Yamla Pagla Deewana 2 (2013) Review by Shivom Oza - Quite A Mixed Bag!

2/5 Stars

Deols (Dharmendra, Sunny Deol and Bobby Deol) are back with the sequel to their 2011 hit 'Yamla Pagla Deewana', 'Yamla Pagla
Deewana 2'. This time, the conning game will get bigger, with the conniving father-son duo (Dharam and Gajodhar) trying to pull off a heist in UK. 

Notwithstanding the magnificent screen presence of the Deols, 'Yamla Pagla Deewana 2' does leave a lot to be desired as far as the 'entertainment' quotient is concerned. Several gags and one-liners, albeit funny on paper, do not transcend well on screen. However, the superb soundtrack and the camaraderie between the Deols, does salvage the film to a large extent. It should work for audiences that do not mind slapstick humour. 

This film is not a continuation to 'Yamla Pagla Deewana'. Barring the three principal characters, Dharam (Dharmendra), Paramveer (Sunny Deol) and Gajodhar (Bobby Deol), 'Yamla Pagla Deewana 2' begins on a completely different note. Dharam and Gajodhar lead extremely comfortable (and dishonest) lives in Benaras, by duping people. Paramveer, meanwhile, is a recovery officer working for a bank in U.K. The conning duo never let the righteous Paramveer know about their misdeeds, and pretend that they are running a flower business in India. 

Dharam and Gajodhar come across a wealthy NRI businessman from U.K., Sir Yograj Khanna (Annu Kapoor), in Benaras, and decide to make him their next target. Dharam persuades Gajodhar to impress Yograj's daughter, Suman (Neha Sharma), and convince her for marriage so that they can acquire all his money. Everything goes as planned till the father-son duo land up in U.K., for the marriage!

Dharam and Gajodhar have to face a few uncomfortable truths during their stay over there, which sets the premise of the film. 

Story-wise, 'Yamla Pagla Deeqana 2' offers something different from the usual fare that is meted out in the 'commercial' cinema space. The screenplay, somehow, manages to do justice to the plot as well. The various twists in the film are well-placed, and move the story along wonderfully. However, the humour, more often than not, lacks the punch. The principal villain Dudeji (Anupam Kher), and his two sidekicks Bunty-Babli (Johnny Lever and Sucheta Khanna), may get overtly slapstick for your comfort. Their side-plot involves the making of a virtual mall (which will consequently become the eighth wonder of the world). In order to acquire land for this mall, Dudeji sends Bunty and Babli to take control of Yograj Khanna's nightclub. Bunty-Babli choose to get into unusual disguises (while taking inspiration from Shah Rukh Khan's 'Don', Sardars, Samurai and the likes) so that nobody recognizes them. There's also an orangutan, Einstein, who befriends Dharam and Gajodhar, and goes on to play a very important part in the story. Johnny-Sucheta's characters, the orang-utan’s antics, and the inclusion of Sumo wrestlers and Ninja fighters, do provide this film with a quirky flavour. However, none of these sequences manage to invoke more than a guffaw. 

The action in the film is all 'Sunny Deol'. Deol can move beyond 'Gadar', but 'Gadar refuses to leave the man. The action is very much similar to what we've been accustomed to see in his films, over the years.

These aforementioned instances do seem like fillers in what was potentially a very good dra-medy! A few of these gags could have been done away with, since they unnecessarily lengthen the duration of the film. 

The film's primary USP is the music (Sharib-Toshi and Sachin Gupta). Songs such as the title track, 'Changli Hai Changli Hai', 'Main Taan Aidaan Hi Nachna' and 'Suit Tera Laal Rang Da', and their excellently-shot-and-choreographed videos, infuse a lot of life and colour into the film. 

The Deols, as expected, deliver exceptional performances in the film. While the hilarious duo of Dharmendra and Bobby Deol have the best dialogues, Sunny pulls off a coup of sorts, managing to perform comedy, action, romance and drama with élan. 

Australian model-turned-actress Kristina Akheeva is extremely impressive for someone who is acting in her first Hindi film. Neha too, impresses with her whole 'Salman Khan-die-hard-fan' act. 

Director Sangeeth Sivan and writer Jasvinder Singh Bath had a great concept at hand. Doing away with a few unneeded gags would have worked wonders for the film. Overall, the film is a half-baked affair, and only die-hard Deol fans will enjoy it!

Shivom Oza

Mud (2013) Review by Shivom Oza – Muddled Up!

2/5 Stars

Matthew McConaughey is a fine actor. He pulls off these understated, brooding characters really effortlessly. However, is he engaging enough for the audiences? Not quite!

In the film, ‘Mud’, the actor plays a lost-in-thought, lonely, distressed man, Mud. The story revolves around his equation with two unsuspecting 14-year-olds, who come to his rescue.

Everybody has acted well in this film. The actors, who play the two kids, deliver delightful performances. McConaughey too, is fine. However, what really brings the film down is its awful pace, lack of a proper conflict and the terrible climactic sequences. There are several sparkling moments in the second half, but overall, the film is below-par.

Two adventurous 14-year-old kids, Ellis (Tye Sheridan) and Neckbone (Jacob Lofland), set out to an island on the Mississippi River, where the latter has found a boat, suspended atop a tree. Here, they meet Mud (Matthew McConaughey), who is on the run after having committed a murder.

Matthew wants to reconnect with his ladylove, Juniper (Reese Witherspoon) and so, he approached the two kids to help him elope with her!

The story is quite simple, right? NO!

There are needless characters that enter the plot – the track involving Ellis’ parents, Neckbone’s uncle, Ellis’ crush, Mud’s nemeses, Mud’s father-figure etc.

Not that, it’s not alright to have so many characters in one film, but their presence should be justified. 

The film scores in two departments – the kids – their characters, dialogues and performances are absolutely brilliant, and so is the music. The actor, who plays Ellis’ friend, Jacob, is amazing as Neckbone. Watch out for this character, if you do end up watching the film.

‘Mud’, on the outset, comprises one element – the concept of love. There’s hardly anything happening in the awfully slow first-half. It’s in the latter part, when the film actually picks up. Ellis’ character strives hard to find the true definition of ‘love’. While it’s not clear if he eventually manages to figure it out, we, the viewers, do end up getting our own interpretations dented.

Totally muddled up! Pun intended! 

Shivom Oza

Oblivion (2013) Review by Shivom Oza - The Title Says It All!

2/5 Stars

'Oblivion' is a science fiction film based on an unpublished graphic novel of the same name by writer-director Joseph Kosinski. Drone mechanic Jack Harper has been assigned to extract Earth's remaining resources (after its surface has been devastated following an alien invasion 60 years earlier). In the process, Jack discovers a crashed spacecraft, wherein he discovers a female stranger trapped inside a space-coffin. Post this incident, he begins questioning everything that he knows about the invasion and its repercussions.

The title, 'Oblivion', means 'state of being forgotten'. And yes, the movie is quite forgettable. Too many sci-fi films have been made on the 'dystopian' theme, so even the concept isn't novel. The lone good thing about the film was the background score. The half-baked climax added insult to injury. The 120-million-dollar-worth project is a criminal waste of resources.

According to the film's premise, planet Earth was invaded by the aliens in 2017, which left its surface nearly destroyed. 60 years later, former Marine commander Jack Harper (Tom Cruise) is one of the last few mechanics stationed on the planet. Jack repairs the drones, which patrol the skies and protect the planet from warring aliens.

He and his colleague Victoria Olsen (Andrea Riseborough) are a part of the operation to clean up the remaining forces of the invasion and extract the planet's remaining resources. Almost reaching the culmination of the mission, Jack rescues a female stranger, Julia Rusakova (Olga Kurylenko), from a space-coffin inside a crashed spaceship. Following this incident, he comes in contact with the mysterious Malcolm Beech (Morgan Freeman) and is forced to question everything that he knows about the alien invasion.

The film takes too long to establish its plot and premise. Most sci-films made in 2012 focused on the 'dystopian'/post-end-of-the-world theme and a majority of them were major disappointments. While this film makes a hash of the subject with its long-drawn and inconsequential screenplay, most makers should question the feasibility of the concept as well. The '2050/2060/2100 etc.' films do not intrigue the audiences anymore. So, no matter what the star-cast, budget, story or maker, there are more chances that the film will carry a strong 'been-there-seen-that' undertone.

In 'Oblivion', the plot moves on sluggishly for the first 90 minutes, until the makers realize that they have to give the 120-million-dollars spending some sort of justification. The writers have tried to incorporate several twists in the climax, but the damage is done and the sudden developments purely add to the viewer's chagrin. Tom Cruise and Morgan Freeman are completely wasted in the film. The background score by Anthony Gonzalez and Joseph Trapanese is quite nice, but that's about it.

The title says it all!

Shivom Oza

Saheb Biwi Aur Gangster Returns (2013) Review by Shivom Oza – Please Go Back!

2/5 Stars

Saheb Biwi Aur Gangster was one of the best-written films of 2011. Jimmy Sheirgill as the Saheb, Mahie Gill as the Biwi and Randeep Hooda as the Gangster, delivered terrific performances and gave us a gripping political-bedroom-drama. Tigmanshu has, since then, made huge strides in the Hindi film industry with brilliant direction in 'Paan Singh Tomar' and a formidable acting debut in 'Gangs Of Wasseypur'. Now, he is all set to present his next directorial venture.

'Saheb Biwi Aur Gangster Returns' comprises traits - sex, betrayal, politics, power, greed among others, which are similar to its predecessor's. Even though the performances and the 'dialoguebaazi' steal the show, the screenplay is a big let-down.

Indrajit Singh (Irrfan Khan) wants to avenge the killing of his ancestors at the hands of Aditya Pratap Singh’s (Jimmy Sheirgill) forefathers. He frequently visits the ruins of his family’s erstwhile kingdom and every visit keeps reminding him of his mission to destroy Aditya Pratap Singh. Indrajit’s love interest, Ranjana (Soha Ali Khan), is the daughter of another royal, Bana Singh (Raj Babbar). Aditya, confined to a wheelchair and already in a defunct marriage with Madhavi (Mahie Gill), takes a liking for Ranjana and asks for her hand in marriage. Bana Singh, who is reluctant to give away his daughter to a handicapped and a temperamental man, summons Indrajit to plot Aditya’s downfall. The film is essentially about how Indrajit along with Ranjana get together to bring Aditya down. However, then enters the Biwi! Having already assumed ad-hoc power in the kingdom, Madhavi is perpetually inebriated and is basking in the glory of her newfound power. Trouble arises when Madhavi comes in contact with Indrajit! The story of the film is baffling at some points. The main conflict of the film only comes with about half an hour of the film to go. Till then, the story does not really go anywhere.

Even though the characters have been well-etched in isolation, they don’t quite go well with the story of the film. Soha’s Ranjana is shown as an innocuous princess who is blindly in love with Indrajit. However, there’s no trait which you would associate with her character, except maybe, confused. Mahie starts out brilliantly with her temperamental, drunk act (which she seems to have mastered), but it gets too annoying and repetitive. The bizarre twists-and-turns in the plot dilute the impact of the casts’ performances. Even though the actors get memorable dialogues to mouth, the story doesn’t quite rise to the occasion. Random incidents such as out-of-the-blue arrests and deaths of pivotal characters are left unexplained. Aditya, who couldn’t stand up till the mid-way point of the second-half, gets his swagger back, all of a sudden. The other royal members, with interesting nicknames such as Rudy and Bunny, also seem a confused lot with no real motive at hand. Irrfan, who is shown to be quite determined in his quest to kill Aditya Pratap Singh, suddenly develops a change-of-heart in the end. The climax just escalates the bizarre-level of the film by a few notches. As far as the politics of the film is concerned, here again, the only impression you will take back is that politicians are lecherous and dumb. Madness is obviously permissible in cinema and often, it makes for terrific viewing as well. However, there should be some method to the madness. The two unneeded item numbers only worsen the viewing experience.

When you have powerhouse performers in Jimmy Sheirgill, Mahie Gill and Irrfan, backed with a wonderful story teller in Tigmanshu Dhulia, how can you go wrong? When your first film ‘Saheb Biwi Aur Gangster’ was so bloody awesome, how can you make such a bad sequel? While you put all the thought into the 'dhamakedaar' dialogues and the 'seeti bajao' scenes, why didn't anyone proofread the screenplay? Greed and complacency! Sequels make sense commercially. One can make good sequels too, but proper attention should be given to the script as well. Mere piggy-backing on the ‘brand’ name won’t do!

Shivom Oza

Oz the Great and Powerful (2013) Review by Shivom Oza – Ordinary and Weak

2/5 Stars

‘Oz the Great and Powerful’, which is a prequel to L. Frank Baum's 1900 novel ‘The Wonderful Wizard of Oz’, and also an unofficial prequel to the 1939 film ‘The Wizard of Oz’, is about a small-time magician, Oscar Diggs/Wizard of Oz, who arrives in an enchanted land and is expected to save it from the ‘wicked’ witches. 

The supposedly ‘great’ and ‘powerful’ turns out to be ordinary and weak. The film begins on a promising note, with charming black and white visuals, witty dialogue writing and a nice setting of the basic premise. However, the film soon finds itself in a quandary, owing to its duration (2 hours 10 minutes).

Oscar Diggs (James Franco), a small-time circus magician with a dubious reputation, is hurled away in a hot air balloon from dusty Kansas to the vibrant Land of Oz.

At this enchanted land, he encounters three witches Theodora (Mila Kunis), Evanora (Rachel Weisz) and Glinda (Michelle Williams). As the lone hope of the trouble-struck people of Oz, Oscar, the newly anointed Wizard must find out who is good and who is evil before time runs out.

The film has brilliant visuals. The way the transformation from the black and white visuals of Kansas to the vibrant ‘Land of Oz’ takes place, is highly praiseworthy. The performances are not quite top-notch. At times, the lead actors do end up looking a bit like caricatures. The biggest let-down of the film is the sluggish screenplay. The 3D too, flatters to deceive. Even kids may not find this fare too entertaining.

The film doesn’t live up to its name!

Shivom Oza

Jack The Giant Slayer (2013) Review by Shivom Oza – Mood Slayer!

2/5 Stars

The fantasy-adventure film is based on the 'Jack the Giant Killer' and 'Jack and the Beanstalk' fairy tales. 

Although the performances by the cast members are up to the mark, the screenplay and the ghastly visual effects terribly let the film down. The iconic fairy tale is not well replicated in the film.

Jack (Nicholas Hoult) is a young farmer living in the countryside. Jack has grown up on the legends about King Eric destroying the Giants and keeping them at bay till his last breath. He is so fascinated by this fairy-tale that he believes it to be true that Giants exist.

On a stormy night, when the young adventurous princess Isabelle (Eleanor Tomlinson) lands at his doorstep, a catastrophe occurs. Earlier in the day, Jack had traded his horse for a few beans, and had been promised a handsome amount of money the next day. However, during the barter deal, Jack was warned to not let the beans go anywhere near the water.

But, coming back to the night, one of the beans comes in contact with the rain water and suddenly, you have stalks creeping out of the ground. The creepers elevate Jack’s house as well and keeping growing higher until they are out of sight. Jack tries to rescue the princess, who has been trapped inside the house, but he suffers a massive fall. All the king’s men gather around Jack the next day to inquire about the princess’ whereabouts.

Soon, Jack and a few of king’s trusted men begin their quest to get the princess back to the kingdom. And then, on the top of where the creepers end, the Giants surface!

The film highlights all the bad parts of the legendary fairy-tale. Moreover, the parts which were good are kind of squandered in the big-screen adaptation. After a point, you stop bothering about Jack, Isabelle or the people who have to bear the brunt of the Giants’ fury. As for the giants, one word that strikes you looking at their appearance and behaviour is ‘gross’! They don’t look scary at all! The writing and the visual effects terribly let this film down. Bryan Singer doesn’t quite make the cut with this film.

A promising premise turns out to become a yawn-fest!

Shivom Oza

A Good Day To Die Hard (2013) Review by Shivom Oza - A Bad Film For 'Die Hard'

2/5 Stars

In the fifth installment of the 'Die Hard' film series, 'A Good Day To Die Hard', Bruce Willis is back as John McClane. This time the American cop travels to Russia to help his son Jack McClane crack down a terrorist plot.

Although the action pieces are well-conceived, shot and executed, the story just doesn't make the cut. Back up the ordinary plot with below-the-par dialogues and performances, and the end result is a disappointing film. Die Hard 5 lets the 'Die Hard' title down, big time.

While Die Hard 4/ 'Live Free Or Die Hard' had Officer John McClane (Bruce Willis) rescuing his daughter, this one involves his estranged son Jack McClane (Jai Courtney). Jack has been staying in Russia as a spy working for the CIA. He has been working to prevent a major terror plot. Also, he is supposed to protect the Russian political prisoner Yuri Kumarov (Sebastian Koch), whose life is threatened by Viktor Chagarin (Sergei Koleshnikov), a corrupt, influential Russian official and Alik (Radivoje Bukvić), who is presumably a gang-lord.

John learns about the impending danger to his son's life and he sets off for Russia. Over there, the father-son duo comes face-to-face with all these troublemakers. What follows are numerous gun-shots, car crashes, explosions among other novel action sequences. The plot is a let-down. The story was equally implausible in the fourth film and one realizes leaps of faith need to be taken into consideration for such big-ticket actioners, but Die Hard 5 is just not gripping enough. 

The only bright spots in the film are the wonderful action pieces and some witty banter between Willis and Courtney. Most dialogues focus on Willis' age, baldness, gumption etc. At other times, he is taking jibes at his son. You may welcome a few scenes with a reluctant guffaw, but it doesn't take too long for the proceedings to become outright boring. Director John Moore has made a good action-scene catalog. Feature film, not quite! 

This film should disappoint 'Die Hard' loyalists as well!

Shivom Oza

Midnight’s Children (2013) Review by Shivom Oza – A De-adaptation!

2/5 Stars

Academy award-nominated filmmaker Deepa Mehta goes on to adapt Salman Rushdie's Booker Prize-winning-novel 'Midnight's Children' with the film 'Midnight's Children'. The film revolves around the lives of children born 'at the stroke of the midnight hour' on August 15, 1947, which left British India independent and divided into India and Pakistan. Two children, Saleem and Shiva, get swapped at the hospital and their lives change forever.

The film is a mix of different genres - political drama, satire, romance, magical realism and much more. It could have been an interesting watch, had it been directed more astutely and in a unidirectional manner (too many side-plots) and made on a larger scale. However, this take is a complete disappointment. It fails to live up to any of the aforementioned themes and ends up beating around the bush (for close to 150 minutes!).

At midnight on August 15, 1947, as India gains independence, two new-born babies are switched by a nurse Mary (who has been brainwashed by her lover into believing that the rich will have to become poor and the poor, rich!), played by Seema Biswas, in a hospital in Bombay. Saleem Sinai (Darsheel Safary and Satya Bhabha), the illegitimate son of poor woman, and Shiva (Siddharth), a child to a well-off couple (Amina, played by Shahana Goswami, and Ahmed Sinai, played by Ronit Roy), are swapped and end up leading lives meant for each other. Their life-story is set to the back-drop of the increasing tensions amid India and Pakistan. Saleem ends up serving for the Pakistan army and Shiva becomes an army officer for the Indian army. Shiva has always resented Saleem for being a rich man's son, and consequently, more fortunate. Amidst all the drama, we are introduced to other characters such as the mysterious conjurer Parvati (Shriya Saran), her mentor Picture Singh (Kulbhushan Kharbanda), the Pakistani major Zulfikar (Rahul Bose), his gorgeous wife Emerald (Anita Majumdar) and in the preceding portions of the film (circa 1910s), Rajat Kapoor plays Amina's (she had a turbulent past, which came back to haunt her, with a man named Nadir Khan, played by Zaib Shaikh) father, Aadam Aziz.

'Midnight's Children' has many inconsequential sub-plots within the entire plot, which kind of becomes bearable owing to the dramatic ending. However, at large, the film is a dampener and fails to evoke any emotion. The historic incidents are marred with over-the-top acting and terrible dialogue writing. It is not clear whether Indira Gandhi's character was meant to be a spoof. If it was, it shouldn't have been. With the makers having been so gutsy to actually show the happenings of the Emergency in the film, the least they could have done is to lend some seriousness to the chief protagonist/antagonist of the entire saga. Our late Prime Minister has been portrayed in terrible light in the film. Even if they wanted to lend a dictatorial element to her character, they could have done away with the caricaturing. Furthermore, some of the scenes in the film, which incorporate a lot of jargons associated with India, even fail to strike a chord with the Indian viewer. Wonder why they couldn’t let the principal characters communicate to each other in Hindi/Urdu instead of English, albeit with subtitles. 'Slumdog Millionaire' did that and bagged an Oscar. The film is good in some parts, in particular, the ending. However, the film, despite having great potential premise-wise, fails to put forward a great story. Haven't read the book, but does it really matter? A film is a story and if it's badly told, it's just bad. Doesn't matter if it's original or adapted!

Among the actors, Siddharth, Rahul Bose, Kulbhushan Kharbanda, Rajat Kapoor, Anupam Kher, Shabana Azmi do a fine job. Ronit Roy's character is strikingly similar to his disciplinarian father act in 'Udaan'. Although he does well yet again, it's nothing new. There are two terrible CGI sequences, both involving bomb blasts. There is also one scene in which Siddharth is shown riding a bike and the frame shakes vigorously. Wonder why! One particular sequence that is enjoyable in the film is when Kulbhushan's Picture Singh addresses his snake as 'Karan'! Such light-hearted moments are too few and far in between. The scenes in which Saleem talks to his fellow Midnight's Children are delightful. It's one of those films where there are moments of brilliance within lots of below-par fare! Avoidable!

Shivom Oza

The Last Stand (2013) Review by Shivom Oza – Doesn’t Stand A Chance

2/5 Stars

The dreaded leader of a drug cartel escapes out of an FBI van and sets off in his speed demon, Corvette ZR1, to the Mexican border. An innocuous sheriff, along with inexperienced accomplices, tries his best to stop the escapee.

While the action (comprising several chase sequences) in the film is above-par, the story just doesn’t make the cut. Arnold Schwarzenegger ambles away as the leading man, but even he looks tired and disinterested. The writing, which includes the plot and the dialogues, is not strong enough and at two hours, the film doesn’t have enough steam to hold your attention.

After leaving his LAPD narcotics post following an unsuccessful operation, Ray Owens (Arnold Schwarzenegger) moves out and settles down in the peaceful Summerton Junction as the Sheriff. However, the peace gets marred when Gabriel Cortez (Eduardo Noriega), a dreaded drug kingpin, escapes from the FBI’s clutches. With assistance from Burrell (Peter Stormare) and his men, Cortez speeds away towards the US-Mexico border at breath-taking speed in a modified Corvette ZR1 with a captured hostage. FBI agent John Bannister (Forest Whitaker) will have his final chance to nab Cortez at Summerton, before he makes the final dash across the border. That’s when Ray and his team come in!

The film doesn’t offer much, in terms of action, story, thrills or Arnold! Yes, even the mega-action star fails to salvage anything out of this lost cause. There are a couple of scenes, one wherein Cortez escapes and another where one of Ray’s men goes berserk over the villains, which manage to hold your unwavering attention. However, at two hours, the film is too long and tedious. The ‘emotional’ moments in the film don’t strike a chord, and you may hardly guffaw, as several supposedly funny gags play out on the screen.

Director Jee-woon Kim could have done better with a cleverer script. ‘The Last Stand’ doesn’t stand a chance!

Shivom Oza

Red Dawn (2012) Review by Shivom Oza – Low-On-Intellect, Bereft Of Action

2/5 Stars

Spokane, Washington, wakes up to the horrific sight of North Korean paratroopers dropping from the sky, with the citizens finding themselves prisoners and their town under enemy occupation. The Eckhert family finds themselves in the middle of this chaos. The story is about how the two brothers, Jed and Matt, along with their team, fight for what belongs to them.

The film neither caters to the politics aficionados nor does it have enough ammunition to impress the action-film fans. It fails to throw light upon any major political issue that might have led to this sudden invasion. The out-of-place comic reliefs and the poor acting don’t serve the cause either. ‘Red Dawn’ just doesn’t make the cut.

U.S. Marine Jed Eckhert (Chris Hemsworth) returns on leave to his hometown where he reunites with his father, Sergeant Tom Eckhert (Brett Cullen), and his brother, football player Matt Eckhert (Josh Peck). Matt resents Jed for having left on duty after their mother died and staying abroad for six years. So the two brothers don’t really get along!

The morning after their reunion witnesses the surreal sight of their town being invaded by North Korean paratroopers. Soon, the armed troopers take charge of the entire city. Determined to fight back, Jed trains a group of young patriots, who have taken refuge in the surrounding woods, to make them guerrilla fighters. They call themselves the ‘Wolverines’, and while protecting each other, fight against the invaders to liberate their town.

In the middle of it, you have an on-going love story between Matt and Erica (Isabel Lucas), an almost-blossoming-love-story between Jed and Adrianne (Toni Walsh), and recurrent ego-clashes between Jed and Matt. There are a few comical scenes thrown in as well but they’re marred by the terrible acting (courtesy Hemsworth and Peck).

The story, in itself, fails to impress. Even for an action film, ‘Red Dawn’ is quite a nonsensical affair. With no back story or information whatsoever about the North Korean invasion, it is quite bizarre to buy into the basic premise of the film. The only ‘political’ angle in the film is shown through poorly cut news bulletins and speeches by politicians during the opening credits, which fails to give any idea about the situation. The film is a re-boot of the 1984 hit, starring Patrick Swayze and Charlie Sheen. This concept doesn’t work anymore especially with such badly shot action scenes and such weak dialogues and characters! The direction (Dan Bradley) leaves a lot to be desired. The only positive aspect about the film would have to be its length (little over 90 minutes). Otherwise, even the supposedly BIG twist in the end will fail to engage the viewer.

The film just doesn’t make the cut. If at all, wait for the television premiere. Not worth the ticket price, surely!

Shivom Oza

On The Road (2012) Review by Shivom Oza – Directionless

2/5 Stars

Aspiring writer Sal Paradise gets affected deeply upon the arrival of his 'liberated' friend Dean Moriarty and his young wife Marylou. The trio takes a road trip across the country and meets several people who impact their journey and their lives.

At the conceptual level, the film works. However, to be attentive enough for close to 150 minutes is something else. The film, albeit embellished with marvellous visuals and brilliant acting, fails to engage the audience. The plot isn't gripping enough to hold the audiences for so long. The film was screened at the 14th Mumbai Film Festival under the 'World Cinema' category.

Sal Paradise (Sam Riley) is one shy fella from New York. The aspiring writer meets the laidback vagabond Dean Moriarty (Garrett Hedlund). Both of them hit it off instantly. Dean is an alcoholic, speed demon, drug-addict, sex-addict, maverick and plain demented. He likes to live the 'high' life and believes in trying out just about everything, even threesomes, including another man. He can do just about anything for money. He marries a girl because he needed money for car fuel. He, assumedly 'straight' until then, has sex with another man, once again for favours in exchange. Greedy and selfish he certainly is, but then he is egoistic too. This is why his friendships/relationships/marriages are always on the brink of collapsing! His young wife Marylou (Kristen Stewart) (not to be confused with the car fuel one), an extremely sexually-liberated woman, along with him and Sal, set off on a road trip! Their journey is barraged with mysterious occurrences. While discovering the outside world, the three learn a lot about themselves and each other. Sal, who is too busy to finish his book, learns a thing or two about friendship and trust. Marylou learns what it feels like to get hurt and Dean doesn't learn anything, until it gets too late.

Kristen Stewart is absolutely mind-blowing in the film. Although the film was found lacking at some parts, her performance shines all the way through. Sam plays the understated Sal perfectly while Garrett owns the part of Dean Moriarty. However, the writing was found a bit wanting. The film drags on and on, without any real purpose. Although their lives are affected owing to the journey, there is too much of jumping around between one place to another and the repercussions of the journey on them are not really clear. Even the setting, showing the America of the 1940s and the 1950s, could have been a lot better. Cinematography is just about decent. Direction by Walter Salles leaves a lot to be desired. Had this film been edited a bit differently, it would have been something else (for the good, of course!).

Although the subject is interesting, you may avoid this one.

Shivom Oza                                                       

Ted (2012) Review by Shivom Oza – The Talking Teddy Bear Fumbles A Bit!

2/5 Stars

A lonely kid John wishes that his Christmas present, a large teddy bear, comes to life to become his best friend. And he does!

‘Ted’ is quite delightful in some parts, utterly dull in most. The cast, including Mark Wahlberg and Mila Kunis, deliver decent performances. Seth MacFarlane, albeit wonderful with the voiceover, falls a bit short on the direction aspect. Brilliant ‘live-action’, but becomes a bit too dull towards the end.

Circa 1985, Josh Bennett (Bretton Manley) is a friendless kid who gets gifted a huge teddy bear on Christmas by his parents. Having developed a very close bonding with the stationary, mute stuff toy, Josh wishes that the bear comes to life and befriends him. Voila! That is exactly what happens. An innocent wish, on the night of a shooting star, turns into an unbelievable miracle. Josh and the newly christened bear, ‘Ted’ (Zane Cowans), become thunder buddies.

Years go by, but the camaraderie is unaffected. Just that the duo, 35-year-old Josh (Mark Wahlberg) and the somewhat older Ted (Seth MacFarlane), now smoke joints, sip beer, watch vintage television series (Flash Gordon!) and just have a good time. Now, Josh is going through a rough patch. With an ordinary job at the car rental service and, more or less, no real aim in life, Josh finds it tough to live up to his girlfriend Lori’s (Mila Kunis) expectations. Lori doesn’t approve of Josh and Ted’s mingling, most of which includes smoking up and getting wasted! Things reach a point when Lori asks Josh to choose between her and Ted! Put in the mix, Lori’s skirt-chasing boss and a maniacal father-son duo pursuing Ted!

The film kind of gets mixed up with its principal genre. Should it be a romantic comedy or an emotional drama or a raunchy comedy or a mix of everything? We don’t figure out till the end. There are some moments in the film which evoke loud guffaws. However, most one-liners lack the punch. There’s a scene in which Ted and Josh go head-on and get involved in a 2-minute-long heated altercation. Assumingly, the scene must have been written as a funny one but then, on film, it just looks absurd.

Mark and Mila deliver nice performances. Seth does wonderfully in the voiceover. Even the dialogues are quite good. However, the screenplay falls short. The film should have been a bit shorter. The first-half was half-decent but the latter part, instead of salvaging the film, ends up worsening it. The animation and visual effects are absolutely brilliant. Director Seth MacFarlane does an average job.

‘Ted’ is not a bad film. However, at some point in the second half you may end up asking yourself – “When is it going to get over?”

Shivom Oza

Killing Them Softly (2012) Review by Shivom Oza – Killing Us Softly

2/5 Stars

Based on the 1973 novel ‘Cogan’s Trade’ by George V. Higgins, the film revolves around the repercussions of a mysterious poker game heist.

The film is part noir, part caper and mostly cryptic. The first 30 minutes of the film unfold in a bizarre manner, making it very difficult for the viewer to decipher the main plot.

The main plot revolves around a robbery that occurs in the middle of a poker game where two small-time thugs, Frankie (Scoot McNairy) and Ben Mendelsohn (Russell), loot Markie Trattman (Ray Liotta). Jackie Cogan (Brad Pitt), a folk music-loving mob enforcer is called into find and execute the suspected culprits. Violence, blood and gore ensue. The film is mainly about how difficult it is, even for the criminals to survive, during the economic meltdown of 07/08. The film attempts to be a very thoughtful take on the political affairs in the US. There’s a dialogue in the end that goes something like, “America is not a country, but a business!”

The film is filled with repeated inter-cuts, witty and expletive-filled dialogue reminiscent of Quentin Tarantino films and also embeds within it a powerful political message. There are scenes interspersed with speeches from the 2008 Barack Obama-McCain Presidential Campaign. However, it’s all too confusing. In the end, you’ll just go ‘Phew!’ The screenplay, although stylishly embellished with some wonderful cinematography filled with exquisite slow-motion shots, has too little substance. Even the clever political connection seems an attempt to intellectualize the content of the film. Brad Pitt delivers a fine performance as does the rest of the cast. However, the writing falters. Andrew Dominik, who has directed and written the adapted screenplay, fails to incorporate the basic premise of the film.

A lot of ‘killing’ goes on in ‘Killing Them Softly’. Menacing it is, intriguing it isn’t. Understandable, it certainly is not! Pitt fans might like it. Fans of the caper-genre may find it a one-time-watch. For the rest, avoid.

Shivom Oza

Kamaal Dhamaal Malamaal (2012) Review by Shivom Oza – Halaal!

2/5 Stars

Remake of the popular Malayalam film ‘Marykkundoru Kunjaadu’, ‘Kamaal Dhamaal Malamaal’ follows the typical Priyadarshan brand of humour. A comedy of errors; involving a wimpy 25-year-old, an absconding thief and a stolen golden church cross, the film does not follow a distinct genre. In essence, it’s a mix of drama, humour and bucket loads of emotion!

Although the performances by the cast, comprising Shreyas Talpade, Nana Patekar, Om Puri and Paresh Rawal, are brilliant, the story fails to enliven the interest of the viewer. There’s slapstick humour galore in the first half, but the latter part gets embroiled in needless mystery.

Johnny Belinda (Shreyas Talpade), according to every man, woman and child in the village, is a wimp. He gets scared of everything and everyone. Not just that, he is a good-for-nothing soul who does not help out his ailing father David (Om Puri) and buys lottery tickets day-in-and-day-out hoping for a miracle which will make him a millionaire. Johnny is in love with Maria (Madhhurima), who happens to be the daughter of David’s sworn enemy Peter (Paresh Rawal). Johnny gets bashed up by every Tom, Dick and Harry in the village and it is due to this continuous humiliation that he is subjected to which earns him the nickname ‘Bakri’. Enter Nana Patekar (an unnamed thief), who gets convinced by Johnny to become his long-lost brother Sam. The newly-turned Sam wreaks havoc all over the town, bringing much-needed relief to the embattled Johnny. Everything is fine, until the real reason of the fake Sam’s arrival in town is revealed!

Although the performances put in by the cast, comprising Shreyas, Paresh, Om, Nana, are quite good, put all of them together in one sequence and you will realize that the adage ‘too many cooks spoil the broth’ is so true. The supporting cast, comprising Asrani and Neeraj Vora, lend some life into the film.

Priyadarshan’s films are known to be the ‘theatre of the absurd’ but sadly, even the absurdity fails to evoke a guffaw anymore. His comedy-of-errors style of humour must have worked tremendously well in the 2000s, but it’s not just doing the trick anymore. Neeraj Vora’s dialogues are funny, occasionally, but overall, the writing is very disappointing.

Performances are fine, dialogue is well-written, but the writing and direction just goes haywire. ‘Kamaal Dhamaal Malamaal’ is pretty much Halaal! You might laugh at a gag or two, but just not enough steam to go on for 2 and half hours! (First Posted in MSN)

Shivom Oza

Teri Meri Kahaani (2012) Review by Shivom Oza – Promising Film Meanders In The 2nd Half

2/5 Stars

The film has been divided into three love stories between Govind- Ruksar in Bombay circa 1960, Krish-Radha in London of 2012 and Javed-Aradhana in 1910 at Lahore. The basic plot for all the stories is the same. Boy-meets-girl, the initial hesitancy, sparks fly, love happens, reality takes over and hearts break. Obviously, the reasons for the heart break are quite different for all the 3 eras. Although, there is nothing new about the way the love stories go about, the concept of imbibing all the three together in the same film was quite interesting. However, the implementation of the concept is very ordinary.

Shahid Kapoor and Priyanka Chopra deliver fine performances in the film. Shahid is first-rate as the aspiring musician of the 60s and the hip collegian of today, though his shayar act of the 1910s was quite abysmal. Priyanka too, is convincing as the big superstar heroine of the 60s, another uber-cool youngster living in London as well as the reticent village girl at Lahore. There are a few chinks in their armour, but the dialogue writers should take the blame for this. Prachi Desai is wonderful in her special appearance. Vrajesh Hirjee, who plays a scribe in the film (although, he has no dialogues) is brilliant in in his minuscule role! The rest of the supporting cast is quite miserable. They don’t look the part, nor do they act it.

The first half holds a lot of promise. The 1960s era is written very well. There is a semblance of Chaplinesque comedy, which does manage to overshadow the awful sets (Bombay of 1960 was recreated poorly!) Even the performances put in by the protagonists along with Prachi Desai, were brilliant, which along with the foot-tapping ‘Uff’ gave the film a rollicking start! London 2012 was a minor blip on the radar, which turns into a blot by the interval! Some of the scenes are charming; a few are cringe-inducing and a couple of them, laughable. The writing (Kunal Kohli and Robin Bhatt) was good in the first half, but abysmal in the latter part. The chemistry between Shahid and Priyanka is sparkling. You do see glimpses of Kohli’s brilliance in ‘Hum Tum’ in some parts; however the steam runs out by the time the film reaches the half-way mark. The film keeps meandering between being too cheesy and too serious, and hence, loses the plot.

The music composed by Sajid-Wajid is at best, passable. None of the songs in the film are extraordinary. ‘Uff’ and ‘Mukhtasar’ were shot wonderfully (Cinematography by Sunil Patel), and that’s that!

Interesting premise/plot, fine performances by the protagonists (Shahid Kapoor and Priyanka Chopra), however lacklustre writing lets the film down!

Watchable for die-hard Shahid-Priyanka fans! Even love story aficionados won’t be too impressed with this film. Tried really hard to like the film in the 2nd half, but couldn’t! (First Posted in MSN)

Shivom Oza