The Avengers Review

Movie Review :

A shield-wielding World War II experiment, a suit flying armour concealing a millionaire playboy scientist, a genius-turned-big green killing machine, an archer, a former spy and a Norse God must join forces to, well, save the world.

Plot

The Avengers brings together some of the most popular Marvel heroes together on screen to save the earth.

While the secret military intelligence agency SHIELD is experimenting with the powerful cosmic cube, the Tessarect, it becomes unstable. While SHIELD chief Nick Fury (Samuel Jackson) and agent Hawkeye (Jeremy Renner) are trying to figure out the reasons behind the Tessarect’s unusual behaviour, the cube opens a portal out of which Loki (Tom Hiddleston) appears.

Before destroying the entire headquarters, Loki escapes with the Tessarect and even enslaves Hawkeye and some scientists so that he can create a portal to usher his soldiers on Earth. With no other way in sight, Nick decides to get his Avengers plan into action by getting together some of the best superheroes on Earth.

Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson) returns from her Russian mission and goes to Calcutta to persuade Bruce Banner (Mark Ruffalo) as he is the best scientist who can help them find the Tessarect on the basis of its gamma radiation. Though Banner has his apprehensions to join because of his ability/tendency to turn into the juggernaut monster The Hulk, he agrees. Fury also convinces Captain America (Chris Evans) to join the squad even though he (Captain America) feels disarmingly outdated as he was recently revived from the frozen state that he was in.

Soon, Iron Man (Robert Downey Jr.) also joins the team. With the help of Banner and the rest of the team, they find the whereabouts of Loki. While Loki is busy trying to subjugate people, the team overpower him in a surprisingly easy attack. While transporting Loki for interrogation, Thor (Chris Hemsworth) storms in and attacks his half-brother Loki to find out why he stole the Tessarect. This results in a thunderous fight between Iron Man and Thor. After realizing that they are all fighting to protect the Earth, they imprison Loki and discuss means to finding out his true intentions. While the Avengers are busy squabbling amongst themselves, Hawkeye (under Loki’s control) and his team attack SHIELD and rescue Loki.

Do the Avengers manage to put aside their differences and work together? Does Bruce Banner get out of control as The Hulk? What is Loki’s real plan and why did he get captured so easily? The rest of the film answers these questions.

Performances

Downey Jr does what he does best playing the blase, individualist bad boy, in the process contrasting the dated goody-two-shoes notions of the stoic Evans’s Captain America. Hiddleston is perfect as Loki, who like the best villains believes himself to be slighted by the ones he loved (or did he ever really? Hmmm...) The character’s brother, however, suffers a treatment that is at times more suited to a surfer dude than Jack Kirby’s Norse deity. Though Whedon’s feministic worldview is witnessed in the asskickery of the Widow and SHIELD agent Maria Hill, she and agent Clint Barton (Jeremy Renner) a.k.a Hawkeye (who were first seen in Iron Man 2 and Thor) don’t get enough of the limelight.

One may never know the details of the beef between Marvel Studios and Edward Norton who played the Hulk in the 2008 film but as a man in resignation — almost embracing the absurdness of his existence — Ruffalo’s performance does honour to the purple pants.

Overall

The Avengers is wall-to-wall action, executed with a fluid coherence we don't get to see in most superhero films, and yet what stays with you are the lines and, resultantly, the characters.

"Hate Story: Strictly for adults"

The bold theatrical trailer of 'Hate Story' clearly indicated that the film will be certified as an adult film with an 'A' certificate. 

On asking actor Nikhil Dwivedi his views on the same, he said, "Why are we discussing about 'A'Certificate? If the film is made only for the adults, then it is so obvious as what the censor board will certify it... It's an adult film and I don't think it is something new to Hindi Cinema."

After being enthralled by the stunning promos of Vivek Agnihotri's 'Hate Story', the general perception amongst the audience is that the sensational Paoli Dam has been picked for her oomph effect.

Says Vivek, "If you do a search you will realize that Paoli Dam is amongst the top five best actresses (Bengal), and that is precisely the reason why we chose her. It was a challenge to make a good actress look sexy.

Well, the erudite director makes a very relevant point, and has definitely succeeded in achieving what he intended to in the first place, and we are quite sure that the results will be there for all to see next Friday, when 'Hate Story' hits the cinemas.

Produced by Vikram Bhatt, 'Hate Story' releases on April 20, 2012.

Bittoo Boss review

Bittoo BossMore Pics

Critic's Rating:   Cast: Pulkit Samrat, Amita Pathak Language: Hindi Direction: Supavitra Babul Genre: Comedy Duration: 2 hours Avg Readers Rating:  Listen to the album on gaana

Trailer

Mann Jaage Saari Raat: Bittoo Boss

Bittoo Boss: Official making

Bittoo Boss: Audi

Bittoo Boss: Kaun Kenda

Bittoo Boss: Kick Lag Gayi

Story: Videographer Bittoo is the 'boss' of all weddings in a small-town. In a desperate attempt to make it big, he dabbles in the sex-spy camera business. Will his fate change, or will the good-hearted boy go back to the less-perverted shaadi scene?

Movie Review : In the town of Anandpur, Punjab, no wedding can start without band, bajaa and Bittoo (Pulkit Samrat). He's the blue-eyed-boy of all celebrations, because he's the only 'sesky' (read: sexy) videographer who can turn any Katto into Katrina. Every time they see his lens, the kudis flutter their lashes and say, "Ab toh meri le ley" (sic). So much so, that even Bittoo is seduced for some behind-the-camera 'action'.

In the first scene we are transported to Pammi and Gurvinder's wedding (surprise, surprise), where Bittoo meets Mrinalini (Amita Pathak) and voila ... it's love in the first frame. At first she rejects him, but a few scenes later, she realizes that he's local, but kadak. To this point it seems like a big-fat Indian wedding, a sweet love story even, but wait, this 'VDO-grapher' has a different story to tell. In a momentary lapse of judgment, he's brainwashed into taking the big bad leap. Leaving behind the shaadi videos, he moves on to shooting suhaagraats, with hidden cameras. Hawww!

Bittoo's grey shades don't really turn 'blue' anytime soon. All he ends up doing is preventing teenage rape and helping an inhibited 'haasband' copulate. Is this still the same movie we started out with? We're not so sure.

With a character sketch, screen-name and styling so reminiscent of Ranveer Singh, debutant Pulkit Samrat has little scope to create his own identity. However, he pulls off the small-town-munda act with sincerity, and a natural ease.

Amita Pathak doesn't strike an impression overall, but she shows spark in some dramatic scenes. Ashok Pathak as Bittoo's sidekick, overacts.
Debutant director Babul had an interesting premise to start with, but after the first half, the script is more scattered than sorted. Some caricaturish characters, dialogues with local tadka, and few laughable moments save the day. At a time when sex and 'dirty pictures' sell, Babul scripts a hero who describes sex as 'dilon ka milan.' Ho-hum!

This one had the potential to be an entertainer, but turns out to be a 'bit-too' much

This Means War

Critic's Rating:  Cast: Reese Witherspoon, Chris Pine, Tom Hardy, Chelsea Handler Direction: McG Genre: Romance Duration: 1 hour 37 minutes

More from

Trailer

Official website

Story: Two CIA agents have one common target: Lauren, the woman of their dreams. Lauren of course, chooses one to the other. So who is the lucky guy? 

Movie Review: Reese Witherspoon has a problem: She can't really finalise on her Mr Right. And you can't really blame her when she's dating Chris Pineand Tom Hardy simultaneously. One is the can-make-every-girl-laugh mushy man, the other the-man-into-one-day-rental.

---

All is fair in love and war. And all is fair in love, war... and dating. Or so it seems, for FDR Foster (Chris Pine) and Tuck (Tom Hardy) who are CIA agents and best buddies with a dual mission: win over the woman they both claim to be falling in love with -- Lauren (Reese Witherspoon) -- and keep the friendship going no matter who gets the girl. Now it's just when the gentlemen's agreement goes kaput does all the war (of words) in the movie come into play. In fact, more than who wins the girl, it's the how-they-win-the-girl that keeps the funny bone tickled on and off. Take for instance FDR Foster who gets his knowledge of Gustav Klimt mixed up with the objectionable and Tuck who puts up a fake action stunt to show he is not 'just the caring' type. Not to miss out is Trish ( Chelsea Handler) who unabashedly concludes the best way to fall for a guy is to check him out in bed! As for Reese, watch this woman capable of choosing her own movies go weak in the knee when it comes to choosing the two men chasing her. For the rest, it's over to the real war - yes, there's even a warlord on the lose who gives you a couple of short-lived action cuts -- you don't really seem to care about.

But then you do care about who gets the girl in this romcom. Who? Well, as the CIA agents on the run put it: 'May the best man win... for the lady'!

American Reunion' a raunchy homecoming

• 
  

Stifler (Seann William Scott), left, and Jim (Jason Biggs) do a few shots… (MCT)

Sweeping aside the film's weirdest unasked question — who goes to their 13th high school reunion? — the characters created by Adam Herz for the 1999 hit "American Pie" return for a rather tired sequel called "American Reunion," in which poor, desperate Jim Levenstein's genitals once again get their ears boxed (metaphorically speaking), and Stifler's way with nubile 17-year-olds doesn't seem quite as obnoxiously sprightly as it once did, given that Stifler is now supposed to be in his early 30s and the actor, Seann William Scott, is 35.

The movie acknowledges this queasy disconnect, though acknowledging it doesn't make it much funnier. Everyone in the ensemble keeps pushing the woebegone nostalgia angle, pining for their lost youth, eager to reactivate their now-dormant sex lives. Every other line, it seems, refers to "back in the day" or "wasn't this more fun when we were younger?" or how "old" they're feeling. You'd think this was a remake of "Cocoon."

The first "American Pie," and the better parts of the second one, proved that the right combination of hard-R-rated raunch and occasional sincerity was golden. Those films were followed by "American Wedding" and four direct-to-DVD spinoffs. The through-line linking all eight, including "American Reunion," has been Eugene Levy as Noah Levenstein, now a widower, still dispensing awkward advice to his son, played by Jason Biggs.

The plot you know, even if you don't. The East Great Falls, Mich., reunion weekend brings together Jim, Stifler, haute poseur Finch (Eddie Kaye Thomas, adroitly treading the line between "deadpan" and "bored"), sportscaster Oz (Chris Klein) and the other guy, Kevin (Thomas Ian Nicholas), now bearded and married. Jim and his band-camp-derived wife Michelle (Alyson Hannigan) have fallen into a non-sexual rut since the birth of their son. The opening scene in the sequel from writers-directors and "Harold & Kumar" alums Jon Hurwitz and Hayden Schlossberg presents dueling-masturbation scenarios under the same exhausted-spouse roof.

Now and then the movie rouses itself to deliver. If you go to "American Reunion" — and many will, if they harbor fond memories of the first one, and if they can find a sitter — stay through the end credits. Levy and Jennifer Coolidge (Stifler's mom) are on a date at a movie theater, and while the ensuing joke is as old as time, the way Levy finesses it you wonder if the "American Pie" franchise would've gotten half as far as it has without him.

For the record, the movie's cinematography and editing are pure hack work, drab and jumpy and jammed with full-face close-ups. Not good for comedy. Next stop: "American Time-Share."

itanic 3D’ – a phoenix that rises to startle, to amaze!

Once you walk out of the theatre after watching ‘Titanic 3D’, your mind can hardly register the happenings around you. Such is the charm of ‘Titanic’, and such is the work of art that James Cameron has breathed fresh life into.

Back in 1997, when the lanky bourgeoisie boy romanced the beautiful aristocratic lady, audible gasps were heard in the circles of the high society. And when the same star-cross’d lovers, whose love blossomed on board the massive liner, suffered separation on the mighty Atlantic, tears were just not enough for the people on the other end of the screen.

That ‘Titanic’ as a movie is Cameron’s consummate work, has been proved time and again, beginning with the yet-unparalleled Eleven Oscars that the film was awarded with in 1998. Fifteen years down the line, Cameron’s tribute to the liner that embraced the depths of the Atlantic hundred years back, is nothing short of magnanimous. ‘Titanic’ is an epic, perhaps the only story of disaster which still remains insurmountable as a work of art. And in 3D, ‘Titanic’ comes across as an experience.

James Cameron’s use of 3D to recreate the fateful love story is successful in piercing hearts and minds (and bodies, thanks to the 3D!). As far as the story is concerned, nothing really is different. What boggles the mind is the strange juxtaposition of that world of a century back and this. The difference appears all the more now than fifteen years back, thanks to our altered perspectives. The Rose (Kate Winslet), whose relationship with Jack (Leonardo DiCaprio) on board the Titanic, appears charmingly incongruous in the world of today. And the rapscallion bohemian Jack’s penniless manifestation looks brilliantly old world. And Billy Zane still strikes hard as Rose’s harsh fiancé. The only difference is that his character is way more fitting today than it was then. Amazing change in just fifteen years!

Cut to the sinking of the ship. The Titanic tugged at our heartstrings then, it tears them asunder now. Sorrow and misery overshadows every other feeling when the giant snaps into two, and devastation is writ large on the face of the Atlantic. The ship is a living, breathing creature, a Kraken out of the depths of some hitherto-unknown sea – which rises after fifteen years to strike where it hurts the most – and it’s job done, goes back into the bowels of the sea. James Cameron’s ‘Titanic’ hits even harder this time. The horrifying incident of the sea turning into a mass grave comes across as pure tragedy. The death statistics don’t tear us apart – the individual tragedies do. So much so, that when the immovable, lifeless Jack lies there on the plank of wood, and the ship sinks in the background – you’re at a loss of understanding. Whether to imbibe the brilliant technology or to take off your glasses to wipe your tears. For a moment, you let your mind sway in a limbo. For no nuance, no intricacy in the film is worth missing. Even a blink of an eye might result in the ship sinking into the Atlantic.

housefull 2 movie review

Housefull 2

Director: Sajid Khan
Cast: Akshay Kumar, John Abraham, Riteish Deshmukh

In a scene towards the latter half of the film,Riteish Deshmukh uses a flowchart to explain who's who, who's posing as who and who's being assumed as who in film. If this confuses you, that's precisely what director Sajid Khanintends to do. If you can't convince them, confuse them is what he believes in. At instances, his film makes you laugh out loud, and at other instances it's so loud that you want to cry. So how's the film in totality? Well you continue to remain confused about your conclusion!

Let's talk about the upsides first. This one is certainly less silly and slapstick than its predecessor. This means there are less slaps (literally), less tomfoolery and less noise! Akshay Kumar does a hilarious spin-off on yesteryear villain Ranjeet who holds the reprehensible record of playing rapist in maximum number of films. And Ranjeet actually brings the house down with his cameo in the climax where he successfully self-spoofs himself. For anyone who enjoyed Sajid Khan's brand of silly-yet-crazy one-liners while he was still a TV host, there are plenty of them here that range from the stupid to side-splitting.

Now for the downside - the comedy is more animated (literally) - which means a crocodile bites the bum and a python crunches at crotch of our heroes. Since there are two brawny bodies (Akshay and John) playing the male leads, it's mandatory that they first fight each other, then, together, fight the goons extensively and finally save a father figure from the falling chandelier. If the first part got a Queen of England replica in its climax, the sequel is substituted with a Prince Charles clone. And while interpreting his brand of humour from the small screen to the big screen, Sajid Khan forgets that unlike countdown shows, cinema calls for plot - which his first half is completely devoid of.

Ah, coming to the storyline (if you still insist), the first half is, more or less, exhausted with unnecessary buildup through lackadaisical love stories and fathers-of-bride (Randhir Kapoor, Rishi Kapoor) who want billionaire son-in-laws for their daughters. The original essence of the franchise - of filling a house with multiple characters which results into a comedy of errors - initiates only in the second half, as a dozen characters land up in one palatial mansion. Each one mistakes the other for someone else and this comedy of mistaken identities isn't much different from the prequel or its likes. In fact one song (Do You Love Me) is an exact imitation of the climactic number (Dil Pagal Hai) from the cult-comedy No Entry - Johnny Lever gets baffled with the cross-connected pairings here.

The narrative often seems lost between two extremes and opts for a middle-of-the-road settlement. Like despite its wacky sense of filmy humour, the movie gets unnecessarily melodramatic at times. For instance, after effectively pulling off a wicked womanizer character, you don't expect Ranjeet to give a sermon on true love. Or you don't anticipate that the venom-spewing stepbrothers would be seized by instant brotherly love in the climax. So just when you enjoy an element, its antidote kills the fun. And if you noticed, I never ever 'criticized' about lack of logic, et al. That's pardonable by now in the slapstick scheme of things, as far as the proceedings are funny. What I am talking about here is the basic grammar of the genre that gets jumbled up.

The most amusing act comes from beyond the dirty dozen characters. It's Johnny Lever who's hilarious and is especially in his elements in the climax. Akshay Kumar is a pro at such comic characters and pulls off his part with effortless ease. John Abraham struggles with, both, his comic timing and expressions and seems uncomfortable in the role. Riteish Deshmukh is too good and his stuck-in-situation expressions are just priceless. Shreyas Talpade is good as long he lasts in his short-lived character. Amongst the senior actors, Mithun Chakravarthy gets the meatiest part and has strong screen presence. Rishi Kapoor is lively but Randhir Kapoor appears exhausted. Boman Irani hams. The actresses have pretty much nothing to do than looking good. So Jacqueline Fernandes wins the race with her gorgeous looks and Shahazn Padamsee comes a close second. Asin does just about fine for herself. Zareen Khan is irritating and thankfully underutilized. Malaika Arora is regular. Ranjeet, by spoofing himself in a cameo, has perhaps played the most entertaining role of his career.