Printable View
சத்யாஜி,
கண்டிப்பாக பாருங்க.. Guy Ritchie படம் பார்த்த மாதிரி இருக்கு.. ரெண்டாவது வாட்டி பாக்குற ஐடியா வேற இருக்கு எனக்கு.
கெட்ட வார்த்தை பிடிக்கும்னா நீங்க இந்த படம் ப்ளூ ரே வாங்கி வச்சுக்கலாம்.. ஒரு சாம்பிள்..
அஜய் ராஜ்: போன்ல யாருண்ணே? அண்ணியா?
சம்பத்: இல்ல.. ***..
ரெண்டாவது வாட்டி பாக்குற ஐடியா வேற இருக்கு எனக்கு
+1...
சம்பத் : உங்க அப்பாவ ரொம்ப பிடிக்குமா ???
கொடுக்காபுளி : அப்டிலாம் இல்லை..... அவர் எங்க அப்பா ....
padam gethu.. Kodukapuli and Kaalai :thumbsup:
Seems the movie is worth the hype. All my friends have liked it. Way to KumararajaR :-)
Sounds very impressive. சுடாத பழமா இருந்தால் :clap:Quote:
Originally Posted by sureshmehcnit
Absolutely recommended. The voice may not be unique (though it certainly is unique to our cinema) but the song is, without a shred of doubt, entertaining. Thagiriyamaa ticket edunga.
I felt the film is missing some pace. Lot of good scenes and all the threads are tied so neatly, but overall it wasn't much satisfying. TK should have avoided voice overs and characters explaining what was already shown. May be my opinion will change after a rewatch.
Watched it the second time. Dialogues, casting, cinematography and BGM are the saving graces of the film which will make everyone say this to be a world class film and turn it into a blockbuster. But is it a film which has substance? Is it a film which showcases characters? Is it a film which will make you emote even for a second?
I couldn't find a single place where the director had said something by himself. The whole movie seems like a combination of nice scenes from a collection of other movies. Nothing seems original. Everything seems to be borrowed from so many people like QT, Inarittu, Sergio Leone, Meirelles etc etc. Even the Jackie Sheroff's plot is a complete ripoff from a chinese movie called Ju Dou. The idea of Sampath tricking the gangs is lifted from Yojimbo. The best thing about this movie is the cinematography but it is more like looking at photographs of north chennai than it helping in telling the story. I heard people saying "this shot was nice" "that shot was nice" but when people start viewing a movie shot by shot for its beauty that is when a director and cinematographer fail. Apart from the characters and locations the audience shouldn't be seeing anything. Using voice-over isn't a bad thing completely but all of a sudden changing the movie's narrative style, that too 15 mins before the climax, makes no sense.
What I cant stand is people calling Nandalala a ripoff but not this. People are giving standing ovations for this but din't make Naan Kadavul run.
I expected a racy film and probably this is why I wasn't satisfied.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thiagarajan Kumararaja
Baradwaj Rangan's short take
With most mainstream films, especially in Tamil, you know some fifteen minutes in if they’re working for you (or not). These are the films made expressly with you in mind, thinking that they know what you want, the pandering productions. But there are a few that leave you hanging until almost the end – “Hmmm… I’m really enjoying this… But where is it going?… Am I really liking it (as an organic whole) or is it just the laughs giving me a high? – and then, gradually, things begin to cohere and reshape your entire thus-far experience, and you slap your forehead and smile and say wow! This is one of those films.