watched it again . Liked it more this time. Recommended . Watch it without any stress or hurry .

      P.s .Very different movies but for some reason It reminds me of Mr.Nobody . I highly recommend Mr.Nobody too . Very good movie.

      • Author
        sputnik 5 years ago

        Predestination has a 7.5 rating on IMDB. Never heard of this movie before. Will try to check it out soon.

        Mr.Nobody has been in my queue for a long time. Will try to check it out sometime this week.

  11. Author
    sputnik 5 years ago

    Seven Years in Tibet
    During World War II, an escaped POW makes his way to Tibet, where he meets the Dalai Lama, whose friendship ultimately transforms his outlook on life.

    Its a good movie though very leisurely paced. Its about the friendship or teacher student relationship between Harrer and the young Dalai Lama. It shows a kid will be a kid even if he is considered to be a spiritual or religious head.

    Brad Pitt was very good as the Austrian mountaineer Heinrich Harrer. David Thewlis was good as his friend. Sonam Wangchuk and Jamyang Jamtsho Wangchuk were good as the 8 year and 14 year old Dalai Lama respectively.

  12. AAP 5 years ago

    Melbourne – 2014 (Iran) Plot summary – The film recounts the story of a young couple on their way to Melbourne to continue their studies. However, just a few hours before the departure of their flight, they are unintentionally involved in a tragic event.

    Absolutely loved it. The storytelling is very interesting and cant say much about this suspense drama without revealing some key things. After 1 hr into movie you feel things are getting bit slow but thats only for 10-15 mins and last 15 minutes bring it all together very nicely.
    Highly recommended/Must see. Thanks to Utkal for recco. Saw it today in Bangalore International film fest.

    Durak (The Fool) – 2014 (Russian)
    Plot summary – The Fool is a movie about a simple plumber. He is an honest man that is up against an entire system of corrupt bureaucrats. The lives of 800 inhabitants of an old dormitory that is at risk of collapsing during the night are at stake.

    Again a damn good film from the festival. The drama is highly engaging. The politics shown in the movie is very engaging and valid across the globe for any country. Loved the performances and pacing of the movie. Very much recommended.

    • Author
      sputnik 5 years ago

      Thanks @ritz_ritz123 for the recco for Melbourne. Will try to check it out if it becomes available here on Netflix.

      • cr7 5 years ago

        I have been looking for a torrent of this movie .But couldn’t find any . Will try to watch as soon as Its available online .

      • AAP 5 years ago

        You r welcome.

        The lead male actor is excellent in this one. He reminded me of Rajkumar Yadav. If this movie is going to be adopted he is the prefect choice in BW.

        Here is the trailer.

        • Author
          sputnik 5 years ago

          Thanks for the trailer. It looks interesting and somewhat similar to A Separation from at least the trailer.

          The lead actor is Peyman Moaadi who was also the lead actor of A Separation. He was excellent in it.

  13. Author
    sputnik 5 years ago

    Phenomenon
    After he’s knocked unconscious, a humble mechanic awakens with incredible intellectual powers that soon draw the attention of scientists and the FBI.

    Movie was good in parts but it had potential to be way much more. Some of it was cheesy and some of it implausible like the FBI wanting to detain him because he is so smart or the doctor getting permission to operate on him. The climax/ending was bad. They could have shown him doing something great but instead they went for some cheesy ending. It almost felt like they were trying to turn it into some Oscar winning movie like Forrest Gump but failed.

    John Travolta was good in some scenes but he was also overacting somewhat with his usual mannerisms. Kyra Sedgwick was ok acting wise but I just don’t like her looks. They should have chosen a prettier actress. Forest Whitaker was good in a side role. Robert Duvall was very good as the doctor. The kids were good too.

  14. Author
    sputnik 5 years ago

    The Fault in Our Stars
    Teenager Hazel, who has pushed people away since her cancer diagnosis, reluctantly joins a support group, where she bonds with a boy named Gus. Together, they face the challenge of building a relationship under the shadow of terminal illness.

    Its a movie about two terminal patients in love. It was ok but did not like it much. Its definitely overrated with a 8.1 rating on IMDB. As @cr7 said “There were some beautiful moments and excellent dialogues” Link but it felt very manufactured – as if the director was trying so hard to make a sensitive tearjerker.

    It just pales in comparison to Mani Ratnam’s classic Geetanjali which was also about two terminal patients in love. I had posted the movie here and would suggest watching that instead of this.

    Shailene Woodley was excellent in the lead role. Ansel Elgort was good but he was like the male equivalent of female eye candy. He mostly had to look cute and smile. He is like a taller version of Shahid Kapoor. His smile and even a few of his mannerisms reminded me of Shahid Kapoor a lot. Nat Wolff was good as the friend. Laura Dern was good as Hazel’s mother. Sam Trammell was good as Hazel’s father.

    • cr7 5 years ago

      Agreed . Even I said the emotional scenes looked forced .

    • hithere 5 years ago

      Similar views.

  15. cr7 5 years ago

    Gone Girl- Very good movie but by Fincher’s own standard Its underwhelming .I liked how the drama unfolded,performances but the ending is rather unsatisfying.At some points the movie was so dumb that it was hard to believe Its by fincher. Performances are excellent specially Pike .Its still one of the best movies of the year but didn’t live up to high expectation.

    • Author
      sputnik 5 years ago

      Agree with you that the ending was unsatisfying. It kind of dragged at the end too with too many media interview scenes. The ending should have been darker or there should have been some justice for all the evil actions.

      Yeah I already mentioned in my review that there were some scenes were implausible.

      • Baba 5 years ago

        ” The ending should have been darker ”

        there isnt a more darker ending in any film than in gone girl.

        • Author
          sputnik 5 years ago

          I like the last scene with the dialogues ” What are you thinking?’ ‘How are you feeling?’ ‘What have we done to each other?’What will we do” but I thought some of the media interview scenes were all unnecessary and made the movie lose the impact.

          She could have announced in the shower scene itself that she is going to have his baby and that he cannot kill or divorce her now. And the next scene could have been the final ‘How are you feeling?’ scene.

  16. Author
    sputnik 5 years ago

    The Fitzgerald Family Christmas
    Complications ensue when an absentee father — who left his wife and children 20 years earlier — announces his intent to return home for Christmas.

    Liked it. Good movie. I think Edward Burns is one underrated director. So far all his movies (She’s the One,
    Newlyweds ) that I have seen were good or ok. His movies have similar story lines of a big dysfunctional family or multiple characters with their own back stories but I like the whole family dynamic. There is a certain warmth to his movies and characters and many of the actors repeat in his movies.

    Edward Burns was good but as I said in a comment before he always plays same/similar characters in all his movies. Michael McGlone was good as the younger brother. Used to find Connie Britton very pretty in the comedy show Spin City but she looked old in this. Kerry Bishé was good as the younger sister. Caitlin Fitzgerald, Heather Burns, Marsha Dietlein were all good. Anita Gillette was very good as the mother and Ed Lauter was good as the father. Tom Guiry of Mystic River fame was good as the younger brother with the drinking problem.

  17. cr7 5 years ago

    Mardaani- -Good movie. Dark,gritty and engrossing . But the movie deserved a better ending . Also It losses steam in 2nd half specially last 20 minutes .Could have been much better . I have heard only praise for the movie .So had high hopes . Better than usual Bollywood movies but nothing extraordinary .Rani was good . Very impressed by the villain .

    • Baba 5 years ago

      i had same reaction after seeing it. when i saw it, i had not read any review and the promos were bad and the directors last film was laaga chnari mein daag. so i was really impressed with the film. i stil think its one of the films of the year. it is not cliched for most of the part except the ending.villain tahir bhasin was too good

      • cr7 5 years ago

        Yup .Haven seen very few movies this year .Mardaani will be in top 5 with Queen,haider,2 states . Will be watching highway,pk and dedh ishqiya soon .

    • hithere 5 years ago

      The ending is very filmy. They change the tone from dark and gritty to very bollywoodish.

  18. Author
    sputnik 5 years ago

    I had mentioned in my review that the TV host Ellen Abbott was clearly modeled on Nancy Grace. Here is Nancy Grace’s interview and she seems to have taken the role which was mocking her sportingly.

    Nancy Grace Finally Reveals Her What She Really Thinks of ‘Gone Girl’

  19. cr7 5 years ago

    The Equalizer – Thoroughly entertaining,even when it stops being logical.There is no novelty about the story , Extremely predictable . Good action,awesome as always Denzel washington,cool villain enough to make the movie wathcable . I just hope there were some twist in last half an hour .Little more space for the villain . But its the same old Ex cia officer acting like a superhero .

  20. cr7 5 years ago

    Watched the series finale of The Newsroom .It was one of my favorite shows on TV . Will miss it . Somehow I don’t think It didn’t live up the promises it showed in beginning.Got really cheesy at times .But It was a pleasure to watch always,never got boring .I love how they dealt with real issues,always interesting . Don Keefer played by Tomas Sodoski was the standout character.Looking forward to see him in more shows and movies. Waiting for next HBO drama,they never disappoint.

  21. Author
    sputnik 5 years ago

    ‘Til Death
    This series finds comic gold in the lives of newlyweds Jeff and Steph and next-door neighbors Eddie and Joy, who’ve been hitched more than 20 years.

    Started watching this comedy series and the first few episodes were hilarious. It has this two contrasting couples – the newly weds and the older couple and its about the differences between their married lives. Brad Garrett’s character is constantly advising Eddie Kaye Thomas’s character on how to deal with his wife.

    Brad Garrett who played the elder brother in Everybody loves Raymond is very funny in this. Joely Fisher is good as his wife. Kat Foster is very cute and she is good. Eddie Kaye Thomas of American Pie fame is good as Kat’s husband.

  22. cr7 5 years ago

    Watched Madras Cafe again .Equally enjoyable as the first time.A standard in this genre for Bollywood movies .It makes much appreciated Holiday looks like a amateur film .Baby needs to live up to the level of madras Cafe to be taken seriously ,not s26 or holiday .

  23. cr7 5 years ago

    The Intouchables – Its feel good,funny and thoroughly entertaining .I liked that they didn’t complicate the movie .It could have been a sentimental mess .But that’s it .It was fun while it lasted .Don’t think I’m gonna remember it for a long time . Its way too lighthearted to be significant or have any major impact .

  24. FS 5 years ago

    Her – Loved the movie and contrary to many others, i liked the ending. Very different and engaging movie

    Khoobsurat – Sonam has chosen some good movies since the start of her career and each time her expressions of different scenes remains same in her other films. Liked it very much. There is nothing much in the movie nor different but very likable. Kind of Standard product.

    Prison Break – Watched all four seasons again. Awesome Series.

    The walking dead Season 5 – First two episodes were so good that expectations went sky high for remaining episodes only tobe disappointed big time. stopped at end of 5th episode itself.

    Lucy – Didn’t like the movie at all. No brains, nothing and not even entertaining. just for the hell sake they made a movie out of CPH4 drug

    • cr7 5 years ago

      Same here with walking dead .Didn’t continue after episode 4 .

      • Author
        sputnik 5 years ago

        Did you ever watch later seasons of Arrested Development?

        I loved the first few episodes of Arrested Development but later on the humor dried up. It became more like a drama or a reality show.

        I loved the first few episodes of Til Death and they were so hilarious. And then for some reason they sidelined the young couple and it became all about the bickering old couple. And it stopped being funny.

        I think this is the reason why Seinfeld and Friends are so great and deserve so much respect coz they kept those sitcoms funny for so long.

        • cr7 5 years ago

          Watched till S03E02 .Quality decreased gradually but it was enjoyable till end of 2nd season . But a disappointment overall after such a hilarious start .

          Agreed about Friends (yet to watch all seasons of Seinfeld) .Keeping a sitcom funny for so long is extremely difficult .I used to like big bang theory a lot . But the latest season(8th) sucks .

          • cr7 5 years ago

            Have u seen Louie,Its always sunny in Philadelphia,Community?

          • Author
            sputnik 5 years ago

            I watched an episode of Big Bang theory on TV. Don’t know which season it was but did not like it that much.

            No haven’t watch Louie. But I used to watch some show by Louis C.K. on HBO. It used to be very funny.

            I was thinking of watching Its always sunny in Philadelphia.

  25. cr7 5 years ago

    Dear Zachary: A Letter to a Son About His Father – I don’t know what to write about this documentary .One has to see it to feel it .I don’t think I felt so touched by any movie recently. I felt devastated and amazed at the same time . A must watch .

  26. cr7 5 years ago

    Ankhon Dekhi – Lovely movie .Second half was weird and could have been better but still a very interesting movie . The tension and bonding between two brothers was adorable .Movie was boosted by the earnest performance from the cast .Everyone was too good .But the movies belongs to Bauji. What an amazingly gifted actor Sanjay Mishra is !

    • hithere 5 years ago

      Probably best Hindi movie for me this year!

      Saw Cleanskin – good masala movie on relevant topic.

  27. jj 5 years ago

    PK – Very good movie but mighty short of a potential classic. Excellent first half. Raised all the valid questions. But could not conclude well. Climax was too convenient. Given the license to overreact aamir nailed this performance.
    Missed Boman Irani in a Hirani movie. He had a very weak character and acted bad too.

  28. Author
    sputnik 5 years ago

    The Silence of the Lambs
    FBI trainee Clarice Starling ventures into a maximum-security asylum to pick the diseased brain of Hannibal Lecter, a psychiatrist turned cannibal.

    Excellent movie. Re watched it after a long time. The movie deserved all the Oscars that it got – Best Picture, Best Director, Best Writing Adapted Screenplay, Best Actor and Best Actress.

    Anthony Hopkins was excellent as Hannibal Lecter. Its definitely his career best performance and of the best performances ever. Jodie Foster was excellent too. Ted Levine
    was very good as Buffalo Bill. Scott Glenn was good as Crawford. Anthony Heald was good too.

    • Baba 5 years ago

      its 3 days since pk release and you are rewatching silence of lambs

      • Author
        sputnik 5 years ago

        I was thinking of watching PK in theater if my friend who is a hardcore Aamir fan came for the weekend but he did not. It did not release in the theater which is close to my home. So I don’t think I am going to watch this in theater. Will watch it later.

        And from what I heard here and elsewhere PK’s first half is good but the second half is not. And many seem to be saying its similar to OMG.

        • Baba 5 years ago

          camrip is out. dont see it too late. soda ki keemat tab tak hoti hai jab tak jaag hota hai. ek baar jaag baith gaya to sirf paani reh jaata hai, ye baat yaad rakhna

          • Author
            sputnik 5 years ago

            camrip is really bad. The top portion of the heads are cut in some scenes and you can’t hear the dialogues with the audience laughter.

    • jj 5 years ago

      This is one of my all time favorites. Also love the way climax is edited where Clarice is at the killers house and FBI is at a wrong address.
      My only complain is that there is very little of the killer shown in the movie. Its a bane of this genre. Seven, Memories etc.
      Red Dragon was a prequel to this released later. That was good too, but dissapointed to see very less of Hanibal Lecter.

  29. shinji 5 years ago

    There’s a interesting trivia that Anthony hopkins won the Oscar for best actor for a 16 Minute role!

    • Author
      sputnik 5 years ago

      Yeah but it did not feel like that he had a small role. All his scenes were excellent and his role had a great impact and it felt like it was the lead/central role.

  30. Author
    sputnik 5 years ago

    The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (Män Som Hatar Kvinnor)
    A journalist and a computer hacker team up to probe the unsolved disappearance of a wealthy man’s niece, only to uncover the family’s darkest secrets.

    Excellent movie. Its a bit long at 2hr 26m but it was completely engrossing. The way the investigation progresses and the way the bad guy is revealed was very good.

    Michael Nyqvist was good as the journalist investigating the disappearance of Harriet. Noomi Rapace was excellent as Lisbeth Salander. The rest of the cast was excellent too.

    Highly Recommended

    ———————

    @cr7,

    Thanks for recommending the Swedish version. Have you watched the sequels to this? How are they?

    • cr7 5 years ago

      You’re welcome . It was an excellent movie. Agree with your review.Haven’t watched the sequels.

    • hithere 5 years ago

      Seen all of them on Netflix. They are good. They have more drama than thrill. I liked them but it is possible that your liking is marginally lower. They are well made and long. They are all connected.

      • Author
        sputnik 5 years ago

        Thanks. Will check them out.

        Even The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo wasn’t exactly a thriller. It was leisurely paced and more like a suspense drama with some family angle too.

        This may sound odd but it reminded me of some episode of Byomkesh Bakshi.

  31. cr7 5 years ago

    The life of David Galle – Dumb but intriguing .

  32. hithere 5 years ago

    Stand by me – based on Stephen King’s novel. Very simple but well made movie. I sometimes wish why can’t our directors make such movies. Of course we don’t have large audience for such movies but you can make small budget movie.

    • Author
      sputnik 5 years ago

      Saw the poster for Stand by Me in Netflix and it did not interest me coz it looked like a kids movie from the poster. Stand by Me has a good rating on IMDB too. So will check out both Stand by Me and In Your Eyes. Thanks for the reccos.

  33. hithere 5 years ago

    In your eyes- improbable but cute love story. Decent watch.

    • Author
      sputnik 5 years ago

      It was more improbable than cute and somewhat weird too 🙂

      ———–

      In Your Eyes
      Two strangers on opposite ends of the country have a telepathic bond that lets each one see what the other sees, a deep connection that leads to love.

      Zoe Kazan looked cute but her acting was not that good in some scenes. Michael Stahl-David was good. Mark Feuerstein was ok.

  34. FS 5 years ago

    PK – Loved it and planning to watch it again but its not 3 Idiots. It is almost similar to OMG except the production values and names associated with underwhelming and over the top climax unlike OMG that ended with an exceptionally brilliant screenplay. First half of the first half is laugh riot and second half of the first half is intense with some of the best scenes you’l see in an Indian movie. Over all its a entertaining movie and must watch.

    Equalizer – Great Action entertainer. Denzel washington was simply awesome. thanks @cr7 for recommending.

    Gone Girl – What a brilliant film with one of the best Climax. Loved the suspense it created till the end and even though I am not satisfied with the Climax totally, it was one of a kind and completely different. Loved the performances of both Ben Afflec and Rosamund Pike. She was excellent playing Diva as well as Socio Path. Highly Recommended!!

  35. FS 5 years ago

    Predestination: Excellent movie, quite different, intriguing and one of the best time travel movie. Recommended!!! Thanks @cr7 again 😉

    • cr7 5 years ago

      You’re welcome . Coming up with something so novel with the concept of time travel is praiseworthy . Agreed that Its one of the best time travel movie . And I liked it how they emphasized more on story than fancy visuals . It didn’t look like a very high budgeted movie compared to other Hollywood sci fi .

      • Author
        sputnik 5 years ago

        Have you guys watched The Butterfly Effect? Its not a conventional time travel movie but more of a what if I could go back in time and change something.

        I had written a recco for it.

        Link

        • FS 5 years ago

          Have watched all three parts of the butterfly effects but remember few things or scenes of part 1 only. the best movie in time travel genre IMO is “The Time Travelers Wife” as the movie had very good story telling and emotional touch to it.

          • cr7 5 years ago

            I have only seen the first part and loved it .

          • Author
            sputnik 5 years ago

            Don’t remember if I watched Part 2 but did watch Part 3 and did not like it much. Akshay Kumar’s Tasveer was inspired from Part 3. Part 2 & 3 had completely different actors.

            Never heard of The Time Travelers Wife before. Thanks for the recco. Will check it out.

          • FS 5 years ago

            Yeah Butterfly effect part 1 was the best.

  36. Author
    sputnik 5 years ago

    Metro Manila
    Seeking a better life, Oscar moves his family from a farm to the bustling city of Manila, where they soon realize that they’re out of their element. Things reach a boiling point when Oscar’s job at an armored truck company threatens his very life.

    It was Britain’s entry to the Oscars for the Best Foreign Language Film but it was not nominated. City Lights starring Raj Kumar Yadav was an official remake of this movie.

    The movie is very similar to those old Bollywood movies where someone comes to the city and how they have to struggle. Its partly similar to Chandni Bar too in that Oscar’s wife has to work at a bar and I had felt the same after watching City Lights trailer.

    The movie is very leisurely paced but it does a very good job of showing the hardship of poor people and how they are conned by everyone. Liked the story of Alfredo that Oscar tells in the movie. Its based on a true story of a hijacker from Philippines. Link Liked the ending and the intention/thought behind it. For someone who served in the army for 4 years the naivete that Oscar displayed in many situations seemed odd.

    Jake Macapagal was good as Oscar. Have not seen City Lights but Raj Kumar Yadav was a right choice for the remake. John Arcilla was good as Ong his partner. Althea Vega was very good as his wife specially in the emotional scenes.

  37. cr7 5 years ago

    The Interview- Inconsistently funny,dumb,some cool references,creepy jokes overall A typical Seth Rogen movie . Rogen and Franco have a chemistry and it worked again . Movie wasn’t boring but not entirely enjoyable. Given a choice I would rather watch dictator again than The interview.

  38. cr7 5 years ago

    Ugly – A very gripping dark thriller . Well directed by Kashyap .It has a very realistic feel in the settings and characterization .Ronit Roy is an amazing actor and probably the best in this type of role Rest of the cast is unknown but did an excellent job .Very good movie overall .

    • Author
      sputnik 5 years ago

      You are quick. I just downloaded The Interview, Nightcrawler and Ugly last night. Might write a review for Ugly if I like it. Is there any similarity with Prisoners?

      Ugly is out even before its official release and there is no good print of PK yet which is strange.

      • cr7 5 years ago

        Making most of Christmas holiday 🙂

        About Prisoners and Ugly -It didn’t cross my mind when I watched it. But yeah there is a similarity in theme .Ugly second half could have been better . But I’m less critical of Hindi movies now-a-days . ts a honest movie. They didn’t compromise , made what they wanted to make . Dark,raw and typical Kashyap humor . Worth a watch .

    • Author
      sputnik 5 years ago

      Watched Ugly.

      Agree with you @cr7 that it has a very realistic feel in the settings and characterization. There were some scenes where Anurag was being over indulgent (like the scene where the policeman is asking questions when they go to report the girl missing) but for most part he restrained himself.

      I did not understand why that friend character would risk so much by trying to blackmail when cops are involved in the case so much. I did not understand the scene where Rahul hits him in the end. Also why would the mother just place 50 Lakhs on the street without getting or even seeing her daughter?

      Rahul Bhatt was good. Jayant Gadekar was good as his friend. Tejaswini Kolhapure, Surveen Chawla were all good. Girish Kulkarni was good as the cop too. Ronit Roy was excellent. What a comeback to movies it has been for Ronit Roy after Jaan Tere Naam (in 90s) with Udaan, 2 States and now this.

      This is Anurag’s best since Black Friday.

      • Baba 5 years ago

        @sputnik – ” (like the scene where the policeman is asking questions when they go to report the girl missing)”

        that is one of the best scenes of the film. its real. that is how police talks. lot of irrelevant stuff and always suspicious and negating things stupidly.

        “I did not understand why that friend character would risk so much by trying to blackmail when cops are involved in the case so much”

        you havent understood the film. this film is not about the girls case. its a film about selfishness. everyone in the film is concerned about their lives and trying to make use of the case in thier favour. no one was acutally interested in “finding” the girl .

        • cr7 5 years ago

          Liked the police station scene a lot .

        • Author
          sputnik 5 years ago

          The title of the movie is Ugly and its about how everyone is selfish and ugly in character. I got that.

          One gets the point that policemen talk a “lot of irrelevant stuff and always suspicious and negating things stupidly” but the scene went on a bit too long and started to irritate. That is just Anurag’s habit of getting overindulgent but as I said he restrained his habit a lot in this movie.

          If it was just an ordinary case where the cops had no personal interest and the friend tried to blackmail then it would make sense. But when the stepfather cop is taking personal interest and just had detained that guy he wont go out and risk getting caught again.

          • Baba 5 years ago

            i made the same mistake while watching memories of murder. MoM is not about the case.

          • Baba 5 years ago

            ” But when the stepfather cop is taking personal interest ”

            ronit roy didnt take an interest in that case bcos his daughter went missing. he took interest in that case bcos he wanted to get even with rahul bhat who had been his college nemesis and married the girl he wanted to marry

          • Author
            sputnik 5 years ago

            Yes Ronit Roy took interest in that case because he wanted to get even with Rahul Bhat but that still means the main cop is interested in the case. Why would some petty guy who was just detained as a suspect take chances when the big cop is interested in the case?

      • Anjanpur685Miles 4 years ago

        Agree on above comment to the T. I saw Ugly 3 days back.

  39. FS 5 years ago

    Guest – Nice, subtle suspense thriller with more of drama in it. Liked it and the film is shot well. Recommended

    Newsroom season 3 – It had just 6 Episodes, quite pissed off with the last episode reminding us with flashback that took more than half of the episodes screen time and if this is the last season then I”ll probably miss it.

  40. Author
    sputnik 5 years ago

    Nightcrawler
    When Lou Bloom, a driven man desperate for work, muscles into the world of L.A. crime journalism, he blurs the line between observer and participant to become the star of his own story. Aiding him in his effort is Nina, a TV-news veteran.

    Excellent movie. It was completely engrossing. Some of the scenes were very thrilling. The final car chase scene was excellent. I think the movie will get nominated for a few Oscars especially an Oscar for Best Original Screenplay and might even win it. This is the debut movie of the director Dan Gilroy who is also the writer of the movie. This is an excellent debut.

    Jake Gyllenhaal was absolutely brilliant as the crazy, almost psychopathic Lou Bloom. This is his career best performance and I think that he will definitely get nominated for an Oscar for Best Actor and he might even win. Rene Russo was good as the news channel director. Riz Ahmed was good as his assistant. Bill Paxton was good in a small role.

    Highly Recommended

    • cr7 5 years ago

      You watched the print with Gotham film festival written over it ?

      • Author
        sputnik 5 years ago

        Yeah. At first I thought that Gotham thing is too big and is going to spoil the movie watching experience but once the movie started I did not even notice it.

        • cr7 5 years ago

          Good .Gonna watch it today .

  41. aryan 5 years ago

    PK – Excellent movie seen last night 2nd show still running housefull I would like to say PK is one of the best movie of 2014 first half of is very very entertaining but 2nd half is not good as first half this movie is very similar to OMG no doubt liked the Aamir and Anushka performance Sanjay Dutt’s role is very small. Waiting for the Sequel.

  42. cr7 5 years ago

    Happy Ending- Boring

    • Author
      sputnik 5 years ago

      So you did not watch Nightcrawler?

      • Baba 5 years ago

        so did you watch pk?

        • Author
          sputnik 5 years ago

          No

          • Baba 5 years ago

            good quality rip is out on extratorrent

          • cr7 5 years ago

            Nope . There was something wrong with my internet .Couldn’t access kickass . Just fixed it and downloaded . Will watch tomorrow. FYI Pk good print is available too.

          • Author
            sputnik 5 years ago

            I had downloaded another print but that was bad too.

            I don’t use torrents but I see that there is a new good quality rip out now. I use mydownloader which allows me to download from some file sharing sites but the links are from other file sharing sites not available through mydownloader. Someone will probably upload to one of the file sharing sites I use soon.

          • Baba 5 years ago

            you should atleast watch the big films and that too soon enough being owner of a bollywood blog 🙂 2014 is already over. ppl made posts on their bests and worsts and you had not even seen many of them. I request you not to be in this position for 2015!

  43. Author
    sputnik 5 years ago

    Finally watched PK.

    Its a decent movie. There are some funny scenes but nothing hilarious. Some of the questions that Aamir’s character asks are funny and very good. The questioning of religious practices and questioning whether there is a God part is very similar to Oh My God. In fact some of the dialogues felt like they were just rephrased a bit.

    The movie gets serious in between and it starts to raise some very good questions about religion and existence of God but then it doesn’t have the guts to go in the direction it was going. So the movie goes offtrack and hits at a soft target – a self styled Baba who is somewhat anti Muslim (based on his dialogues) and there is a message of Hindu Muslim unity which almost makes it feel cliche. I think there was no need for Sushant’s character to be a Pakistani. He could have been a Indian Muslim and the movie could have had the same plot.

    Some of the scenes are a rehash from Raju Hirani’s best movie Lage Raho Munna Bhai. In that Munna Bhai becomes famous on the radio show and everyone is calling him for advice. Here PK becomes famous on a TV show and everyone is calling the TV show with their questions. In LRMB Diya Mirza’s father Kulbushan Kharbanda is under the influence of the astrologer Batuk Maharaj played by Saurabh Shukla. Here Parikshit Sahni, the father of Anushka is under the influence of the Baba played by the same Saurabh Shukla. There Munna Bhai helps her get married to Abhishek and here Aamir helps Anushka almost the same way by proving the Baba wrong. And there are some scenes to remind of 3I too like peeing scene or Boman Irani dropping his pants in a TV studio. Why would someone drop his pants to tell that he got hit on his butt when he is just going to point to his underwear that he got hit there? He could point with his pant on and tell the same too. The fat barber scene, the condom scene along with these are all silly juvenile humor scenes.

    This is the weakest film of Raju Hirani. He has now become the Subhash Ghai of the 80s and early 90s. Just make movies with his formula and keep rehashing same scenes from his earlier movies. Even many of the actors (Boman Irani, Saurabh Shukla, Parikshit Sahni) are same. In the Munna Bhai series also you could tell that Raju Hirani was in love with his own lead character that he created. It was there in 3I too but here it almost feels gay the way Anushka is going gaga over PK’s character while narrating about him.

    I thought Aamir would be very irritating from the promos but he was good and his Bhojpuri accent was good. Sanjay was good in a cameo. Anushka looked bad with her duck lips and her acting was totally like Kareena Kapoor from 3 Idiots. Sushant was ok but he did not have much of a role. Boman Irani was ok. Saurabh Shukla was not that good playing almost the same role as in LRMB.

    • hithere 5 years ago

      Agree about Sushant being Indian Muslim. Commented elsewhere on similar lines.
      I found the movie more enjoyable than 3 idiots. I find the first munnabhai the best from Hirani. Second one was good but contrived( but then most screenplays could be termed like that) In my opinion.

    • Baba 5 years ago

      very good review sputnik. yes as a film its his weakest but also his most ambitious.yes it lacks guts in seocnd half and it could not conclude the movie properly. we never get to know the perspective of PK about God. what we get are his observations on earth.yes many scenes are rehash from his earlier films as you have rightly pointed out.i didnt like the dropping pants and moving car sex scene humour at all. it was crass and not needed in a film like this but then hirani has some fetish with male nudity.agree on ssr as paki. not needed. pak embassy scenes – extremely cheesy.

      • Author
        sputnik 5 years ago

        Thanks @baba-ji

        I think we do get to know the perspective of PK about God. He does tell that there are two Gods – one who created everyone and the other duplicate one whom people have created. I think Raju Hirani wanted to say that all the existing religions are man made and that their God/Gods are not real but he did not have the guts to go with that message. He hints at that message many times like the way he says why would God want his children to do all sorts of stuff to appease him in order for him to help them.

        Anyway this is my favorite line from the movie.

        “tum ek chota sa gola ki choti se sheher ke chote se gali mein baith ke bolta hai ki bhagwan ki raksha karega jo kono poora antriksh banya hai. usko tumhare raksha ki kono jaroorat nahi wo apni raksha khud hi kar sakta hai”

        • cr7 5 years ago

          I don’t think the movie lacked perspective .Its the cheesiness in second half & Hirani’s repetitiveness that ruined the movie. I don’t think Its necessary to show Pk’s perspective of God .He raised some questions which seems legit .Now audience will think about it .Its not the responsibility of movie to give a solution or show the path .

          • Author
            sputnik 5 years ago

            Agree with you @cr7

          • Baba 5 years ago

            its not the responsiblity of a movie to question any belief either for that matter. if you have chosen to question it, it is better to put forth your own viewpoint too. it would have made PK’s position stronger more than anything and he would not have come across as confused about the concept of God.

            It is like an ill-informed person questioning a Tai Chi Chuan expert that Tai Chi is crap and it has nothing to do with Chi energy. The expert will say ok, then how do we realise the Chi without the Tai Chi Chuan? PK accepts/thinks there is Chi but doesnt know how to realise it.

          • cr7 5 years ago

            I don’t know if you were expecting PK to spoon feed or what.I think PK the movie has very clear perspective .PK’s character on the other hand is an outsider.Someone who has absolutely no idea about religion or God would react exactly the same when exposed to the concepts for the first time .It shows what would happen If we didn’t have preconceived notions and instead tried to find the answers all by ourselves . And a It would be unfair for a movie which questions blind faith to end up giving another concept. Clues are there , form your own concept of God .

          • Baba 5 years ago

            its not spoonfeeding. its about having an original point of view and being confident about it. you are saying pk character has a clear perspective and then you say “he was merely reacting” to the things he was seeing. reacting to something is not the same as having a solid well-informed opinion about it. that is why i gave the tai chi example.

        • Baba 5 years ago

          “He does tell that there are two Gods – one who created everyone and the other duplicate one whom people have created”

          that everyone knows.every hindu knows God in not in the idols and in mandirs.they worship idol becasue they use it as a medium to access God.PK mocks at that and other rituals. so did OMG. but pk doesnt answer what should be done then to reach God and what really can please him. OMG did that.

          • cr7 5 years ago

            OMG did what ?

          • Baba 5 years ago

            rewatch OMG . go through comments in my pk review. you wil get the answer

          • Author
            sputnik 5 years ago

            How can someone tell how to reach God and what really can please him when they have never met/seen God. How will they know what will please him? Imagining that there is only one God who magically does things and that he gets persuaded by prayer is also just speculation and assumption.

            Mocking religious Babas or rituals is just hitting at a soft target. All those religious Babas exist because of religion.

            Now a lot of kids in US and elsewhere believe in Santa Claus. There are some traditions/rituals associated with Santa Claus Link. If some movie just attacked the rituals associated with Santa Claus and asked kids not to follow those rituals but still said its OK to make wishes to Santa then how is that a solution? The problem is not those traditions/rituals. The problem is the belief in an imaginary Santa which leads to all those traditions/rituals. When a movie tells those kids the truth that Santa is not real and to stop making wishes to Santa then that’s the real solution.

            Anyway as I said above the movie did show the perspective of PK and that was said in the last dialogue of the movie too which went something like this – “If someone tells you that they can help you contact God then make a U Turn and run away at full speed.” It can’t be clearer than that.

    • Author
      sputnik 5 years ago

      I had compared Raju Hirani to Subhash Ghai in my comment and now Rangan does the same.

      ——————-

      Lights, Camera, Conversation… “A matter of same”

      Thoughts on Rajkumar Hirani, formula films, and the astonishingly successful ‘pk’.

      Most of us turn filmmakers when something we’re watching doesn’t satisfy us. If X occurs and we’re not happy with it, if our mind screams out “this cannot be happening,” then we automatically come up with alternatives. It’s our way of making peace, finding closure, and it happens all the time in the movies. It happened to a reader of my blog, who watched pk and commented that the love track between the alien named pk (Aamir Khan) and a human named Jaggu (Anushka Sharma) could have been subtler, that we learn about pk’s love for Jaggu only at the end. I agree. As for me, my filmmaking instincts kicked in during the stretch in which pk comes to Delhi in search of a crooked godman. Earlier, we’re shown that pk lands in Rajasthan and a local promptly steals the device that helps him communicate with his spaceship. He’s stranded, and when a newfound friend tells him that all stolen goods are fenced in Delhi, pk decides to go there and look for the device. And he finds it in the hands of the godman, whose assembly he stumbles into by chance. I wasn’t too happy with this contrivance, which comes at the end of a riotously funny segment involving a street-theatre actor posing as Lord Shiva. This kind of “coincidence”, where you just happen upon the very thing you’re looking for, is always a little iffy, and I wished something else had brought pk to Delhi. Let’s say pk, in the living room of that friend’s house in Rajasthan, discovers this wondrous box-like contraption that broadcasts moving images. He discovers that there’s another wondrous contraption, with buttons – he can hold it in his hand and flip from image to image. And one of these images makes him pause. It’s the godman, and beside him is the stolen device. And that’s what makes pk decide he needs to go to Delhi. And there, he meets Jaggu…

      It’s fun to do this, sometimes, but most people I’ve trotted out this scenario to haven’t been amused. You know pk is a phenomenon not just because it’s minting staggering amounts of money, but because viewers are so much in love with it that they cannot stand criticism. The film, according to them, is perfect. With other films, they’ll say to me “let’s agree to disagree” – they are okay with the fact that our views are at variance. But pk has become one of those films where it’s practically a case of “you are either with us or against us.” They want consensus, and it vexes them to find someone with a contrarian opinion. I faced some of this when Interstellar came out and I expressed my annoyance with what I considered the director Christopher Nolan’s bad habits. I bring this up because, like Nolan, I think Rajkumar Hirani is an important but problematic filmmaker, and if they weren’t important, I wouldn’t be analysing their work in such microscopic detail. With hacks, I’d just say it’s a bad movie, point out what went wrong (or right), and move on – this handwringing wouldn’t happen. It happens with Hirani because I expect more, I demand more.

      How do we know Hirani is special? Because of the flashback in the first half of pk that tells us about the alien’s experiences on earth. Hirani is one of the few mainstream filmmakers who can pull of the mix of tones and emotions we find in this stretch – it’s funny, it’s whimsical, it’s sentimental, it has parts that make us think, and, most importantly, it’s original. It’s easy to make money with Dhoom 3, working off a prefab template, riding the coattails of a hugely popular brand, counting on the guaranteed patronage of a pre-existing audience. But Hirani’s films are different. You could say that Lage Raho Munnabhai was as much a sequel and a “franchise film” as Dhoom 3, but the film wandered off into a unique zone with its engagement with Gandhian values. I am not a fan of 3 Idiots, but at least at a conceptual level, the film is unique, as is pk.

      And yet, when it comes to the execution, Hirani – and this is my problem with him – is turning out to be as much a “formula” filmmaker as the maker of a franchise film. If the enemy-establishment was the medical profession in Munnabhai MBBS and educational institutions in 3 Idiots, it’s now the religious right. If the catchphrases earlier were “jadoo ki jhappi” and “all is well,” it’s now “wrong number.” I don’t have an issue with formula, per se. All franchise films (the Bond adventures, Fast and Furious) thrive on it – we go to these films because we liked what we saw in the previous instalment and want more of the same. In this category, you could also lump films that belong to a genre, and therefore have the must-haves of that genre, which is another way of talking about formula. Most rom-coms, for instance, must have the scene where Boy and Girl get separated (mostly due to some misunderstanding) before their grand reunion at the end. So why, as a reader asked, can you not treat Hirani the way you treat a Subhash Ghai, who was a formulaic filmmaker as well?

      The question sounds logical enough, but consider this: Ghai’s formula is a generic masala formula, whose ingredients are the strong mother character, the mythical hero-villain showdown, and so on. So here’s the difference between Ghai and Hirani. Ghai, at his peak, picked and chose from these formula elements and did not repeat them all that often. For instance, Hero is very different from Karz which is very different from Kalicharan. There’s a formulaic sensibility in these films, but the films themselves aren’t reiterations of the same formula. Hirani’s films, however, are more unique in their conception – that is, they’re not assembled from “generic” bits and scraps – and this uniqueness is what makes us instantly sniff out the formula.

      He likes, for instance, the Disapproving Father Finally Relents trope – we see it between Munnabhai and his father in Munnabhai MBBS, between the Jimmy Shergill character and his father in Lage Raho Munnabhai, between the Madhavan character and his father in 3 Idiots, and between Jaggu and her father in pk. And apart from the first film, the fathers in all the others were played by Parikshat Sahni. And Saurabh Shukla, who played a manipulative guru in Lage Raho Munnabhai, plays the manipulative godman in pk. A reader pointed out the similarity of the “bittersweet Disney-type farewell” in 3 Idiots and pk, followed by the “happy return scene”. You could add the Death Accompanied By Quirky, Unexpected Music trope – when the Sharman Joshi character attempted suicide in 3 Idiots, we heard opera, and when an equally beloved character in pk dies, we hear an old Mukesh hit. You could add the hero’s sidekick character as well – played by Arshad Warsi in the Munnabhai movies, by Sharman Joshi and Madhavan in 3 Idiots, and by Anushka Sharma in pk – whose reaction shots are constantly invoked in order to amp up the emotional quotient, to make us marvel at the hero just a little more. The Tamil auteur Mysskin’s oeuvre consists, essentially, of variations on his pet themes and tropes, but in his case, these are not just simple, narrative-level dramatic devices to evoke a response in you. They are part of an overall vision. But with Hirani, these are just scenes that move the story forward, and when similar scenes with the same actors, in service of similar stories, become a fixture across four consecutive films, it becomes – as I said – a problem.

      And only to me, it appears. When I mention these issues to people, I get some variation of the “but this film has made so much money” response. But was there any doubt about its success? For a good part, it’s genuinely charming and entertaining – Hirani may be like Madhur Bhandarkar in terms of identifying new settings for essentially similar plots revolving around “socially important” issues, but his light-hearted scenarios are far easier to take than Bhandarkar’s humourless hectoring. (Even if you say that only half of pk is truly worthwhile, that half is more satisfying than the entirety of most other films.) Besides, most people aren’t into analysis of art or artists – they just want to have a good time at the movies. And more importantly, pk features an actor who can do no wrong at the box office, who has assiduously built up a reputation as someone whose films are always worth forking out money for in theatres. If there’s a man who sees just one Hindi film a year in the theatre, that film will be an Aamir Khan starrer. Even the gloomy, moody Talaash (which I think is among Aamir’s best two films of the last decade, the other being Rang De Basanti) made over 90 crores at the domestic box office. And heck, when a film is making so much money, isn’t that it’s own kind of success? Why should Hirani change? Why should he fix something that ain’t broke?

      Because if he doesn’t, then it’s going to be hard to consider him a major filmmaker, who is almost always someone with range. Hirani is undoubtedly an important filmmaker – he knows the pulse of the people like no one else. He is also a real filmmaker, in the sense that, when all cylinders are firing, he can create magic on screen, like the way he invests a quotidian phrase (“God only knows”) with existential weight in the scheme of the narrative in the early parts of pk. But what else is he capable of? That question hasn’t been answered by his quartet of films. I hear that Hirani’s next is a biopic of Sanjay Dutt. I am really looking forward to this. It would have been devastating if his next was about another impish, twinkly-eyed outsider who sets about changing things – though at some level, it would certainly be understandable. After all, when your films become the first to breach the 200-crore and 300-crore benchmarks (pk is zooming in on that target), why take a risk with something different? Filmmaking isn’t just an art, and not everyone wants to be a “major filmmaker”. It’s also commerce and it’ll be interesting to see if this Sanjay Dutt project gets going, or if Hirani decides to do more of the same, with the logic that once you enter the race you have to keep running.

      On another note, critics, these days, are part of a different kind of race. A long time ago, films would release on Fridays and the reviews wouldn’t appear until the next Friday. Then the interval shrank – the reviews began to appear on Sunday. Then, after the Internet arrived, reviews started showing up the same evening. Now, apparently it’s all about how quickly you can get your review up on the web. It’s all about who’s the first to review the film. How does this help? Once the gold medal for first-on-the-web has been handed out, what about the quality of the review itself? How can one properly process a film and mull over the parts that you’re unsure about, have problems with, when you have an eye on a deadline? I’m being sucked into this race slowly, as the paper has begun to publish its reviews on the web the same day, and it’s caused a bit of stress. As my resolution for the new year, I’m going to try not to think about the deadline. The review is ready when it is ready. As long as the content has some meat, I guess… all is well. Happy 2015.

      Link

  44. jj 5 years ago

    True. All of Hirani’s movies are of the same mould. As a director he is still where he was with the Munnabhai films. May be his next would be radically different. Its said to be a honest biopic of Sanjay Dutt.

    • Author
      sputnik 5 years ago

      hmm well let’s see what he does with it but its hard to imagine Raju making a serious movie without his usual comic scenes.

  45. cr7 5 years ago

    PK- Entertaining first half,cheesy second half,Flawless Aamir . Overall enjoyable but my least favorite Hirani movie .

  46. FS 5 years ago

    UGLY – Eerie, dark and engrossing movie with some of the finest performances of the year.The jail scene between Rahul and his friend where Rahul indirectly tries to confess his friend about kidnapping is flawless. Recommended!!!

    Kung fu Jungle – Donnie Yens another martial art movie with limited drama and unlimited martial art action. It was a good time pass movie with some really good moves.

  47. Author
    sputnik 5 years ago

    The Interview
    In the action-comedy The Interview, Dave Skylark (James Franco) and his producer Aaron Rapoport (Seth Rogen) run the popular celebrity tabloid TV show ‘Skylark Tonight.’ When they discover that North Korean leader Kim Jong-un is a fan of the show, they land an interview with him in an attempt to legitimize themselves as journalists. As Dave and Aaron prepare to travel to Pyongyang, their plans change when the CIA recruits them, perhaps the most unlikely candidates, to ‘take out’ Kim Jong-un.

    Its silly, completely ridiculous but very entertaining movie for the most part. There are many hilarious scenes – the initial song scene with the US bashing lyrics, Eminem coming out as gay, the CIA scenes, Skylark partying with President Kim, the Tiger scene, President Kim liking Katy Perry’s song and the final interview scene. Some scenes where the movie tries to get serious about how bad Kim is and the whole rebellion thing doesn’t work and the movie feels boring in those scenes.

    James Franco was good in parts but was also overacting with his facial contortions. I did not get who he was trying to imitate. Seth Rogen was good. Lizzy Caplan looked very hot as Agent Lacey. Randall Park was excellent as President Kim. Diana Bang was good as Sook.

  48. FS 5 years ago

    Always 2011 – Normal romantic tearjerk with full of cliche’s that could be a perfect remake option for Srk as a romantic movie in bollywood.

  49. Author
    sputnik 5 years ago

    Dirty Rotten Scoundrels
    A small-time con man butts heads with a successful swindler. Hoping to get rid of one another, they make a loser-leaves bet to scam an heiress.

    The movie is a remake of an older 1960s movie Bedtime Story and is written by the same writers as the older one. I read the plot of Bedtime Story on Wikipedia and its very similar except for the ending.

    It took a while to get started as the initial half hour or so wasn’t that funny. It was only after the arrival of the female lead that the movie became entertaining. Dirty Rotten Scoundrels is a 1988 movie so some of it is smart and funny while some of it is a bit dated or old school.

    Andaz Apna Apna is definitely inspired from this movie but its more hilarious. Apart from the basic plot of the two con men competing for one woman the characterization of the two leads is also very similar. Michael Caine’s character is that of the smarter intelligent one similar to Aamir’s character and he wins more often. Steve Martin’s character is similar to that of Salman’s character.

    Steve Martin pretends to be handicapped due to a emotional issue and Michael Caine pretends to be the psychiatrist who can cure his disease. So the doctor patient scenes are similar to the doctor patient scenes from Andaz Apna Apna. Also Michael Caine’s character loses to Steve’s character similar to Andaz Apna Apna and the heiress turns out not to be a heiress. There is a twist with respect to the female character which was good and the movie should have ended there itself but there are some unnecessary scenes after that.

    Michael Caine was excellent. Steve Martin was ok. He was somewhat irritating and overacting a lot.
    Glenne Headly was very good as Janet. The rest of the cast was ok.

  50. cr7 5 years ago

    The Judge – Good movie but could have been better.Bit long and melodramatic .Excellent performance by Downey Jr and Duvall .Every scene between them was good.Liked the back story of elder brother . But the problem is the movie tried to do everyting. Too many subplots ruined the drama & slowed down the pace. They could get rid off 1-2 subplot (divorce,old girlfriend) and emphasis more on the trial .

  51. Author
    sputnik 5 years ago

    The Last Days on Mars
    While a crew of astronauts on Mars waits for a ship that will return them to Earth, one discovers a strain of bacteria that turns humans into killers.

    Its the usual zombie movie except that it is set in Mars. It has his usual share of some stupid characters, some silly scenes and some scary moments. Its watchable.

    Liev Schreiber was good. Romola Garai looked pretty. Olivia Williams was good as the slightly obnoxious Kim.

  52. cr7 5 years ago

    Filmistaan – -Not half as funny as the trailer . Some hilarious scenes but all were already shown on trailer..Honest attempt but didn’t work.Could establish the emotional connection . The leading actor was below average . Strictly average.

    • cr7 5 years ago

      couldn’t,

  53. cr7 5 years ago

    LA confidential – One of the best cop/detective movies. Out and out and entertainer .

  54. Baba 5 years ago

    Soutnik – rofl. You are totally off the mark. Will comment in detail later

  55. Baba 5 years ago

    @spuntik – where did santa claus come into picture here LOL! anyway if you dont know, santa claus was a real person who used to do those things and christmas is celebrated as a mark of what he stood for.that is to give.it is an irrelevant example you are giving. there is nothing superstitious about santa claus.

    I dont want to repeat what i had said about OMG. go through pk review thread or you should see its climax properly or even the scene i posed on tq , my first post on OMG, to understand the essence of God as shown in OMG.

    “The problem is not those traditions/rituals. The problem is the belief in an imaginary Santa which leads to all those traditions/rituals.”

    this is your personal problem as an atheist. you have to deal with it. not me nor pk or OMG. i have given my view about God before the release of pk http://tanqeed.com/does-god-exist/

    • Author
      sputnik 5 years ago

      The imaginary Santa Claus that kids believe in is entirely different from the real Saint Nicholas. Saint Nicholas came down chimneys and gave gift to kids LOL

      Santa Claus is based on a pagan God Odin and Christians hijacked Odin and their celebration into their religion.

      “The appearance of Santa Claus or Father Christmas, whose day is 25th of December, owes much to Odin, the old blue-hooded, cloaked, white-bearded Giftbringer of the north, who rode the midwinter sky on his eight-footed steed Sleipnir, visiting his people with gifts. … Odin, transformed into Father Christmas, then Santa Claus, prospered with St Nicholas and the Christchild became a leading player on the Christmas stage.”

      Santa Claus doesn’t exist and he does not give any gifts period and belief in Santa Claus is superstition. And belief in any imaginary God with no evidence to back it up is also superstition.

      You confuse will power with faith in God. Every human being with his will power can do things which may seem unimaginable. It has nothing to do with God. All religious people go to doctors when they have major illnesses, heart attacks, accidents and so on. You gave an example of Jonty Rhodes to prove that faith in God cured his epilepsy when he himself is advising others to take medicines.

      When it is conclusively proved that a God or Gods exist then the believers will be right (but even then it won’t be any of the existing religions) and when it is conclusively proved that no God exists then the atheists will be right. Till then the correct thing is to be agnostic and to say “I don’t know”.

      • Baba 5 years ago

        “The imaginary Santa Claus that kids believe in is entirely different from the real Saint Nicholas”

        LOL! since when have kids become the std? kids also believe hrithik is krrish! they are innocent and once they become adult they understand what christmas is about. his apperance etc is the “ritual” part and it is done just for fun. one can just gift thier children or poor ppl on that day and make them happy. that is how its done to celebrate the spirit of saint nicholas.if you think adults believe in santa claus and think they wil give him gift on christmas, then the joke is on you, not the people! you need to find a doctor.

        “You confuse will power with faith in God” . No I said there is Chi in every human and it can be realised by harnessing and its powers when fully relized are unreal/superhuman. and i think that power is called God by some and I see more sense in that than a blindfolded atheist who is just ignorant.

        “You gave an example of Jonty Rhodes to prove that faith in God”

        LOL!you didnt even understand my post. read it again. i talked about power of meditation there (to stress importance of intangible things in life)

        i gave several examples how things which are normal for one can be superhuman for another. i talked about fasting (which you childishly gloated that you do easily,as if that matters!) to a man of 80 years standing on his finger. I also gave the example of a tai chi expert vs a layman in this thread. I dont think i can be more clear than this. you missed the point there also and even here.

        • Author
          sputnik 5 years ago

          The Santa Claus thing was a analogy and you did not get it. Belief in God is the adult equivalent of belief of kids in Santa Claus. The kids stop believing in Santa Claus when they grow up – when they either start really applying their brain or are told the truth by a elder. But with religion most people continue to believe in ludicrous stories which cannot stand any rational/logical scrutiny and mythical characters who have no historical/archaeological evidence.

          Inner power isn’t God. One can control what happens to him but they cannot control things beyond them.

          The blindfolded atheists/agnostics have contributed more to this world with their scientific discoveries/inventions than all the believers. There are different meditational organizations (usually with a religious background) which come up with different claims of curing/healing diseases which are not scientifically proven.

          “i talked about fasting (which you childishly gloated that you do easily,as if that matters!) to a man of 80 years standing on his finger.”

          I have seen people who have huge faith in God struggle with their fasting while staying without food/water for a long time is no big deal for me. The point is not about gloating – the point is that it doesn’t become easy just because one has faith. It depends on the individual make up of that person and his will power. Something can be easy for one person while being extremely difficult for another person and vice versa.

          And as far as that one finger stand video is concerned he wasn’t exactly standing on his finger. He was leaning against the wall. And there are videos of people standing just on finger with no wall support too but then many think those are fake. I don’t know if those are fake or not. May be if someone practices hard for a long time its possible.

          • Baba 5 years ago

            “The Santa Claus thing was a analogy and you did not get it”

            i know. but it was a very poor and irrelevant analogy. santa claus was a real man and there is no superstition around him.

            “The blindfolded atheists/agnostics have contributed more to this world with their scientific discoveries/inventions than all the believers”

            atheists and agnostics arent the same. atheist doesnt believe anything which he cant see, touch and measure. it is not a bad position to be in.

            a believer has a potential to achiever greatness (shaolin monks)

            a agnostic is the worst kind who is neither here or there. its confused like you are.

            “May be if someone practices hard for a long time its possible”

            yeah right! just join a gym and its possible in 6 years! that is why no one in the world (including the much stronger and younger ppl with all the technology at thier disposal) cant do it but a old shaolin monk at 80 years does it. you need to read about Chi as i see you are totally ignorant on this topic.the whole base of my post was about it.

          • Baba 5 years ago

            “Inner power isn’t God”

            then what is it acc to an atheist? bcos i am saying it is Chi which is the fact and i have evidence for it.

            “And there are videos of people standing just on finger with no wall support too but then many think those are fake.”

            that video is part of a shaolin kung fu documentary which i have seen full. its not fake and you can see that in the video too. and there are so many unbelievable things done by monks which are verified by experts that they are not fake.I know that til an american company doesnt back it, you wont believe it, so watch this episode from fight quest , an american fight show, on shalion monks:

            watch from 26:00. a monk breaks an iron bar with his bare skull. you are aware that skull is made of calcium and there is no way a human can have a skull harder than an iron bar no matter how hard he hits the gym! now use your “agnostic” mind and your “science” and tell me how something like this is possible?

            https://youtube.com/watch?v=fWEuWXEZepU

            watch the national geographic “xtreme martial arts” where scientists have verified the existence of Chi

            wach another documentary named “myths and logic of shaolin kung fu” again on national geogrpahic and educate yourself if you are interested

            i am not sure if full episodes are available on youtube.

        • Author
          sputnik 5 years ago

          Even after reading the Odin part you are still saying Santa Claus was real. They started with the pagan God Odin and mixed Saint Nicholas to it to make it theirs.

          “atheists and agnostics arent the same. atheist doesnt believe anything which he cant see, touch and measure. it is not a bad position to be in.”

          Atheists hold the position that there is no God. Its got nothing to do with personally seeing, touching and measuring everything to believe in it.

          “a agnostic is the worst kind who is neither here or there. its confused like you are.”

          Yeah agnostics like Einstein, Charles Darwin, Madame Curie, C.V. Raman, Carl Sagan and Neil deGrasse Tyson are confused and are the worst out there.

          “a believer has a potential to achiever greatness (shaolin monks)”

          By doing what? Standing on fingers? There is no need for any person to stand on their fingers and it doesn’t serve any real purpose.

          “yeah right! just join a gym and its possible in 6 years! that is why no one in the world (including the much stronger and younger ppl with all the technology at thier disposal) cant do it but a old shaolin monk at 80 years does it.”

          So if someone joins a cricket academy and practices for a few years then he will become great like Sachin? No. It depends on talent, perseverance, will power, interest and so on to achieve greatness. Those monks have been practicing that thing their whole life.

          “watch from 26:00. a monk breaks an iron bar with his bare skull. you are aware that skull is made of calcium and there is no way a human can have a skull harder than an iron bar no matter how hard he hits the gym! now use your “agnostic” mind and your “science” and tell me how something like this is possible?”

          So how did this guy do the same thing? He is no Shaolin monk.

          And I can post so many links of extraordinary or superhuman feats done by people who aren’t Shaolin monks.

          • Baba 5 years ago

            By santa i meant saint nicholas not caricature
            The video u gave is not available
            . But the technique he uses will b similar to one in my video. That is through qi gong. U hv to watch those documentaries which i mentoned.
            Again a silly analogy about cricket academy. Going to academy can actually make u sachin but going to gym cant teach u kung fu or harnessing chi. Its wrong place.
            Standing on finger or breaking iron bars are ways why which monks demonstrate power of chi to laymen. They r enlightened ppl.
            Einsten didnt win noble prize for being an agnostic. U dont become einstein bcos u r also agnostic.u r sputnik who is sometimes believer n on some days an agnostic!

          • Author
            sputnik 5 years ago

            You said “a agnostic is the worst kind who is neither here or there. its confused like you are.” and when I point out that smart people like Einstein & others were also agnostic you say he didn’t win noble prize for being an agnostic. Did I say he won a Nobel Prize for being a agnostic?

            Yes you don’t become Einstein because you are also agnostic just the way you won’t be able to do a finger stand just because you also believe in Chi.

            All these things are mind over matter. I can post a link to a 91 year old man pulling a car with his teeth and he tells that its Mind over Matter.

            Anybody who believes in some imaginary God and is living a life of hardship and goes through all sorts of trouble to please this imaginary God is certainly not enlightened.

            Wake me up when a Shaolin monk becomes a Einstein using Chi.

  56. Baba 5 years ago

    Saw the video from a different yt channel. I remember this guy. I think he has a brief appearance in national geographic fight science episode.

  57. Baba 5 years ago

    “Did I say he won a Nobel Prize for being a agnostic?”

    you took his name just to digress from the topic which is what you always do. the work einstein has done in his career has nothing to do with him being an agnostic. yes agnostic are the worst kind when it comes to the concept of God. their stance is confused and illogical.

    “you won’t be able to do a finger stand just because you also believe in Chi.”

    that may or may not be possible, but atleast i am on the right track.it can be done by harnessing chi. one doesnt have to be a shaolin monk for it. but shaolin monks are the experts in that domain. your exmaple about eisntein is bullshit and out of context.

    “Anybody who believes in some imaginary God and is living a life of hardship and goes through all sorts of trouble to please this imaginary God is certainly not enlightened.”

    I dont know about whom are you are speaking and i am not here to speak on the behalf of every believer in the world. I believe in Chi and science has verified its existence and its power. Chi is there in every human being and it cant be seen and touched or measured. it can be cultivated with tai chi to achieve great mental and physical heights (almost superhuman) which has also been verified by science experts.

    • Baba 5 years ago

      I uploaded a small clip from Discovery channel documentary “Xtreme martial arts” where they are talking about Chi and its significance in real life/fights. I have the full documentary in my laptop and i also have the torrent link if you want to see full version

    • Author
      sputnik 5 years ago

      Einstein was one of the world’s greatest scientists ever and is considered to be a genius. Now he obviously did not declare himself to be a agnostic without giving due thought to it. Its you who are trying to deflect your silly argument that agnostics are confused when I point out some great scientists who were also agnostics.

      Believers usually point to a God or Gods to explain anything that cannot be explained by prevalent Science at that particular time. Here is a video of Neil DeGrasse Tyson talking on that very point.

      Atheists and Agnostics both do not believe in any of the existing religions. An Atheist completely rules out the possibility of a God or some creator ever being revealed whereas a Agnostic just admits that there is no existence of God based on present evidence but does not rule out some future discovery of a creator which is a correct position to be in. When some one is curious to find out the Science behind something un-explainable and works to find it that’s when great scientific discoveries/inventions happen. That is what Tyson says in his last part of the video.

      I am talking about the existence of a supreme creator or God who is supposed to have created the whole universe and you are talking about internal energy.

      I can’t see the video you posted but saw some other video from National Geographic where some one did some superhuman stuff with Chi. There are videos from National Geographic too where the expert says that Chi is not real. So as a agnostic will wait for the scientific explanations for those things rather than rule out as an atheist.

      Read this posts on Chi and watch the videos in those posts.

      http://skepdic.com/chikung.html

      http://scienceblogs.com/neurotopia/2007/10/01/martial-idiocy/

      • Baba 5 years ago

        U r now desparately finding links which suport u. Those websites u posted are crap n they r not from national geographic n discovery.

        Einstein was great in his profession but that doesnt mean everythinh he does in life becomes great. What kind of logic u use lol…so einstein must have given a great thought to the way he loked also isnt it ? He was such a good looking dork what great hair style he had. Definitely a lot of thought has gone into it, you are absolutely right!

        • Author
          sputnik 5 years ago

          LOL Attacking Einstein’s looks because you can’t refute that he was smart. Yes a scientist will think about how he looks and will give looks (and something vain as his hairstyle) the same importance as to whether there is a God or not. He is not a model or movie star to care about his looks.

          One of the videos in that links is from National Geographic. Here is the longer video from National Geographic and watch the paranormal expert at 31 seconds say that Chi does not exist. LOL on that Chi expert’s excuses. So what’s your excuse now.

          I rest my case.

          • Baba 5 years ago

            ” He is not a model or movie star to care about his looks.”

            LOL! he is also not a philosopher or messenger who will give a lot of thought towards Gods existence and religons.no more of this irelevant debate on einstein from me.

            regarding the video you showed above, yes there are some (mostly fatass bookworm snobs like the person speaking in that video) who dont believe it because they have never ever attempted to do Tai chi moves.I had talked about it in my post :

            “Now there is debate whether this Chi is for real or is it just a hoax.Those who think it is hoax can and will never experience this internal energy in them.Those who have faith in it will experience it with gradual practise.Its all about the power of faith.You gotta have belief in it.You cannot see it or touch it.”

            now you answer – did you watch the video i have posted?

          • Author
            sputnik 5 years ago

            Now he is not good enough because he is not a philosopher or messenger. What a scientist says about God is more important than some philosopher’s musings and certainly more important than some charlatan messenger.

            Anyway here are some great philosophers who were also agnostics – Bertrand Russell, Herbert Spencer, Epicurus, Noam Chomsky, Confucius and Kent.

            “regarding the video you showed above, yes there are some (mostly fatass bookworm snobs like the person speaking in that video) who dont believe it because they have never ever attempted to do Tai chi moves.”

            Did you even watch the National Geographic video in full which I posted? That fatass is George Dillman Link a Karate Champion.

            That video was “Is It Real?” a National Geographic Channel program tested his “Knockout” Chi (a no-touch knockout technique), and he is is knocking out his guys without even touching them but was unable to knock-out Luigi Garlaschelli, an Italian skeptical investigator.

            “now you answer – did you watch the video i have posted?”

            I already said “I can’t see the video you posted but saw some other video from National Geographic where some one did some superhuman stuff with Chi.”

          • Baba 5 years ago

            i was talking about joe nickell not george. rest of your queries are answered in my new post

          • Author
            sputnik 5 years ago

            Joe Nickell is a skeptic and investigator of the paranormal. His job is to investigate paranormal or extraordinary claims. Why would he believe and practice Tai Chi moves?

            George Dillman who was fooling people with his no touch knockout was the one who was shown to be the fraud. Both the videos that I posted links of showed that the claims of using Chi to knock out or fight were nonsense.

            As for the videos of Shaolin monks where they have done some superhuman things like breaking iron rods over head and things like that its just mental and physical conditioning practiced over years.

            Bones get strengthened over time with repeated practice.

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolff's_law

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bone_remodeling

          • Baba 5 years ago

            he is a skeptic and a fatass bookworm. unless you do tai chi, you cant experience it. sitting on lazyass chair in his ac room and making judgements.

            many ppl fool public even by opening martial arts classes and how they can teach a person karate in 1 month. there are thugs in every part of the world.

            “its just mental and physical conditioning practiced over years.”

            easier said than done. khud karke dikhana phir bhaav khaana

          • Author
            sputnik 5 years ago

            He is a renowned skeptic who disproves stupid paranormal claims. Your attack against him because he dismissed Chi is really silly.

            “khud karke dikhana phir bhaav khaana”

            I have no interest in doing all those things. That American fighter also broke a iron rod with his head and he also used his head to bang a nail into wood without believing in any Chi. So yes its all about physical and mental conditioning achieved with years of practice.

            That yahoo answer link you have posted also says that Chi doesn’t exist.

  58. AAP 5 years ago

    I havent followed all the discussion and dont know how Einstein came in, but its stupid to believe than inner power means Maha-faltu show of breaking something into pieces.

    • Baba 5 years ago

      then what does inner power mean? your ramdev babas patanjali products? 😀 you are just angry because i pointed the gaping holes in PK and you lacked points to counter it. a person who is a fan of a fraud like ramdev baba has no ground to stand on

  59. AAP 5 years ago

    Read a bit about Chi and clearly looks like a big Hoax. As big as all Indian Babas doing chamtkars.

    • Baba 5 years ago

      “Read a bit about Chi ”

      is this supposed to be a joke? lol. you think you read a bit about CHi from some internet websites and you became an expert? there are no chamatkars in martial arts. everything is backed by reason and science unlike your ramdev baba!

      I dont care about your blocking. you should not attach so much importance to yourself. I cudnt care less if you are active on fb or tq. the thing is you do not have answers to any my questions on pk and you are not able to digest this as an aamir fanatic just like dhoom 3 time.

  60. AAP 5 years ago

    Baba, I have blocked both your IDs on FB as you were continuously taking personal remarks and not talking on the point. You are free to assume that I did it because you opposed pk or ramdev or whatever. Normally I dont do it but you were behaving like a real troll only taking personal jibes when your faith is opposed. I may abstain from TQ also in future if it continues here. Goodbye.

  61. Baba 5 years ago

    @sputnik – I was myself very curious about the no-touch knockout once. There is a scene in the movie The 36 chamber of shaolin which shows that. I had asked that question on yahoo a long time ago and one guy had given a very very good reply to it . check this:

    Which is that unique technique in shaolin kung fu?
    Yday i saw the movie,The 36th chamber of shaolin, where the hero enters the shaolin temple to learn kung fu.he straightaway enters the highest chamber and asks the highest monk to teach him kung fu.The monk gets angry and attacks him in some unique weird manner in which he doesnt even touch the hero but the hero falls down.which is that technique?

    check this youtube video at 00.13.what is dat technique??

    Garrett answered 4 years ago
    “36th Chamber of Shaolin” is my favorite Chinese martial arts movie. I read about it being filmed in “Hong Kong Movie News” and “Southern Screen” Chinese magazines while it was in production, and I was eager to see it. I did see its debut at Tai Tin Sing (Great Star) Theater a few doors away from my residence in San Francisco’s Chinatown in 1979. What you mention is a milder use of “Hung Shou Dzung” that is said to be able to kill people without touching them. It can cause death immediately or up to two years later, according to my Sifus in this technique. It can be used against someone in another room if the user can aim well. The basic idea is that there is a sort of Vital Energy, Energy Flow, Air, Breath, etc. that can be controlled well by masters of the proper techniques. It is called Qi in the modern Pinyin Romanization of Chinese symbols, Ch’i or Chi in the older Wade-Gilles system for Chinese words, Ki in Japanese, Gi or Ki in Korean, Chi in Thai, Khi in Vietnamese, etc., … … but “Is It Real?”
    Massimo Polidoro and Luigi Garlaschelli of the University of Pavia in Italy were invited to partcipate in a TV show on National Geographic’s “Is It Real” series by being given Qi blows by Leon Jay, an associate of George Dillman, at a gym in Milano, Italia (Milan, Italy). As all reasonable people could predict, Mr. Jay couldn’t affect Signor Garlaschelli at all with his Qi projection strikes. One of Mr. Jay’s students was also placed behind a dark sheet while Mr. Jay again tried his Qi punch, and again he failed to knock down anyone. George Dillman was interviewed by National Geographic after this and made silly excuses, e.g. saying the position of the victim’s tongue and toes can stop him from being affected by the Qi punch. How asinine can anyone be? No objective medical research on accupuncture has shown that it actually works, and it is based upon Qi. That shows any logical person that there is no good reason to believe in Qi, so there is nothing that the monk could actually use to knock down Liu Chia-Hui (a.k.a. Gordon Liu) in the movie.
    EDIT- Who is this Sensei Scandal who makes the quite ridiculous claim that Qi is “beyond science”? Science and scientific method lend themselves to any quest to discover the truth, and they are our best means of doing just that. To just try to dismiss science totally with a trite cliche phrase is beyond illogical. Anything is permitted when someone wildly claims there are areas “beyond science”. Believers in all sorts of nonsense mindlessly utter this cliche, as if it supports the existence of such obvious nonsense as Qi, gods, ghosts, paranormal, Bogfoot, Atlantis, and myriad other such hoary hoaxes.
    EDIT II- Shienara makes a good observation. George Dillman’s students have been conditioned to fall down upon command, but our Italian skeptic resists such conditioning that is based somewhat upon Mesmerism, but I do question his sequence of events in the movie. Liu Chia-Hui was new at the Shaolin temple, so he hadn’t had time to be “mesmerized” yet.
    Source:
    60 years of study and practice of Chinese, Japanese, Korean and Tibetian martial arts have never shown me Qi,Ch’i,Chi, Ki, Gi, Khi exists.

    https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110322013024AAKT5BK

  62. Baba 5 years ago

    sputnik – he is not as renowed as you imagine him to be. his word is not the last word. for every such “expert”, there are 10 more and i gave links to them in my post.you have to see everything and then form an educated opinion, not in your vent to prove me wrong.

    your american fighter video strengthens my argument not yours.the american fighter broke it using the concept of “kinetic linking” which is exactly what Chi is about. that is why i had said you can do these things without being a monk too but monks are the experts in this domain.the ninjas are also adept in ths technique and they are japanese not chinese. this technique is there in indian martial arts kalaripayatu also . i dont know its technical name. and this technique is there in karate as well which is called “iron-body conditioning”.read my post well and watch the videoes . download them. I have put you and some others to good amoutn of work since last 2-3 days and you have to be thankful to me for passing so much knowledge. 😀
    agar main na hota to Qi kabhi nahi search karte!

    yes the yahoo answer is awesome. he is an educated man and presents the other side of the spectrum. there are many martial artists who dismiss Qi when they spend their lives and never realise it.and that is why its special.but then are also many who do realise it and then are able to do the things that they do.I liked his explanation about “conditionng his disciples to fall”. it makes sense to me. A very simple relatable example is during your childhood when you are sitting close to your tutor and you made a mistake and if the tutor just moves his hand, you get scared and move away assuming that he is moving his hand up to beat you. That is what Hung Shou Dzung is in laymen words

    • Author
      sputnik 5 years ago

      There is no scientific evidence for Chi so what he said was absolutely right. Some people claim Chi is real and some say there is something definitely unexplainable when they see supposedly superhuman things but that does not prove Chi.

      From what I read and have seen so far I don’t see anything mystical or magical life force thing called Chi.

      I have no interest to prove you wrong.

      “your american fighter video strengthens my argument not yours.”

      He obviously did not believe in Chi. So it debunks that one has to believe in Chi to experience it and do those things that only people who believe in Chi are able to do.

      “I liked his explanation about “conditionng his disciples to fall””

      That’s what disciples and blind believers of phony Babas do.

      To me its a simple case of the Shaolin monks being able to do those supposedly superhuman stuff with years of physical and mental conditioning but thinking its due to some imaginary life force energy called Chi.

      • Baba 5 years ago

        how long are you going to repeat the same thing? nothing new to add? you have not read the post i made and have not seen the vidoes i asked you to see. you didnt read what kinetic linking is.you didnt understand what i meant when i said “I liked his explanation about “conditionng his disciples to fall” even though i gave a simple real life example which is relevant and has been experinced by everyone for sure once in life atleast. by this comment again you have proved that you are only interested in proving someone wrong and the funny thing is you are not capable of it with your limited knowledge and knowhow. someone like that yahoo guy can but not you!live with it

        • Author
          sputnik 5 years ago

          Someone was scared of his tutor so that’s because of Chi. What nonsense?

          This is no different than any Baba’s theories. I am sorry I am not going to indulge in any more debate on this.

          • Baba 5 years ago

            “Someone was scared of his tutor so that’s because of Chi”

            sigh! cant believe it. are you sputnik or sunil? if you cant understand a simple real life example like this, then it is foolish to expect you to understand kinetic linking and other higher level concepts. from where Chi cropped up into my example God only knows!

            this is a reply from a guy on the same yahoo link question i gave. I gave that example from his reply only

            Shienaran answered 4 years ago
            Actually it’s more of a psychological thing than a martial arts technique. You know how you intimidate a person so well that when you suddenly say “Boo!” he jumps back and falls on his butt? Well it’s kinda like that, the monk’s aura was so intimidating it conditioned the young hero’s mind to jump at the slightest sound. Of course since this is a movie, they tend to exaggerate and make it look like the monk had magical powers.

            again – was this example that confusing or am i just expecting a bare minimum std of intellect?now i am confused.

          • Author
            sputnik 5 years ago

            “if you cant understand a simple real life example like this, then it is foolish to expect you to understand kinetic linking and other higher level concepts.”

            I gave you links to bone modelling and Wolff’s law and you are trying to show that the American fighter did it because of Kinetic linking which is same as Chi. I gave you a National Geographic channel video since you were saying I got videos from some useless sites and then you attack the paranormal expert.

            You can continue to believe in Chi. I don’t and the world at large does not believe in it except some martial arts fans who have grown up on legends. I read your posts and there is no connection between what is considered Chi and a supreme creator.

            “Actually it’s more of a psychological thing than a martial arts technique. You know how you intimidate a person so well that when you suddenly say “Boo!” he jumps back and falls on his butt? Well it’s kinda like that, the monk’s aura was so intimidating it conditioned the young hero’s mind to jump at the slightest sound. Of course since this is a movie, they tend to exaggerate and make it look like the monk had magical powers.”

            These are BS excuses trying to show the instructor positively instead of calling them for what they are – frauds. Disciples or supposedly normal people also do same sort of stuff at religious Baba’s gatherings. That’s also because of the Baba’s aura?

            When a tutor raises his hand the kid moves so as to not get hit. Its known as reflex. When someone throws an object at another person he will try to weave or duck.

            Here is one more video of a Tai Chi Master controlling his student with fake powers.

            https://youtube.com/watch?v=3VqgUqaWaEo

  63. Baba 5 years ago

    I am not “trying” to show it is kinetic linking. I am CLEARLY stating its kinetic linking because i KNOW what it is.

    ” I read your posts and there is no connection between what is considered Chi and a supreme creator.”

    and where have i said Chi is the “supreme creator” ? LOL! these are all your imagination. calling Chi as magical or God is your imagination. dont put words into my mouth.you are desparate to paint my views in some stereotypical way by using silly arguments. Chi is not magic. it is a form of energy in every human being which can be harnessed by pratice and i have given all the relevant videos and information regarding it which i am sure you have neither read nor understood.

    “These are BS excuses trying to show the instructor positively instead of calling them for what they are – frauds.”

    you are bullshit. you are so full of shit in your head that you cant even comprehend simple logical and practical aspects which is so easy to see. The first step towards learning Chi for you is to forget all that garbage you have in your mind.forget what i have said about pk or omg. just read my post again with nul mind.

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published.

Log in with your credentials

or    

Forgot your details?

Create Account