Movie Reviews |

Yevade Subramanyam | Movie Review

Yevade-subramanyam

Yevade Subramanyam is a movie I can connect with; it was about three years ago that I took a similar trip to the Himalayas, the trip of my life thus far. But thank god for I am no where like Subramanyam.

Directed by debutant Nag Ashwin, the movie is about an overachiveving, materialistic guy, Subramanyam, who cares only about his future. On the other hand, his friend, Rishi, is a guy full of life, one who wants to explore the world, but most importantly travel to Himalayas with Subbu. They soon meet a lively girl, Anandi, who does whatever she feels like (one very similar to Rishi), and Subbu needs her consent to reach his life’s ambition. The rest of the story is all about how destiny leads Subbu to Himalayas, and in the process, teaches him life’s biggest lesson. All of this is showcased in a neat manner and while direction is good, there’s big scope for improvement. On the downside, the screenplay happens to be mediocre (for no fault of its own).

Nani does a good job as the materialistic guy. But the movie belongs to Vijay Deverakonda and Malavika Nair. They are both brilliant and full of energy. Their performance is what makes Yevade Subrahmanyam click. Krishnam Raju and Nassar are alright, while Ritu Verma is plain average. Rajesh Vivek has a meaty role and does well.

On technical front, music and cinematography apart, this happens to be one of the most mediocre films I’ve watched till date. Background score and sound mixing are terrible; there are multiple shots with two different tunes playing without sync. Add to that the most pathetic editing ever by Kotagiri Venkateshwara Rao; scenes end abruptly on numerous occasions without making any sense. Even an amateur short film maker can edit better. Maybe the film was shortened for length issues, understandable, but there’s definitely a better way of doing it.

Is it worth your time and money??: For the story part of it, and the acting, yes. But the appalling editing is a big negative. Nevertheless, it’s worth a watch for the message.

Worth mention: Performances by Vijay Deverakonda and Malavika Nair.

Acting: 8.5/10
Story-Screenplay-Direction: 7.5/10
Technical Aspects: 6/10

Verdict: 7.5/10

Detective Byomkesh Bakshy | Movie Review

People have been talking about the Doordarshan serial Detective Byomkesh Bakshy, and how good it was, but I somehow don’t remember ever watching it. And I’m glad I don’t, cause that kinda made me enjoy the movie without comparing it to anything.

I’ve enjoyed all of Dibakar Banarjee movies till date, and while all of his previous films dealt with reality, this is his first try at fiction. While the script does justice to the character created by Sharadindu Bandyopadhyay, I thought Dibakar faltered in showcasing it on the screen. For a thriller, the screenplay was awkwardly haphazard; I really had to concentrate to understand what was happening, and rattle my brain for it all to make sense. Yes, one needs to use their thought process to enjoy a thriller, but not to an extent when it starts to get onto your nerves. Nevertheless, I found the direction to be spot on. The climax proves the calibre of Dibakar as a director; pure genius.

The movie scores big time on acting front, with near splendid performances by almost everyone. Sushant Singh Rajput put his best foot forward and came up with a memorable act. Anand Tiwari is brilliant as Ajit, and so is Neeraj Kabi as the antagonist. Swastika Mukherjee and Divya Menon are decent, while the rest of the cast does well.

Music (by various artists) is perfect and goes well with the flow of the movie. Editing by Manas Mittal and Namrata Rao is neat, and cinematography by Nikos Andritsakis is excellent. Production values, especially the set, are great.

Is it worth your time and money??: If not for the chaotic screenplay, I think it’s a good watch. I’m actually looking forward to the sequel, and so should you!

Worth mention: The climax!

Acting: 8.5/10
Story-Screenplay-Direction: 7.5/10
Technical Aspects: 8.5/10

Verdict: 8/10

Fast & Furious 7 | Movie Review

Fast & Furious

Fast & Furious 7 is touted to be the last ride. It probably wasn’t their intention when they started with the production, but circumstances have led Furious 7 to be the one last ride with Paul Walker.

James Wan, who’s directed horror movies like The Conjuring in the past, is in the driver seat for the last, ok, enough of it. There are tons of action episodes and chases, most of which are well canned; but the fast-paced action seemed to have a burden on someone who’s’ done horror his entire life. While you might at times feel a little nauseated, James still does a decent job on direction front. Planning the screenplay must have been a big challenge, because the untimely demise of one of the main characters; nevertheless, Chris Morgan does well.

Vin Diesel barely acts, but he gets the job done, like he’s done in the remaining five films. Paul’s footage is pulled off well by his doubles. Jason Statham is perfect as the antagonist, and gives the lead pair a good fight. Dwayne Johnson has minimal presence, and thank god for that 😛 . Michelle has a dead expression for most part (but why!). The rest of the cast, is just alright.

Music by Brian Tyler could have been better. The sound effects and mixing however, are excellent. So is the cinematography by Stephen Windon and Marc Spicer. While editing (by a bunch of guys) is decent, the film might seem a little too long for most.

Is it worth your time and money?: Forget logic, it’s all about action; it’s Fast & Furious. With well canned stunts, and a decent storyline, you have a good action film yes. And more than that, the montage towards the end will leave you teary. So, what more do you need?

Worth mention: Almost all the action stunts make you go whoa. And the montage!

Acting: 7.5/10
Story-Screenplay-Direction: 7/10
Technical Aspects: 7.5/10

Verdict: 7.5/10

Cinderella | Movie Review

Cinderella

The story we grew up with is back on the big screen. It might have been told over and over but still has the magic which can charm you; and this version is no different.

Director Kenneth Branagh doesn’t play around while telling Cinderella’s tale, and that actually what makes this movie work. Direction is good, however, the emotions could have been more powerful. The evil wicked mother wasn’t really evil, and the love story could have been better. Screenplay by Chris Weitz also seemed a little out of sorts, especially in the ball episode. A little more engaging screenplay would have worked wonders.

Lilly James is perfect as Ella; she has the innocence needed to play the character, and does total justice. She looks gorgeously beautiful in the ball gown. Richard Madden is handsome enough to be Prince Charming, and does well. Cate Blanchet could have been more evil. The rest of the cast is alright.

Music by Patrick Doyle is decent, while sound mixing and effects are good. Cinematography by Haris Zambarloukos is excellent, and editing by Martin Walsh could have been crisp. Disney has its stamp all over the movie.

Is it worth your time and money?: It might not be an excellent film, but it is a decent watch nevertheless.

Worth mention: Cinderella in the ball gown.

Acting: 8/10
Story-Screenplay-Direction: 7/10
Technical Aspects: 8/10

Verdict: 7.5/10

Temper | Movie Review

Temper

After a disastrous Rabhasa, NTR needed something special for his career to stay alive. And thankfully for him, Temper keeps the ship sailing for a little longer.

Vakkantham Vamsi, who has scripted some duds for NTR in the past (Ashok and Oosaravelli) tries to convey a message through Temper. Puri narrates this story of a corrupt police office in his trademark style, and one can’t miss the similarities to Pokiri and Businessman. The entire first half is stylish, and though not believable, is watchable. The second half forms the crux where the transformation happens. This half happens to be more engaging than the first half, however, the screenplay seemed shabby and rushed through (I hear climax was cut short by 30%, that might be the reason). A little more care on characterization front would have worked wonders.

NTR has put in his heart and soul into the movie and it shows on-screen. His performance in the second half is very good. His dance moves also deserve a special mention. Kajal looks glamorous in her glam-doll role. Prakash Raj is at his best. The surprise package turns out to be Posani, who performs well in a meaty role.

Music by Anoop Rubens is alright. It’s nice to see him finally move away from Manam tunes. Background score by Mani Sharma is pretty good. Cinematography by Shyam K Naidu is spotless. Editing by S R Sekhar is good for the movie never seemed boring, but it also seemed like there were too many cuts made, which kinda ruined the screenplay.

Is it worth your time and money??: I think it is. Plus points are NTR, direction in parts, and length. On the downside, the screenplay in the latter half could have been better. Give it a watch.

Worth mention: NTR’s dance moves.

Acting: 8.5/10
Story-Screenplay-Direction: 7.5/10
Technical Aspects: 8/10

Verdict: 7.5/10

Shamitabh | Movie Review

shamitabh-poster

Both of R. Balki’s previous films (Cheeni Kum and Paa) have been different, and Shamitabh is no exception. However, this time, it gets too predictable and monotonous.

Shamitabh starts off with Dhanush accepting laurels for the performance in his début film, his speech being in Amitabh’s voice. Then we are told the story detailing a young dumb boy’s love for movies, his journey to Bollywood wanting to be an actor, and how he gets Amitabh’s voice. Balki showcases all of this in an entertaining manner. While the story seemed unrealistic, thanks to witty dialogues and perfect direction, you have a delightful first half. But come second half, the film seems like a bore, the flow goes for a toss, and the climax is clichéd. Wish Balki tried to do something different here (just like the ‘Piddly’ song).

Dhanush puts up an engaging performance as the dumb wannabe actor. His countenances when he makes it large, and his interactions with Bachchan are superb. Akshara has a meaty role and she does a good job. Her dialogue delivery was pretty good. The true star however, is not Amitabh Bachchan, but his voice. Not that Amitabh’s performance was bad, it was in fact splendid, but it’s his voice which adds life to this film.

Music by Ilayaraaja is a another asset to this film. It’s soothing and seemed just perfect. Cinematography by P C Sreeram is neat. Editing by Hemanti Sarkar could have been better; the second half seemed unnecessarily long, and could have done away with some cuts.

Is it worth your time and money??: Though the second half plays spoil sport, Shamitabh deserves a watch for the performances by all three leads.

Worth mention: Amitabh’s voice!

Acting: 9/10
Story-Screenplay-Direction: 7.5/10
Technical Aspects: 8.5/10

Verdict: 8/10

Birdman | Movie Review

birdman-poster

Given that you have a bunch of Oscar nominated films releasing together, it’s tedious to keep track of the one which stands out. While all other nominees are either biographies or dramas, Birdman excels as a dark comedy with some spectacular performances.

It’s very difficult to write about director Alejandro González Iñárritu’s Birdman. A Hollywood actor once famous for playing fictional ‘Birdman’ character is trying to establish himself on Broadway; but he is still haunted and tormented by the voice of Birdman, and the story showcases how this conflict affects his Broadway career. While González Iñárritu brings out the best from the entire cast, the screenplay is spectacular and makes the movie a treat to watch. The way the entire film flows seamlessly while giving an impression that it’s all a single shot is brilliantly done. This is how good it gets on script, screenplay and direction front.

Michael Keaton is superb as the struggling actor. He gets into the skin of the character, and his performance is the best I’ve seen this year (thus far). Edward Norton comes up with an equally spectacular act and actually outshines Keaton in some episodes. Emma Stone is perfect in her brief appearance, and so are Naomi Watts, Andrea Riseborough and Zach Galifianakis. The film is an absolute treat in terms of performances.

Music by Antonio Sánchez is haunting and very effective. Cinematography by Emmanuel Lubezki and editing by Douglas Crise and Stephen Mirrione are excellent. Again, the way the film flows as a single shot thanks to perfect screenplay, editing and cinematography is worth mention.

Is it worth your time and money?: While all the Oscar nominees are excellent films, Birdman happens to be the clear winner for me. It’s a perfect example of the script, director, actors and technical teams all coming together to churn out a work of art. Don’t miss it!!

Worth mention: The performances and the illusion that entire film is a single shot.

Acting: 9.5/10
Story-Screenplay-Direction: 9.5/10
Technical Aspects: 9/10

Verdict: 9.5/10

The Theory of Everything | Movie Review

Theory of Everything Poster

It is not often that you have two biopics releasing together – both British (one about a mathematician and other a physicist), both nominated for the Oscars. While The Imitation Game is a dramatized thriller about Alan Turing and his achievements, The Theory of Everything is a drama about Stephen Hawking’s personal life.

Based upon the book written by Jane Wilde (Hawking’s first wife), the movie happens to be more about the couple’s relationship rather than the physicists achievements. It starts of with a young Hawking meeting Jane a little before he was diagnosed with motor neurone disease, and continues with their struggles as a married couple, while Hawking pursued research on quantum mechanics through deteriorating health conditions. While the love story is well picturized, director James Marsh could not maintain the same zeal for the rest of the story. Beyond a point, the relationship between the couple seemed artificial. The screenplay is neat, but only if the story had much more substance to offer. Even worse, it doesn’t even connect with you emotionally.

Eddie Redmayne is brilliant as Hawking. He resembles Hawking in looks, and portrays the medical condition to perfection. While he has not much to say, he conveys a lot through his facial expressions. Felicity Jones puts up an equally good performance as Jane. David Thewlis and Charlie Cox are good.

Music by Jóhann Jóhannsson is alright. Editing by Jinx Godfrey and cinematography by Benoit Delhomme are good. I actually liked the way the some scenes were presented in retro nostalgic frames.

Is it worth your time and money??: When you compare with the other British biopic, The Theory of Everything lacks enough substance to keep you engrossed for it’s more of a drama than a biopic. While worth a watch for the performances, it really has nothing new to offer.

Acting: 9.5/10
Story-Screenplay-Direction: 7/10
Technical Aspects: 8/10

Verdict: 7.5/10

Baby | Movie Review

baby

The Wednesday was a brilliant film, while Special 26 was a good watch. Come Baby, Neeraj Pandey seems to have got lost in the world of big budget Bollywood movies. One would expect something more sensible from him.

Director Neeraj Pandey’s Baby has nothing new to offer. Like most of the thrillers, Baby starts off with an episode where the our hero, a secret intelligence officer, saves the day by fighting tons of goons all by himself. Thanks to the big budget, this happens in Istanbul. Next we are told that there’s a bigger terrorist attack planned, and our hero and his team need to fight more goons (all from the neighbouring country). They first go to Nepal, and then to Saudi Arabia. Forget Hollywood, the same plot has been used in so many Hindi movies till date. Even the screenplay has nothing new in store; in fact, its at times stupid and illogical. The only plus point of this otherwise predictable and long movie are its witty dialogues. Pandey also succeeds in inserting humour in some episodes. These apart, Pandey disappoints big time (given the expectations). Direction actually is way below par, especially in the first 30 odd minutes.

Akshay Kumar shines in one of the sensible roles he’s played in recent times. While he looks good with a moustache, it could have been better groomed (for it looked more like a sticker on his face). Danny Denzongpa does a good job as the mission head. Rana and Taapsee have minimal screen presence (about 10 minutes each), and while Tapsee does a perfect job, Rana was expressionless. Anupam Kher entertains in a small role, and so does Murali Sharma. The guy who played the Maulana, Rasheed Naz, did good.

There’s only half a song in the movie (apart from the end-credit song), and both of them are decent. Background score is neat. Cinematography by Suddep Chatterjee is good. Editing by Narayan Singh could have been better. For a thriller, the movie was a little too long. Also, the second half being twice as long as the first doesn’t help in engaging the audience.

Is it worth your time and money??: Baby isn’t really a bad watch. But at the same time, it doesn’t match up to your expectations either. While the actors are a plus point, the mediocre screenplay and direction play spoilsport. Give it a watch only if you have nothing better to do. Actually, walk in without any expectations, and you might actually enjoy it.

Worth mention: Acting and cinematography.

Acting: 8/10
Story-Screenplay-Direction: 6/10
Technical Aspects: 8.5/10

Verdict: 7.5/10

PS: It was funny to watch Akshay signalling a guy on the street to not to look into the camera (or at him) while in a shot. What the *beep* was the director doing?? :O

I | Movie Review

I - Movie

The trailer didn’t look that great, and the initial reviews weren’t positive either. Nevertheless, here I was to watch and appreciate Vikram’s efforts.

Shankar’s I, starts off really well; the story of the body builder wanting to make it large (pun intended) is perfectly picturized. Him lionising a model is also understandable. But the problem starts when the renowned director adds too much commotion to this simple story. After a point, it just seemed like he just wanted to showcase fights, stunts, make up effects and so on, rather than make a good movie. There are a number of episodes which were absolutely irrelevant and unnecessary – love story with the stylist, the Lion-man song and the terribly long fight sequences. These episodes don’t just make the movie incredibly long but test your patience levels. Add to that a mediocre screenplay, and what started off well ends terribly. Why Shankar, why?

Vikram put in his heart and soul into the character and it is sad to see his brilliant performance go waste. Hats off to him for moulding his body as per the characters requirements. Amy Jackson looks fabulously gorgeous. She complimented Vikram in almost every shot and stumped me with her performance. Santhanam is alright. Upen Patel and Suresh Gopi put up decent performances.

Thanks to an Oscar, A R Rahman seemed to have lost it. It’s sad to see him compose such disastrous tunes. But for a couple of songs, the rest go straight into the bin. Even the background score is below par. Editing by Anthony couldn’t get any worse. Cinematography by P C Sreeram is the only saving grace on the technical front. Barring the action sequences, almost every other frame is perfect. Make up effects by Weta Worshop are alright.

Is it worth your time and money??: If it weren’t for Vikram, it’s a big no. His performance, Amy, and cinematography are the saviours in this long film. Shankar’s over-ambitious effort to showcase ‘more’ has ruined an otherwise good film.

Anthaku minchi, anthaku minchi antu manchi cinemani chethulara paduchesukovadam ante idhe!

Worth mention: Apart from Vikram, Amy Jackson’s performance is noteworthy.

Acting: 9/10
Story-Screenplay-Direction: 5.5/10
Technical Aspects: 7.5/10

Verdict: 7/10