the movie is really good yaar, I did not understand who has written this worst review. pls stop writing negatively, have u received money from shrof's opposition. pls don't write negative rating if the movie is good. tiger shrof is really fantastic.
Re: the movie is superb
by Kamal B on May 24, 2014 04:37 PM
to all Tiger shroff haters, just go to H3lll. You people have made fun of him but the fact is movie is going to be HIT
Having know how about cinema and people can judge a film and their actors...tiger sheriff was brilliant in this movie...paloma madam..please be more genuine in your judgements.
You said "and follows in the footsteps of the original, Parugu. and then you say "Babloo must now use his superpowers (aka heropanti)"; Super Powers in parugu?? have you seen the movie parugu?? It may not be a great movie but not a movie where heropanthi is shown....it is a normal movie which concentrates more on the emotional inner battle of a father for his daughters, of a lady between father n a lover, of a brat between his lady love and the concerns for her father...the original movie dealt with emotions more..I don't know about this movie but reviewer for sure has not seen the original...just making random comments...
PS refers to the reviewer's initials, if you already didn't know.
So, here's Rediff, once again publishing this hack's "review". This time she's out to make a bad film look and sound even worse.
But that's not the point. PS clearly needs to go back to school.
Some excerpts from her gem of a "review": 1. Yes, this *is* Tiger's debut film.
2. getting both their butts honour killed - WHAT?! Just what?
3. *Swoons* - This is...supposedly a "review". Umm, okay.
4. great to see Raj's usual bad guy act have some shades of grey this time around as he plays a man torn between the brutal traditions of his people and his undying love for his daughter - shades of grey? Are you serious? If he was a good character, then being a bad guy or doing things a bad guy does would imply "shades of grey"
So, Rediff, I'd like you to publish my 12 year-old cousin's review on Rediff too. I bet he'd be more competent than PS.
P.S.: Nothing personal, PS. It's just that your "reviews" are very misleading and extremely biased, besides being shoddily written.
PS refers to the reviewer's initials, if you already didn't know.
So, here's Rediff, once again publishing this hack's "review". This time she's out to make a bad film look and sound even worse.
But that's not the point. PS clearly needs to go back to school.
Some excerpts from her gem of a "review": 1. Yes, this *is* Tiger's debut film.
2. getting both their butts honour killed - WHAT?! Just what?
3. *Swoons* - This is...supposedly a "review". Umm, okay.
4. great to see Raj's usual bad guy act have some shades of grey this time around as he plays a man torn between the brutal traditions of his people and his undying love for his daughter - shades of grey? Are you serious? If he was a good character, then being a bad guy or doing things a bad guy does would imply "shades of grey"
So, Rediff, I'd like you to publish my 12 year-old cousin's review on Rediff too. I bet he'd be more competent than PS.
P.S.: Nothing personal, PS. It's just that your "reviews" are very misleading and extremely biased, besides being shoddily written.
