Film The Redcafe Movie review thread

I've seen 1947 Earth and teen Deewarein. They don't compare to the old stuff.

I forgot about Shakti. That'd be some where in my top 5 too.
 
crappycraperson said:
Hmmmm toughie

Hazaaron khwaishein aisi
Andaz Apna Apna
Deewar
There was a movie with Raj Kaporr in black white where he plays a very poor man , I think it was called Jagte Raho

Really tough to decide I have watched loads of movie from 70s and 80s but can't remember their names.....

Just watched Page 3 tonite, though it was good but a bit too obvious as in could have been more subtle .
Click to expand...

I like Andaz Apna Apna but imo it doesn't quite match the brilliance of some old comedies like Chupke Chupke.
 
You just mentioned earlier that you haven't even seen them. Akhree rasta was rubbish compared to the ones I've mentioned.

Jaane bhi do yaaro was another good one.

Watch those movies before forming an opinion. They're on TV all the time.
 
You didn't think Chupke Chupke was funny?

And I haven't mentioned any of the others. Those aren't classics. They are masala movies. Like the Akshay Kumar movies of today.
 
You've been watching too many rubbish movies. Black Friday had some horrible actors, the screenplay was shite.

Watch the movies I have mentioned. You can thank me later.
 
I don't care about Black Friday or if you think it's better. i'm just saying that don't reject old movies before seeing them. There are some gems out there. Movies actually had decent plots back then.

Abhimaan's the story of a man jealous of his wife's success.

Deewar's the story of 2 brothers pitted against each other.

Teesri Manzil is the best suspense thriller I have seen amongst all Hindi movies. Jewel Thief was pretty good too but I don't like Dev Anand.

Majboor is another one. A man learns he has brain tumour. He has an aging mother, a kid brother and a crippled sister. He knows he must do something to make sure they lead comfortable lives after he dies.

I could go on with Shakti, Silsila, etc.
 
Man On Fire.

Now whats funny, at least to me, is that I knew nothing of this film when I sat down to watch it. Yet within about 90 seconds (no exaggeration), I knew Tony Scott was the director.

His fecking nauseating and trashy way of overstylising every single element of his films, completely ruins what may or may not have been a decent watch. I couldn't tell you if it is any good to be honest, I was too busy throwing up in a nearby and necessary sick bucket. There was some decent acting in it, some engaging moments, but just when it looked like he had a decent shot, he goes and ruins it with some jump cutting or ridiculous camera trickery. Why the feck do studio execs. green light him for any films at all? If I had one of my screenplays bought by a studio, I would take my own life if they gave it to Tony fecking Scott.

Other than that Radha Mitchell is fit, I'd definitely stick her one in the pooper.
 
Spammy said:
Man On Fire.

Now whats funny, at least to me, is that I knew nothing of this film when I sat down to watch it. Yet within about 90 seconds (no exaggeration), I knew Tony Scott was the director.

His fecking nauseating and trashy way of overstylising every single element of his films, completely ruins what may or may not have been a decent watch. I couldn't tell you if it is any good to be honest, I was too busy throwing up in a nearby and necessary sick bucket. There was some decent acting in it, some engaging moments, but just when it looked like he had a decent shot, he goes and ruins it with some jump cutting or ridiculous camera trickery. Why the feck do studio execs. green light him for any films at all? If I had one of my screenplays bought by a studio, I would take my own life if they gave it to Tony fecking Scott.

Other than that Radha Mitchell is fit, I'd definitely stick her one in the pooper.
Click to expand...
#

You are clearly gay.
 
Salvation said:
I know about Shatranj, I haven't seen it

Hazaron is a goon choice Crapp. And 1947 Earth would make my top 5

Have neither of you seen 3 Teewarein?
Click to expand...
I have seen 3 Deewarien, one with Juhi, Jacki and Shah right?

I liked it but that's it really.
 
mehro said:
I like Andaz Apna Apna but imo it doesn't quite match the brilliance of some old comedies like Chupke Chupke.
Click to expand...
It's quality, as slapstick is may be, I can watch it hundred times in a row and still laugh. Chupke Chupke is a classic indeed and I forgot about Jane Bhi do Yarro. That would defy make my top 5 as well.
 
Not seen it, Spamms.

Topic on Requiem for a Dream in the Gen. What did you think of this film? Personally, I thought it was hyperbolic crap. Talk about being manipulated emotionally. Aronofksy told us that drugs are bad and that you'll most likely end up dying in some awful way after taking them. Nice one Aronosky, you clearly are a tool. Prentious bollocks really, could've easily been commissioned by the Chrisitian Right in the US.

Film clearly for the MTV generation. feck off.
 
It was very stylish. . . like a hip MTV video. Oh and expect to feel suicidal at the end, when he starts fecking about with your emotions.

Very cheap.
 
It is an adaptation innit? So perspective should be taken from those who have read the book. Saw Cold Mountain yesterday and it had a brilliant screenplay which makes you think the book would've been a well styled story. Casting and performances again is a matter of perspective from those who've read the book
 
Not surprised. I would really love to live in that part of the world. Seems so much more civilised than here. Japan's too expensive, I feel.
 
Spoony said:
Not seen it, Spamms.

Topic on Requiem for a Dream in the Gen. What did you think of this film? Personally, I thought it was hyperbolic crap. Talk about being manipulated emotionally. Aronofksy told us that drugs are bad and that you'll mostly likely end up dying in some awful way after taking them. Nice one Aronosky, you clearly are a tool. Prentious bollocks really, could've easily been commissioned by the Chrisitian Right in the US.

Film clearly for the MTV generation. feck off.
Click to expand...
Bollocks.

Considering the stories he conveyed have very much chance of happening to addicts, you can't call it hyperbolic.
And yes it was undoubtedly about showing the adverse effects of drugs and he conveyed that in a great manner. I am glad he didn't try to balance it all with some story of normal addicts.
 
crappycraperson said:
Bollocks.

Considering the stories he conveyed have very much chance of happening to addicts, you can't call it hyperbolic.
And yes it was undoubtedly about showing the adverse effects of drugs and he conveyed that in a great manner. I am glad he didn't try to balance it all with some story of normal addicts.
Click to expand...

Nah, it was rubbish. And like I said, it manipulates the viewer's emotions far too much, much like Green Mile. As I said, cheap. This may surprise you, but people do enjoy taking drugs. . . the problem with this film is that it's very blinkered. And addiction's a very bad thing. . . most addicts feel like like shit after taking or doing something they're addicted to. The film showed none of this, and it's clear he's go no idea what he's talking about. People who haven't taken drugs loved this film. People with experience of it, hated it. That tells me a lot. Sure, show it to schoolkids. But any adult with an ounce of intelligence, will see that film for what it is. . .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.