by maya nirvana on Nov 29, 2010 06:28 PM
G3 is not "intelligent" cinema but it doesn't pretend to be so either. It is at least entertaining in its own way-like Enthiran, Dabang etc. Guzarish is a pathetic rip off of a brilliant foreign film, that pretends to have substance but is all surface-which is neither real nor believable. this is a movie not a music video and I'm not sure WHAT is "sensible" about a film that is set in modern day Goa but has characters resembling spanish dancers and jesus...in which there is no plot and no logical reason given to explain the motive behind euthanasia even when the character has managed to do well for himself for 14 years...the list just goes on....and this film is not even entertaining-no wit bad dialogue, bad music....
Rich canvases, lavish sets, glossy costumes, it's all about bhansali movies, till now I am waiting to see a movie worth aprising, if you really want to enjoy movies in hindi watch Vishal's omkara,kameene, Ramu's old flicks(not the new ones please),Anurag kashyap's Dev D, if not finding much movies around just rewind oldies from Shyam Benegal,Gautham Ghosh, really missing good movies now a days. Raja's review is excellent, it's better off reading Raja's review than watching these boring movies
Bhansali blatantly copies The Sea Inside, which is considered a good film. Won't call it a masterpiece. Hrithik is not a patch on Javier Bardem. Rai looks like a overmade up cabaret girt. The whole exercise is a disgrace. 60 crores and media hype. That is all. It is no classic. It is a overblown, overhyped mistake. Sooner we forget it the better it is!
Re: The Sea Inside. That is it! End of Discussion
by First Last on Nov 30, 2010 01:38 AM
Look! We have a Patel in the making. Dude, seriously, the only thing that is a copy here is you - a copy of a pig. Your gene pool is full of pig's genes. By all means though, keep trying your hands at intelligence.
Re: Re: The Sea Inside. That is it! End of Discussion
by deimos Jr on Nov 30, 2010 03:09 AM
Before commenting on other's intelligence, you should take a look at your own post and ponder about your own? Doesnt look like you have too many genes of any animal - comparisions to them will be extremely insulting (to them!)
Re: a cllasic
by First Last on Nov 24, 2010 11:18 PM
Unfortunately the box office collection is driven by the likes of the ones who are burning in jealousy and spweing nonsense here about the movie from the mental asylum.
Re: Re: a cllasic
by sandeep patil on Nov 26, 2010 04:17 AM
Agree with u mate. Its really sad that our audience doesnt appreciate excellence. Probably they are so used to mediocrity that they dont even recognize excellence when they see it. My heart goes out for SLB... It is really a shame that a genius like him doesnt get his share of praise.
Re: Re: Re: Re: a cllasic
by maya nirvana on Nov 29, 2010 06:33 PM
shame on US if we think THIS movie is a classic. not only is it a terrible film but boring and pseudo serious art movie. classic cinema isn't just about pretty people and pretty sets. there has to be some plot, logic, wit, real raw emotion.....some realism....look at bombay, roja, omakara.....at least the brainless films like golmaal don't pretend to be "great" cinema...at least they are entertaining. I can't believe that so much money was spend on making a crap film like this which no one wants to watch....how self indulgent
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: a cllasic
by First Last on Nov 30, 2010 01:42 AM
I am sure there was no money spent in making a crap product like you. It also appears that a lot of male species were involved in the fertilization process. Otherwise you would at least have had some plot, logic, wit, real raw emotion... some realism... waah waaaah waaaaaaaaah!