I am shocked by the utter bias in Paresh’s review…..the movie, which I have seen, is socially very relevant especially today and more so in the backdrop of the rape cases across India and the one in Delhi……Paresh has done a great disservice by writing off the movie in such an emphatic fashion….I believe the movie should be watched by every family, young girls and boys in fact everybody who is worried about the safety of their daughters, wives and sisters. MY daughter was aghast at the manner the film unfolded and for the first time in her life applauded the violence from a hero…she is normally averse to all film violence…..guys I rest my case and Paresh please stop writing such drivel….
Re: What a shameful review!
by Sreejith Unnikrishnan on Dec 29, 2012 11:00 PM
I don't know how you compare films and what your expectations are. But personally for me this movie was an utter waste of time. A very bad script, bad direction, senseless dialogues and plot.. I could go on. I couldn't really find anything good about this movie.
Just because the theme has some socially relevant parts doesn't mean it can't be an aesthetically directed movie. This movie falls into the same category as Kandahar and other wasted movies.
Re: Re: What a shameful review!
by Rajesh Soman on Dec 30, 2012 10:12 AM
Let ut be a utter waste of time for you my friend....but atkeast you do not have the unfettered rights, as our friend Paresh here, to write off anymovie the way he wants......the film is socially relevant through out its length....Irrespective of how you like your films a comment of "utter waste" or "not worth watching" is is equally unjustified ...
Re: Re: Re: What a shameful review!
by Arun Vadakkedath on Dec 30, 2012 01:56 PM
I agree with Rajesh Soman. May be from the reviewer’s prospective this is not a movie worth watching but please do not generalize things. If the story was told in a typical way then reviewer would say here is nothing new but if the director do something new then say this is not acceptable. I like the movie and recommend for all to watch
As long as reviewers like "Palicha" exist "pseudo-intellectuals" and "biased" reviewers will survive. Reviewers like Palicha doctor reviews and are a shame to professional journalism. Compare his incomplete review with many other reviews on other sites and the "bias" is evident. You may call a bad act bad, but when you are trigger happy, target individuals, and frame your reviews as Palicha does, ignoring all else, the manipulation is evident. Some of these reviewers don't have to be journalists or professionals to survive. There they are lucky. Some also post messages using proxies and pseudonyms to support their muck? In Kerala it has become a fashion to bash Mammootty and Mohanlal...and call it "new generation"..."copied foreign cinema" is all that these people generate...on the other hand Movies like Mayamohini are highest grossers...is that reflective of pseudointellectual taste? People also expect entertainment Mr.Palicha, especially when alcoholism and incest cases dominant social issues....Your bias is showing Palicha
Re: ...doctored reviews
by Adarsh Pillai on Dec 27, 2012 09:55 PM
I think you are right Varoon, the reviewer Palicha kind of takes a trigger happy and biased approach here. I have noticed this with many of his reviews, he does not come across as a journalist by any measure and has many biases. Even in his review of Mammootty's Bavootiyude Naamathil, he clearly discredits Mammootty's performance with carefully chosen words. The superstar bias is evident in Palicha reviews and I am glad you chose to point it. Palicha seems like a guy with many complexes and these complexes show in his work. Rediff may have a strong reason to keep him on board.
completely directed by Major Ravi. I remember reading that Mohanlal was so unhappy with the intial cut that he asked Priyadarshan to reshoot several scenes including the climax
Re: It is clear that M'lam movies are running out of ideas
by dicktracy on Dec 27, 2012 06:08 PM
True they churn out substandard remakes with the ugliest actors possible every week. Heard that Avatar was inspired after James Cameron saw the Rajkumar family and he made it in 3d after seeing Puneeths nose
Irrespective of what reviewers say, artistes such as Mohanlal (and several others) have long passed their 'use-by' date and ought to withdraw altogether from films.
Instead, such men and women keep trying to 're-invent' themselves with the aid of sundry directors and take unsuspecting movie-goers on long trips of boredom and disgust!
That the only 're-inventing' that takes place in many of the movies of today is a laboured attempt to re-produce the white man's cinematic ideas is an entirely different matter!
The drooping, double-chinned, quadruple-cheeked faces of men such as Mohanlal on movie-posters ought to serve as a dire warning to those contemplating watching those movies!
Re: The visage of Mohanlal is disincentive enough!
by Varoon Madhavan on Dec 27, 2012 07:38 PM
As long as reviewers like "Palicha" exist "pseudo-intellectuals" and "biased" reviewers will survive. Reviewers like Palicha doctor reviews and are a shame to professional journalism. Compare his incomplete review with many other reviews on other sites and the "bias" is evident. You may call a bad act bad, but when you are trigger happy and frame your reviews as Palicha does, ignoring all else, the manipulation is evident. Some of these reviewers don't have to be journalists or professionals to survive. There they are lucky. Some also post messages using proxies and pseudonyms? And who decides there is "use date" - does art and do artists have a use date? That explains you...People like you are a curse to cinema as much as the bad acts of artists. In Kerala it has become a fashion to bash Mammootty and Mohanlal...and call it "new generation"..."copied foreign cinema" is all that these people generate...Movies like Mayamohini are highest grossers...
Re: Re: The visage of Mohanlal is disincentive enough!
by dicktracy on Dec 27, 2012 02:40 PM
Mammooty (62 playing carefree bachelor in every film with a 20 year old heroine), Jairam (playing the same characters in same style for last 25 years), Mukesh , Suresh Gopi... please dont give me the usual Rajni/Kamal excuse coz they do just one movie in couple of years not churn out one every month. In Hindi actors of Big M's age or younger are doing character roles , (Sanjay dutt, Sunny deol, Anil Kapoor, Jackie Shroff) . They acting is like asking a 90 year old Sean Connery to put on a wig and act as James Bond now. He may have been the best, but a younger Daniel craig is the best choice now.
Re: Re: Re: The visage of Mohanlal is disincentive enough!
by Raj on Dec 27, 2012 03:28 PM
tks...atleast there is a sense of fairness in your comments....i was observing that off late Mohan Lal had stopped romancing young girls but as you rightly said some of the other greats continue in the same vein...but i do not see a problem in tough cop roles being done....may be a more subtle roles like Grand Master are wonderful for Mohan Lal..
Re: Re: Re: The visage of Mohanlal is disincentive enough!
by GEORGE SEBASTIAN on Dec 27, 2012 03:46 PM
The reason is remuneration. In a small industry like ours an actor is paid less than a crore and every project gets over in less than two months. So an actor gets involved in four to five movies a year even if you don't get a good script. In other film industries actors focus on a single movie at a time. Since they have just one release a year, they can wait for the right script, find a good director and take time to complete the movie. Aamir Khan co-produced 3 Idiots and he got close to 60 crores (total 207 crores). It took him another 3 years to make Talaash. This is not possible here. Now coming to the second point, in India I think Aamir Khan is the only actor that chooses role that suits his age. So twenty years down the line at the age of 50, Prithviraj will also romance a 25 year old heroine.
Re: Re: Re: Re: The visage of Mohanlal is disincentive enough!
by dicktracy on Dec 27, 2012 06:22 PM
Ha ha ha do you really think Prithvi will last that long? I agree with your logic but our two Superstars at least have made enough money in the last 30 years or so , to stop doing mindless drivel and would it be too much to expect quality products from them? Mohanlal was on the right track i felt with Spirit and Grandmaster, even Run Babby was ok (except his pairing with Amala Paul perhaps), Karmayodha seems to be a favour to Major Ravi, hope he bounces back. Mammooty is the biggest offender here, there was a time when he was revered for his masterful portrayal of Chanthu , GK and so many others. Now he is reduced to a laughing stock with his jet black hair and mush, playing silly characters that are barely older than what his son portrays? I strongly feel he could have utilized the whole NewGen Cinema trend to reinvent himself instead of being branded as the king of flops . I am not against anyone and should mention that Mammooty had the most impressive success rate of films from 99 till around 2008 . (Hit to flop ratio was very low)
Re: Re: Re: Re: The visage of Mohanlal is disincentive enough!
by dicktracy on Dec 27, 2012 06:23 PM
Ha ha ha do you really think Prithvi will last that long? I agree with your logic but our two Superstars at least have made enough money in the last 30 years or so , to stop doing mindless drivel and would it be too much to expect quality products from them? Mohanlal was on the right track i felt with Spirit and Grandmaster, even Run Babby was ok (except his pairing with Amala Paul perhaps), Karmayodha seems to be a favour to Major Ravi, hope he bounces back. Mammooty is the biggest offender here, there was a time when he was revered for his masterful portrayal of Chanthu , GK and so many others. Now he is reduced to a laughing stock with his jet black hair and mush, playing silly characters that are barely older than what his son portrays? I strongly feel he could have utilized the whole NewGen Cinema trend to reinvent himself instead of being branded as the king of flops . I am not against anyone and should mention that Mammooty had the most impressive success rate of films from 99 till around 2008 . (Hit to flop ratio was very low)
Re: Re: Re: Re: The visage of Mohanlal is disincentive enough!
by aravind gopalakrishnan on Jan 03, 2013 04:11 PM
Excellent..Then why did AAmir Khan act like 20 at the age of 45 in the same 3 idiots ?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The visage of Mohanlal is disincentive enough
by dicktracy on Jan 03, 2013 06:16 PM
Because it was a one off experiment, Your mamooka is doing it again and again with jet black hair and mush at the ripe age of 62 romancing heroines who are younger than his kids
