RE: [arr] Re: JA movie review
Hey, I heard Ashutosh is looking for his lost soul mates called Shahnavas and Rajeev Gandhi. Why don't both of you become his assistant directors so he can properly direct his next movie and we can be spared of your rambling? Anand From: arrahmanfans@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of shanavas.chemmamkuzhi Sent: 18 February, 2008 10:11 AM To: arrahmanfans@yahoogroups.com Subject: [arr] Re: JA movie review JA is neither a classic nor spectacular movie, but worth for one time watch.Its an above average hindi film with excellent performances of lead actors. Ashuthosh treated Rahman's music as a second hero of the movie, but i doubt Rahman met his expectations.Computer graphics is so bad and many unnecessary sub plots are there. I liked the picturisation of Khwaja Mere Khwaja and Manmohana. --- In arrahmanfans@yahoogroups.com mailto:arrahmanfans%40yahoogroups.com , Rajeev Gandhi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Going to a theater for a movie is some effort on your part. - download and watch is easier. I myself took this effort, spent 11$ + gas + got tortured for 4 hours. I meant to say that let alone theater, it was not even worth the easy way of dw. Regards, rajeev --- In arrahmanfans@yahoogroups.com mailto:arrahmanfans%40yahoogroups.com , || V i s h w e s h || Vishwsant@ wrote: If you watched it in theater then what's with It's not even worth download and watch?? --- In arrahmanfans@yahoogroups.com mailto:arrahmanfans%40yahoogroups.com , Rajeev Gandhi rajeev4480@ wrote: Hi, I saw JA yesterday. It sucks big time. movie lasts for 3hours 45 minutes and will bore you to death. Not a single person in the whole theater liked the movie. Ashutosh has made a joke out of akbar. Its not even worth download and watch. Dont waste your time/money on this movie. what a waste of 40+ crores. regards, raj The search is more important than the destination - a r rahman - - Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
[arr] Re: JA movie review
I could make that out from general reaction. I meant it in all honesty. I felt it was needed to supplement the fanatic following. the movie will fail. I wouldnt watch it again even if paid for it. Infact my appreciation goes out to anybody who watches the full movie twice in a theater. Music was OK but 5 songs for a rahman album was not satiating. BGM was not upto rahman stds. -Rajeev --- In arrahmanfans@yahoogroups.com, Anil Nair [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well the question is - how do you know not single person liked it? Did u check with each and every person? If you did then thats commendable. Sorry dude no offence meant. I dont think it was bad enough to say it sucks. It was an honest and a brave attempt at recreating those times and historical characters. Yes ...there were short- comings - agreed -but in no way can the whole movie be called a waste' -A --- In arrahmanfans@yahoogroups.com, Rajeev Gandhi rajeev4480@ wrote: Hi, I saw JA yesterday. It sucks big time. movie lasts for 3hours 45 minutes and will bore you to death. Not a single person in the whole theater liked the movie. Ashutosh has made a joke out of akbar. Its not even worth download and watch. Dont waste your time/money on this movie. what a waste of 40+ crores. regards, raj --- In arrahmanfans@yahoogroups.com, Gopal Srinivasan catchgops@ wrote: Gowarikerâs churned out a historical one yet again, but unfortunately itâs so awfully long that, by the time you exit the theaters, youâre yawning, wondering to yourself how the editing (or the lack of it) ruined the film so bad Iâm tempted to title it Jodhaa Ak-bore. Because parts of the âepicâ just drag, itâs like a heavyweight flick heaving itself lazily to the final reels as if it were a burden. Like Lagaan, the movie begins with Amitabh Bachchan narratinghistory. But thatâs where the similarity ends. Jodhaa Akbar takes aneternity to develop too many characters, and while there isnât a singlescene in the movie that is irrelevant, many of them could be simplytrashed. The plot is simple, and historians might argue on this, but ittraces Akbarâs (a confident Hrithik) path from childhood to youth, tomarrying - and falling in love with - the bold and rebellious Jodhaa (astrikingly pretty Ash). Sprinkled in are the battles. Yes, itâs technically brilliant, save for the unforgivablysubstandard war scenes. The warriors - and the animals - are often soclumsy on the battlefield that itâs sometimes painful to watch themfight. Outside of that, Gowariker is flawless - as is thecinematography by Kiran Deohans, Neeta Lullaâs scrumptious costumes andNitin Desaiâs breathtaking sets. In those aspects, the flick isspectacular and might just make people say âgoodâ when opinions areneeded. The much-talked about khwaaja song is so brilliantlypicturised, and it ends with Hrithik defying the norm, being hypnotizedin awe and love for the saint, as he joins the devout disciples intheir celebration, almost under a spell. A scene loaded with passionatefaith that leaves the audience moved. The performances are a strict okay,except for the leads. Hrithik, for once, is amazingly expressive.Warmth, romance, fury, frustration, fear, sympathy, helplessness,vengeance - you name it, and the blokeâs managed it all effortlessly,silencing many a critic. Helping him out is his captivating screenpresence - thereâs a scene where he tames a rogue elephant, and whilethat scene might be rubbished on paper, the director-actor duo do sowell to make it convincing that you almost nod your head inappreciation. Ash is no less expressive - in fact, she has very littledialogue yet a lot of meat in her role - but I must admit, her abilityto emote is far, far superior than her sword-wielding skills. Still,she fits the part of the defiant Rajput princess. The support cast is unfortunately weak. Kulbhushan Kharbandaâs Raja Bharmal is almost always helpless, very unlike a king if I may, and Nikitin Dheerâs Shareefuddin is so absurdly over expressive that, at times, you hope Akbar slaughters him and gets over with it. Sonu Soodâs Sujamal is expected to make the audience notice him, and he manages it more out of sympathy than conviction. The female support cast do a lot better, Ila Arun deserves a mention but itâs Punam Sinhaâs Hamida Banu who plays the motherâs role to the T. Credit to Gowariker for getting that bit of the cast together, and extra-credit for handling the subplots of religion so subtly, so simply, and so sweetly that you agree unconditionally. All in all, itâs worth a watch if you donât mind the 200- minute length, but you might catch sunrise if you go for the night show. And feel free to excuse yourself in
[arr] Re: JA movie review
- Going to a theater for a movie is some effort on your part. - download and watch is easier. I myself took this effort, spent 11$ + gas + got tortured for 4 hours. I meant to say that let alone theater, it was not even worth the easy way of dw. Regards, rajeev --- In arrahmanfans@yahoogroups.com, || V i s h w e s h || [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you watched it in theater then what's with It's not even worth download and watch?? --- In arrahmanfans@yahoogroups.com, Rajeev Gandhi rajeev4480@ wrote: Hi, I saw JA yesterday. It sucks big time. movie lasts for 3hours 45 minutes and will bore you to death. Not a single person in the whole theater liked the movie. Ashutosh has made a joke out of akbar. Its not even worth download and watch. Dont waste your time/money on this movie. what a waste of 40+ crores. regards, raj The search is more important than the destination - a r rahman - - Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
[arr] Re: JA movie review
JA is neither a classic nor spectacular movie, but worth for one time watch.Its an above average hindi film with excellent performances of lead actors. Ashuthosh treated Rahman's music as a second hero of the movie, but i doubt Rahman met his expectations.Computer graphics is so bad and many unnecessary sub plots are there. I liked the picturisation of Khwaja Mere Khwaja and Manmohana. --- In arrahmanfans@yahoogroups.com, Rajeev Gandhi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Going to a theater for a movie is some effort on your part. - download and watch is easier. I myself took this effort, spent 11$ + gas + got tortured for 4 hours. I meant to say that let alone theater, it was not even worth the easy way of dw. Regards, rajeev --- In arrahmanfans@yahoogroups.com, || V i s h w e s h || Vishwsant@ wrote: If you watched it in theater then what's with It's not even worth download and watch?? --- In arrahmanfans@yahoogroups.com, Rajeev Gandhi rajeev4480@ wrote: Hi, I saw JA yesterday. It sucks big time. movie lasts for 3hours 45 minutes and will bore you to death. Not a single person in the whole theater liked the movie. Ashutosh has made a joke out of akbar. Its not even worth download and watch. Dont waste your time/money on this movie. what a waste of 40+ crores. regards, raj The search is more important than the destination - a r rahman - - Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
[arr] Re: JA movie review
Well the question is - how do you know not single person liked it? Did u check with each and every person? If you did then thats commendable. Sorry dude no offence meant. I dont think it was bad enough to say it sucks. It was an honest and a brave attempt at recreating those times and historical characters. Yes ...there were short- comings - agreed -but in no way can the whole movie be called a waste' -A --- In arrahmanfans@yahoogroups.com, Rajeev Gandhi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I saw JA yesterday. It sucks big time. movie lasts for 3hours 45 minutes and will bore you to death. Not a single person in the whole theater liked the movie. Ashutosh has made a joke out of akbar. Its not even worth download and watch. Dont waste your time/money on this movie. what a waste of 40+ crores. regards, raj --- In arrahmanfans@yahoogroups.com, Gopal Srinivasan catchgops@ wrote: Gowarikerâs churned out a historical one yet again, but unfortunately itâs so awfully long that, by the time you exit the theaters, youâre yawning, wondering to yourself how the editing (or the lack of it) ruined the film so bad Iâm tempted to title it Jodhaa Ak-bore. Because parts of the âepicâ just drag, itâs like a heavyweight flick heaving itself lazily to the final reels as if it were a burden. Like Lagaan, the movie begins with Amitabh Bachchan narratinghistory. But thatâs where the similarity ends. Jodhaa Akbar takes aneternity to develop too many characters, and while there isnât a singlescene in the movie that is irrelevant, many of them could be simplytrashed. The plot is simple, and historians might argue on this, but ittraces Akbarâs (a confident Hrithik) path from childhood to youth, tomarrying - and falling in love with - the bold and rebellious Jodhaa (astrikingly pretty Ash). Sprinkled in are the battles. Yes, itâs technically brilliant, save for the unforgivablysubstandard war scenes. The warriors - and the animals - are often soclumsy on the battlefield that itâs sometimes painful to watch themfight. Outside of that, Gowariker is flawless - as is thecinematography by Kiran Deohans, Neeta Lullaâs scrumptious costumes andNitin Desaiâs breathtaking sets. In those aspects, the flick isspectacular and might just make people say âgoodâ when opinions areneeded. The much-talked about khwaaja song is so brilliantlypicturised, and it ends with Hrithik defying the norm, being hypnotizedin awe and love for the saint, as he joins the devout disciples intheir celebration, almost under a spell. A scene loaded with passionatefaith that leaves the audience moved. The performances are a strict okay,except for the leads. Hrithik, for once, is amazingly expressive.Warmth, romance, fury, frustration, fear, sympathy, helplessness,vengeance - you name it, and the blokeâs managed it all effortlessly,silencing many a critic. Helping him out is his captivating screenpresence - thereâs a scene where he tames a rogue elephant, and whilethat scene might be rubbished on paper, the director-actor duo do sowell to make it convincing that you almost nod your head inappreciation. Ash is no less expressive - in fact, she has very littledialogue yet a lot of meat in her role - but I must admit, her abilityto emote is far, far superior than her sword-wielding skills. Still,she fits the part of the defiant Rajput princess. The support cast is unfortunately weak. Kulbhushan Kharbandaâs Raja Bharmal is almost always helpless, very unlike a king if I may, and Nikitin Dheerâs Shareefuddin is so absurdly over expressive that, at times, you hope Akbar slaughters him and gets over with it. Sonu Soodâs Sujamal is expected to make the audience notice him, and he manages it more out of sympathy than conviction. The female support cast do a lot better, Ila Arun deserves a mention but itâs Punam Sinhaâs Hamida Banu who plays the motherâs role to the T. Credit to Gowariker for getting that bit of the cast together, and extra-credit for handling the subplots of religion so subtly, so simply, and so sweetly that you agree unconditionally. All in all, itâs worth a watch if you donât mind the 200- minute length, but you might catch sunrise if you go for the night show. And feel free to excuse yourself in the middle to grab a snack or two, as you wonât miss too much with the extra scenes. As the credits rolled at the end, I was left in a mild shock seeing Ballu Salujaâs name for the editing. Where was the editing anyway? This crazily stretched film shattered my expectations, and for me, Jodhaa Akbar is history. In more ways than one. * mutiny.in
Re: [arr] Re: JA movie review
If you watched it in theater then what's with It's not even worth download and watch?? --- In arrahmanfans@yahoogroups.com, Rajeev Gandhi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I saw JA yesterday. It sucks big time. movie lasts for 3hours 45 minutes and will bore you to death. Not a single person in the whole theater liked the movie. Ashutosh has made a joke out of akbar. Its not even worth download and watch. Dont waste your time/money on this movie. what a waste of 40+ crores. regards, raj The search is more important than the destination - a r rahman - - Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
