Ek Mahal Ho Sapno Ka

Too many things were happening in a short time as if the Director was given a time limit to finish the movie. I believe Sholay movie shooting was running concurrently and time for this movie had to be squeezed in. Due to this the film feels emotionally disjointed. Leena Chandavarkar didn't have any kind of chemistry with Dharmendra. The songs were ok not memorable. Dharmendra was his dashing self, as he was in the 70s, but there wasn't much depth in the role so it felt one dimensional. Sharmila Tagore was ok not great as emotional aspect of the character was cut short. I always like Deven Verma, but his presence seems pointless as if he was an afterthought when casting the movie. Similarly the marriage arrangement between Sharmila and Ashok kumar felt weird on many levels. Then Ashok kumar was conveniently killed off. Last but not the least, when you cast Jagdish Raj, a known henchman of the 70s, as the main villain there isn't much more to say. Though this movie might not be of high standards, if you get overly nostalgic you could watch it. Just don't go in expecting too much.

I am a big fan of the bollywood movies of the 80's and this is by far the most senseless and ridiculous movie from that era.

Absolute waste of time.

Movie is mind blowing in every aspect....performances are good...Good watch.. Go ahead for it..

This is the second Bollywood movie I've seen (the first being "Sharabi"), and I enjoyed this a lot more. The following plot points were given in Netflix's summary, and thereby cannot be considered spoilers. Vishal (Dharmendra) and Aruna (Sharmila Tagore) are very much in love. However, when Aruna finds out that she is going blind, she marries her elderly employer (Ashok Kumar) so that she won't be a burden to Vichal, who already has to take care of his handicapped mother (Achala Sachdev). Deven Verma provides comic relief.

The first act of this film is a bit overly melodramatic. It takes a western viewer a while to get used to the in-your-face close-ups and other staples of old-school Bollywood cinema. However, the acting is very good. Dharmendra and Sharmila Tagore are good as two young lovers. Ashok Kumar is quite good as a magazine executive with a heart of gold. However, the best actor does not show up until the beginning of the second act: Leena Chandavarkar as Kumar's daughter. She acts evenly with her whole body, and the fact that she's easy on the eyes doesn't hurt her performance. She simply has the best chemistry with all of her co- stars, especially with Sharmila Tagore. In their scenes together, the unique chemistry that develops when two women the same age take on the roles of mother and daughter is captured brilliantly. Chandavarkar's scenes with Dharmendra are also very good. Even when the script becomes overly misogynistic, Chandavarkar's presence is stronger than her male counterparts. Also, the woman who plays the friend of Aruna in a small role is very good and sexy, but I couldn't find her name.

Even though I'm praising the acting, why am I only calling the movie decent? The story. For starters, characters have a habit of appearing out of nowhere in scenes, particularly Kumar's character. Also, a lot of times the plot is like a soap opera. Sometimes the action depends on events so nonsensical that they ruin the mood. All of this would be tolerable, however, if it wasn't for the dénouement. Without giving anything away, this movie's dénouement breaks the original mood of the film so severely that the last fifteen minutes just become annoying. Everything else about the movie was very good, but the dénouement was so awful that it almost ruined the movie for me.