It has been 2 years since the New York incident and wars are raging all across the nine realms. Asgardian warriors have the onus of restoring order and warding off all evil. Meanwhile back on Earth, Jane Foster has accidentally unleashed an ancient weapon of the Dark Elves that resurrects their race, threatening the very existence of the Universe. The Norse God of Thunder has a mighty force to reckon with and will need the assistance of his deceitful brother Loki. Thor must prevent the world from falling into darkness before the imminent convergence of all realms. With most of the events unfolding upon Asgard, some fantastic special effects were obvious devices to be used by the celebrated TV director Alan Taylor whose most recent works include several memorable episodes of Game of Thrones, Mad Men & Sopranos. 'Thor: The Dark World' is undeniably an exciting superhero epic that outdoes its predecessor and establishes Chris Hemsworth as a worthy Avenger.
While the Asgardians police the realms and keep trouble away from their homeland, Thor's ambivalence is highlighted. On one hand, he has a role in protecting Midgard as an Avenger and being closer to Jane Foster and on the other, the responsibility of being the King of Asgard in the near future. As Jane accidentally becomes the host for the dark power Aether on Earth, Thor decides to bring her to Asgard. Darkness then draws onto itself and the resurrected Malekith (Christopher Eccleston – Who?) attacks the might of Asgard itself causing terror and despair. Thor must now seek the assistance of whom he wouldn't trust at all but retribution, has common enemies. Together with Loki (Tom Hiddleston), Thor must prevent Malekith from unleashing darkness upon the world before the convergence of all nine realms occurs. The common plane of this rare alignment falls in Greenwich, which then serves as the final battleground for an epic clash between Thor and the forces of the Dark Elves.
At his third outing as the God of Thunder, Chris Hemsworth is more convincing and iconic than ever before. He effectively manages distinct relationships in this sequel, between his father, his conniving brother and his love, Jane. With more humor, action and evil, Hemsworth does a mighty job with his hammer. Natalie Portman has a better role that is suited to her talent and at Asgard, she feels just at home as she was on Naboo as Queen Amidala. Anthony Hopkins might look weary of playing Old Odin but his voice and persona still make him the most suitable King. The show stealer however, is Tom Hiddleston as Loki. His comic timing and charm simply add to his character's dishonest nature. The untrustworthy Loki is turning out to be the most lovable villain and that simply asserts how well Hiddleston plays the part.
Alan Taylor's comprehensive background with major TV series does enable him to blend in several elements of the story in a fast paced, eventful and exciting movie of less than 2 hours. A seemingly uncomplicated plot does yet provide the grip and thrill. With some exemplary visual effects that not only showcase the fantastic realm of Asgard in vivid light and colors but also showcase the epic destruction in Greenwich, Taylor makes remarkable use of technologies to enhance the story's appeal. The best part is, he directs the screenplay in a seamless manner that keeps the audience engaged with the pace so the film isn't heavily reliant on its visuals but is merely aided by it in its storytelling. That is precisely how such superhero movies should be made. The cinematography is excellent even with simple scenes such as Thor's arrival upon Earth, London's aerial view and the action on desolate landscapes of other realms. The background score has the epic tone and sustains the darkness associated with the film's evil.
Technicality finds its happy medium with comic book storytelling and Taylor deserves credit for enhancing Thor's presence in the Marvel world. As Malekith's evil grows with the power of Aether, Thor's strength increases with his loved ones around him. His definitive stance for Midgard's well being and for his love, Jane Foster will establish him as an Avenger and protector of all realms. Meanwhile, Loki's wile ways shall keep us entertained with the brilliant Tom Hiddleston.
Thor: The Dark World isn't ground-breaking but it does everything right for a superhero movie and that, is the simple reason you should spend that money. Oh, and to watch the scene where Thor sheds his cloak, jumps off the balcony, catches the incoming mjölnir and flies away. Epic.
- 8.688 on a scale of 1-10.
It could have been an excellent movie, but the camera man must have gone out drinking all night and couldn't hold his camera still...I stopped watching the movie about halfway through as I got tired of feeling like I was in the way of the drunk camera man..not to mention seasick flashbacks of Blair Witch Project...looks like if the "new thing" in filming is a jiggidy camera in hand they need to start selling Dramamine along with the movie.
Several attempts were made over the years to create Indian cinema's very own superhero. Most attempts were ridiculed until the 'K' obsessed Rakesh Roshan introduced an alien inspired by Spielberg's 'E.T.' who bestowed magical powers upon Rohit whose son, in turn, would be the first convincing superhero that leaped across long distances in a long black coat. This young Krishna is now back as a more refined Krrish whose nemesis is not only the mutant generating apocalyptic maniac but also his father's script that introduces unwanted drama and cheeziness to restrict this 100 crore venture from being a fine example of India's advancement in films. 'Krrish 3' or 2, as you like it, is technically impressive and stunning in several aerial shots, action sequences and the climactic showdown between two immense forces but it is the storytelling that sees no advancement or refinement. With a cartoonish plot of a villain seeking world domination with his self-generated mutants, Rakesh Roshan seldom offers intrigue, surprise or nuance in a story of good v/s evil. Expectations are high and people will certainly flock to the cinemas for the special effects from Filmkraft but one can't eliminate the realization that most of the story was based around action sequences that were adroitly visualized rather than the other way around.
The sequel finds its roots in the events in Singapore when Dr. Siddhant Arya used the DNA from Rohit Mehra (the better Hrithik Roshan) to create new life. Years after Krrish's victory over Dr. Arya's malicious attempt to change the world, we see him struggling with jobs he can't keep while being the superhero that the city occasionally needs. While his father Rohit's experiment to harness the sun's power achieves limited success, his main focus is to find an antidote for a deadly virus outbreak in Namibia. An elusive pharmaceutical company finds the cure eventually, garnering enormous profits and funding for its proprietor's relentless attempts at creating a life form that can cure his handicap with a DNA matched bone marrow. Kaal (Vivek Oberoi) has no regard for human life and sends his mutants to Bombay to unleash the virus again. Millions of lives are threatened but the father-son duo create an antidote and use Krrish's powers to distribute it in Diwali style. Furious at his foiled attempt, Kaal sends his mutants to threaten Rohit's family and Kaya (Kangana Ranaut) replaces Priya (Priyanka Chopra) with her form changing ability.
Intrigued by the common DNA signatures between the virus, its antidote and a captured mutant, Rohit seeks to unravel the mystery in Singapore where Kaal seizes him. Krishna, who has just realized Kaya's deceitful ways is determined to rescue his wife, unborn child and father from Kaal's hideout. Meanwhile, the nefarious villain finds the DNA he seeks and now has renewed powers with which he threatens the city of Mumbai once again. Only a superpower can stop him. Only its hero can prevent the annihilation of the city.
The refinement in action sequences and special effects is delightful to watch. This is by far, the best that our cinema has achieved. Krrish's entry over the city's skyline is simply stunning. But then there is the unwanted overacting by people on the airplane. The visual effects of Krrish's antidote deployment look really cool but that is only followed by a song praising him with God, Allah and Bhagwaan. The intermission point is with Krrish standing at the edge of a crane looming over the city and its skyline. Quite impressive even though it resembles many of Batman's epic scenes.
The film then drags through some love, affection, heartbreak post intermission till Rohit links the DNA facts together, bringing Krrish to Kaal's mountain hideout and then of course, the subsequent showdown in the city.
The climax seems unlike Rakesh Roshan. Not to discredit the director but the sequences look incredibly powerful and thrilling, were it not for the similarities with that of 'Man of Steel'. Yet, the attempt is commendable and does pack most of the film's budget into the 20 mins.
Thus, Krrish 3 leaves the impression that things have evolved in the past 6 years. The action, the budget, the superhero's powers, the villain's malice and strength as well as Rohit's role as a guiding father, have evolved collectively to create a bigger impact. However, the flaws are deep and are many. Rakesh Roshan still relies upon corny storytelling that may appeal to kids. Various themes such as Batman, Superman and X-Men are obvious inspirations and that is detrimental to all the hard work put in by the actor and the technical crew that came up with such stunning visual effects.
Music by Rajesh Roshan is perhaps his dullest work and brother Rakesh favors him by featuring the various songs abruptly through the storyline. The biggest flaw however, is that the story seems to follow the action. Big action sequences were visualized and the story seems like an afterthought to the 100 crore ideas. That sadly, is the reality of the action film genre in India where there is no dearth of creativity in the technical aspect but severe dearth of nuance in storytelling.
Hrithik Roshan is much better at playing the paternal role of Rohit where he is so distinct from the dull and bulky Krishna. After several years, he still portrays the same innocence, silliness and intelligence that won him accolades. Only if there was more life in Krishna's character that the series will now depend on. As Krrish, Hrithik needs to stop his facial vibration to depict aggression. It just doesn't work. But he is great with the action sequences and even when he silently stands with hands crossed behind him, looming over the villain or the city with a watchful eye.
Priyanka Chopra can of course play into the melodrama and create more forgettable moments of the movie. Kangana Ranaut on the other hand, plays the role of a mutant very well. Her evil form is as convincing as her guilt ridden one that admires Krishna. Rajpal Yadav has barely 3 minutes of comedy and he does well to make us laugh. Vivek Oberoi maintains good composure as a handicapped villain. His aggression is focused and we seldom see him overact when he easily could have. Only if he were given a better metallic suit for the climax sequence, he would've had more fans. Negative roles do suit him more than romance and comedy as is evident from 'Company', 'Shootout at Lokhandwala' and now as Kaal.
Rakesh Roshan had everyone's hopes up with this huge release and with Hrithik averaging one movie a year (if that), the audience shouldn't be blamed for expecting a lot. The script, storytelling and little brother's music do not work for such expectations and a film of this budget but the action sequences do when they need to because of the adroitly crafted visual effects. Cinematography in those sequences is quite stunning but not impressive otherwise.
As the film closes with the sun setting over Bombay's skyline through a panoramic aerial shot of a construction crane, its hero stands tall on the edge, observing with a watchful eye and a keen sense for any looming threat. That visual is convincing. The idea of such a hero is convincing. Krrish being that hero, is convincing.
- 7.778 on a scale of 1-10.
Well for the starters..the movie has to credited on being different from other Super heroes Sequels.The movies has elements of humor and laughs which necessarily cannot be found in most of action heroes movies as i recollect. Anybody adoring director Christopher Nolan wont be exactly finding the movie so interesting if they visualize from the perspective of the Dark Knight series.
The visual effects are good if not " blow you away ". Natalie Portman is ravishing as usual but has a more of eye candy presence. Chris Hemsworth has improved as an actor and that be substantiated if u compare him with other performance. The X- factor of the movie i believe is Tom Hiddleston. He is a gem of actor and but is yet to shine. Even though Chris Hemsworth character is the main protagonist but people will talk about Loki as step out of Exit . His brilliance is personified in an intriguing way and i would love to keep it within wraps.
Beautifully crafted are the humour shots...and i believe anybody reading my comments wont disagree on agreeing to it.
I expected this to be hilarious but it really wasn't. They had a decent concept going but didn't do anything that was of worth. The kid in this film wasn't that good. He did some things that should have been funny but he just doesn't have a comedic look to him which kind of ruined the movie. Johnny Knoxville played his role well but it wasn't enough to play this movie. There was maybe one part that I found to be when he goes into the Bingo parlor and starts eating Bingo ink but that's about it. The other part with the striptease is ruined by trailer. They stole that idea from It's Always Sunny In Philadelphia anyways. I would see this movie but only if you can get it from RedBox or online for free. 5.5/10
Another great acting job by Tom Hanks. The film wouldn't be that interesting except for the fact that it is based on a true story which is pretty cool. Don't believe the reviews because reviewers (such as the Just Seen It review) are biased and just going to give it a good review because it's based on a true story (remember Zero Dark Thirty? A bad movie that was horribly acted yet got a perfect score by these so called "professional" reviewers). While not terrible it left something to be desired. The only real exciting part was when people start to get sniped off which lasts for literally half a second. Don't expect much til then. 5/10
Adapted from a Stephen king novel, I had high hopes for Carrie to be a hit. The movie posters always seem to portray a horror thriller that is different from the others. Especially when this was the third adaptation of the novel, I expected something far more refined. However, I was left quite defeated at myself to think the movie may be great. It simply wasn’t and I do not have a slightest clue where it went wrong.
Was it too simplistic a plot or was it too unjust? I have no idea because I haven’t read the book and I don’t intend to. The book was written in 1974. So, I feel that it’s better that the movie is set at that time and not in present time. The start of the movie was cliché. The way Carrie found out about her powers was too frustrating to watch. It was boring and unentertaining. I wished that god or the team of extractors from inception would plant the idea of something like peter parker’s discovery of his powers into the screenwriter’s head before he or she had written something down.it just didn’t make me feel as if telekinesis was actually a great power to possess. Later towards the end of the movie, Carrie had pig’s blood poured on her (so it was revealed, the blood on her wasn’t caused by her killings. Hence, it totally ruined her scary image. ) and she completely went berserk after that, hurting everyone in the ballroom which was the unjust part. I think the best part of the story was the extremely small and tiny love story between sue and her boyfriend who died after being hit by the bucket.
The ending was soon to be the most irksome part of the movie. After killing Chris and billy Nolan Carrie reaches home to a mother who tries to kill her. I was not surprised, considering her mom had become the religious freak she was. But she killed her mom in the end. Later, sue appeared at the house trying to make things right again. For some strange reason, Carrie was able to use her telekinesis powers to determine the gender of Sue’s baby. Can telekinesis really do that? Carrie then brought sue out safely and burned the house down, killing both her mom and herself. Maybe Carrie should put a curse on the baby? It’s just a suggestion to salvage a movie that was already bad.
There has not a good record of female directors in the movie industry and this movie certainly did not do them any favour. To end it off, a bad adaptation or a bad novel is still a question, but one thing’s for sure. It did not turn out right. I’m still a fan of king’s novels and movies like 1408, just not this one.
Quentin Tarantino seems to be a protege of Scorsese, producing movies which trivialize and exalt brutality and violence by suggesting that there is something funny and cool about killing and torturing people. This movie, like Mean Streets and Silence of the Lambs, is beyond sick. The producers behind such films want our society and civilization to fall into a new Dark Ages where there are no morals, no hope and only the belligerent and sadistic rule. The movie is filled with A list stars in order to make it easier to swallow but, it is definitely a poison pill. All of Tarantino's movies seem to be about killing and how you are supposed to see it in a humorous light. God help us.
This is one of the most enjoyable suspense-filled rides ever produced by Hollywood from the days when bad guys were bad and dignity was a recognized value. Audrey Hepburn's acting really reinforces the tenuous nature of the predicament she finds herself in, after her wealthy husband dies and leaves her a small ostensibly valuable airline bag filled with seemingly worthless personal effects. Strange men enter her life claiming that her husband lit out with a fortune that all of them had stolen from the Nazis during the war. The plot has more twists than a pretzel and is guaranteed to please, right to the surprise ending.
Not even for one second can you even come close to predicting the next stage of the plot. Although I did know the next line to be spoken a few times. There are so many twists you will get a sore neck! HA! The acting is good, the story is awesome and the movie will keep you interested throughout. I was not expecting much from this one and was pleasantly surprised if not shocked at the depth of the writing that took place to make it. The characters are likable and well thought out.
Four magicians each answer a mysterious summons to an obscure address with secrets inside. A year later, they are the Four Horseman, big time stage illusionists who climax their sold out Las Vegas show with a bank apparently robbed for real.
The world's greatest illusionists - "The Four Horsemen" - pull off a series of daring heists against corrupt business leaders during their performances. The super-team of illusionists shower the stolen profits on their audiences while staying one step ahead of an elite FBI squad in a game of cat-and-mouse.
Starring: Jesse Eisenberg, Mark Ruffalo, Woody Harrelson, Mélanie Laurent, Isla Fisher