Change Your Image
kimayarawat
Reviews
The Happytime Murders (2018)
No Kermit, all calamity
The biggest question that arises when it comes to a film like The Happytime Murders is 'how?'. How did a concept so weird and seemingly brilliant amount to a film so lacklustre and boring? How can a project that's been circling around Hollywood for so many years feel half-finished? The answer likely lies in a million different things, but that doesn't make the end result any less disappointing.
Brian Henson's attempt to bring his family business into R-rated territory could have been great, but instead The Happytime Murders is a pedestrian cum joke stretched to 91-minutes. The film follows Los Angeles private investigator Phil Phillips (Bill Barretta), an ex-cop who was banned from the force after a police shooting gone wrong, which resulted in the death of a bystander and his partner Connie Edwards (Melissa McCarthy) being given a puppet liver. Common consensus is now that 'puppets don't shoot puppets', and the once pioneering Philips is now forced to work in the seedy parts of a city that treats his kind like second-class citizens. When someone starts picking off members of the 'Happytime Gang' - a sitcom not unlike a naughtier Muppet Show - he is forced to investigate what might be a larger conspiracy.
Your opinion of the film will depend a lot on how the above description makes you feel. Make no mistake, the film doesn't make a lick of sense, and the internal logic of this Roger Rabbit-esque society was clearly not a major concern in the writing process. To have even a slightly good time with this film, you have to give yourself over to the madness. Madness can be fun. It's a bit of a tragedy, then, that the parts of The Happytime Murders that are genuinely interesting and/or hilarious are so few and far between. For every Muppets-level sight gag or surreal one-liner, there's a lengthy and repetitive "asshole says what" joke or characters repeatedly mistaking McCarthy for a man. Too many times the audience are left wondering if they're missing something, or if the joke was really that lame.
More disconcerting even than an octopus milking a cow's udders as part of a sex act (it has to be seen to be believed) is the racial allegory that Happytime goes for but misses wildly. This hits Bright levels of bad judgement, as characters are subjected to racial profiling and discrimination, and puppets engage in surgery and skin-lightening in order to be more acceptable in a human world. But Happytime Murders isn't at all interested in following up on that concept, using it instead as a stand-in for depth and world-building. It's comes off as indecently tone deaf in 2018, and isn't helped by a sexist and bi-phobic thread running through other parts of the film. Bad and offensive aren't the same thing, so if Happytime Murders had been at all sharp and inventive a lot of these sins would have been more forgivable. But even the film noir element is played straight, never subverted further than 'wouldn't it be funny if puppets...'.
At least the human performers are game, with McCarthy, Maya Rudolph as Philips' assistant Bubbles, and ex-Happytime Gang member Elizabeth Banks all giving charming turns in underserved roles. Joel McHale is also fun as the curmudgeonly FBI agent investigating the murders. Oddly, for a film that's been worked on for so long, this feels like it could have done with another draft or two, tightening up the story and identifying the few jokes that really land. All of this said, once the credits start to roll, and you see the work involved in making any movie of this kind, you may find your annoyance softening. It's impossible for something as intricate as this to be dubbed a 'lazy' film, but rather its flaws feel more to do with wonky judgement and a clash between decade-old and modern comedic sensibilities.
For some reason, turning The Muppets and their extended universe friends into modern-day Hollywood figures doesn't work, also proven by 2015's similarly adult (but PG) attempt at giving Henson's creations their own contemporary sitcom format. The natural relevance for these characters comes and goes in waves, but a good film is always a good film. Happytime Murders is sadly not that movie, and we'll likely have to wait a while for another. My rating 4/10
Padmaavat (2018)
I got fooled by the hype!
SPOILER: What do you get when you have Bhansali, Ranveer, Deepika and Shahid in a movie? Well, I can't believe I'm saying this but sometimes you just get a shitty movie! Shahid is utterly miscast as a warrior king. He looks like a puffed up frog next to Ranveer and just doesn't cut it in this world. But the movie itself is honestly....terrible. The plot mechanics, basic story elements are just filled with illogical scenes. The CGI is horrendous! People are offended by this movie for various reasons but here I was offended by the bad CGI. The songs are just plain bad, two of them are so sudden and misplaced that you just end up laughing out loud. Never does it reach the level of Hum Dil De Chuke Sanam, Devdas and Bajirao Mastani either visually or musically.
Now, Ranveer as Khilji is committed, looks great but the character is hollow because the film maker is in love with the actor. Never do we see Khijli's savagery or rumoured bisexuality. There is this idea that he's in search of LOVE but let's be honest, he was going to rape a queen...he wasn't some misunderstood bad boy. The violence, the sexual themes, religious differences in this war...everything is just disneyfied for prettiness and that's just bad cause it's not a Disney movie, it's a warrior movie and Bhansali should have make it like one. The slow-motion scenes are another minus point in this movie, the turban-tying and holi-rubbing are taking such a long-ass time. Shahid and Deepika have no chemistry, whatsoever. Why Padmawati falls in love with this symbol of hollow masculinity that is Raja Ratan Singh? No reason is given. The entire Rajput's strategy has dug a big hole and get captured.
The final fight should have been like Troy, but Shahid and Ranveer are mismatched. It's doesn't seem Shahid is interested at all. There is supposed to be a scheme and escape ending in a tragic sacrifice but we have terrible CGI instead taking all the air out. What also annoyed me is the lack of world building. Where is Mewar? What is Chittor? Is Khijli's throne in Delhi? And how does it take to get from one place to the other? How did Ratan Singh get kidnapped with all his guards outside the tent? Is Ratan Singh a good king, we should root for? Is he a warrior? Never is this established so all the showdowns with Khijli mean nothing. Also the betrayal that kicks off the war is never explained? Why was the priest watching???? Like I've said before, this movie is just filled with illogical loopholes and the movie is sooooo long like almost 3 hours.
Padmavat fails to establish emotional connect as the writing is pale and withdrawn. Despite all its opulence and grandeur that is a given in a SLB film it still does not have the "heart" that is associated in such films. Battle-scenes wise, sadly there is more action in the streets than in the film.
Star Wars: Episode VIII - The Last Jedi (2017)
Probably the worst Star Wars movie ever!
I hated it. Although, there are many reasons but the one I would like to point out is lack of character development for Snoke, no backstory and origin and then killing him just like that. Same thing goes for Rey's parents, for two years they were trying to tell us that who are her parents, then we found out they are basically nobodies. Casino scenes were so pointless. Leia flying scenes, wtf was that!? and slapstick humour every 10 minutes...I mean, there is a time and place for funny moments, but even serious scenes are getting ruined by so much jokes. It's like I was watching a parody of Star Wars and I like watching parodies but Star Wars movie should feel like a Star Wars movie, you know like dark and gritty. Overall, the movie in this trilogy felt like 'Attack of the Clones' rather than 'Empire Strikes Back'.
Blade Runner 2049 (2017)
In the league of best sequels
Honestly, I was dreading the sequel since I came to know about it cause it's been 35 years and the main hurdle was to justify the existence of the sequel, it was just impossible to surpass or even making as brilliant as the first movie directed by Ridley Scott, it was a hard act to follow but when Denis Villeneuve came on board as a director, I was building hopes for it, afterall the guy has directed some excellent sci- fi movies. I'm glad to say this that the director has done justice to the franchise and also to the Blade Runner fans.
If someone hasn't watched the first movie yet, then they should cause you need to know who are the characters and what they do cause this is very much a continuation. It's not just in the same world, it is a much later chapter in the same story with an entirely new character – Ryan Gosling as K who like Harrison Ford as Deckard, hunts replicants (synthetic humans) who have escaped their owners and are considered dangerous. Where that story goes, I'll let you find out on screen, but it reaches back frequently to part one.
The sequel is over two and a half hours, still it's well-paced and manages to earn it's long run time. It's used to properly chew over huge ideas and to build a world so detailed you can imagine its existence far beyond the edges of the screen. Like first, the movie is a philosophical drama in a blockbuster clothing.The story by Hampton Fancher, writer of the original, goes much deeper into the theme of what it means to be alive and of humanity as obsolete hardware. This isn't exactly an action-packed movie. Neither was the first. It leaves you more shaken than most action movies do by plunging you into a world so fascinating and enveloping that to be ripped from it and thrust back into reality brings on something like the bends.
Cinematographer Roger Deakins who is well known for his ability to frame a beautiful image, Blade Runner 2049 is a breathtakingly gorgeous film to look at and that's also in no small part. When it comes to the songs and holograms, they are mere facsimiles but the emotions they evoke are real.
It's a triumph with really good performances by the cast, and the crew behind the camera. With this movie, Villeneuve has again confirmed himself as one of the best director currently working in Hollywood.
Haseena Parkar (2017)
Go watch Haseena, if you want Paseena
The weak screenplay together with a fragile plot that lacks interesting twists, is the undoing of the film. It fails to engage you from scene one. The courtroom too lacks drama and appears a tad amateurish and staged. Even glimpses of Dawood Ibrahim and Haseena's early life fail to keep you hooked or offer anything interesting. Be it the riots, shootouts, emotional scenes, everything seems forced and tackily handled. The use of 3D animation in the scene of the Mumbai bomb blasts of 1993, for example.The characters are one- dimensional and the plot is wafer-thin. The dialogues are steeped in mediocrity and in fact in some serious scenes, they were not executed very well.
Shraddha Kapoor makes a bad attempt in trying to portray the journey of Haseena from a young girl to a married woman and ultimately a widow who is geared to shoulder the responsibility of her family and neighbour hood. It is also the script which fails her and in several scenes makes her appear theatrical and unreal. Her get up too is not entirely convincing. Siddhanth Kapoor as Dawood Ibrahim on the other hand fails to make an impact. He appears a misfit in a powerful character like this and perhaps again, the script limits him.
On the production front, the film is poorly mounted and fails to recreate the 1980s and 1990s to perfection. Montages with newspaper clippings, stock shots lend a hurriedly and carelessly feel to the entire film. Even the actions sequences lack finesse. The music by Sachin-Jigar, is nothing to write home about and does not in any way contribute to elevating the flavour or the context of the narrative.
Overall, what could have been a strong film, well- researched, stimulating and perhaps hard-hitting film, ends up as a poorly executed court room spectacle sans any drama. Shraddha Kapoor is just not menacing as Haseena Parker and I can't stand her face throughout the movie, it's like there are Gulab Jamuns inside her mouth which she is not trying to eat until the guests leave lol. Avoid this movie at any cost, folks or you can watch Haseena, if you want paseena.
Simran (2017)
Simran is just OK at best
Praful is an NRI who lives in America and works as housekeeping staff in a hotel. America is known as land of the free and the home of the brave, but she still lives with her parents so how free and brave can she really be? Especially when she's a 30-year-old divorcée? Praful's frustration comes across as real and believable. It's not overly sentimentalized but you can feel it under your skin, nevertheless. Kangana did an good job as a Gujrati immigrant women but the script, however, doesn't match up...also it doesn't help that the movie run time is like 4 hours. First half is somewhat enjoyable but all that is ruined by the pace of the movie in the second half, the writing is weak and the direction is not so convincing, knowing that this movie is coming from an director like Hansal Mehta who has directed movies like Shahid and Citylights, looks like he has missed the mark this time.
The story is inspired from the life of Sandeep Kaur, a Punjabi Indian woman who robbed banks in the US to support her expensive lifestyle. But Simran doesn't take this devolution seriously enough. In its determination to keep the proceedings light, the plot ends up making things look too easy and convenient. I did take guilty pleasure from the car chase towards the end that had the FBI look like incompetent clowns though. Hollywood has made them look too good for ages. When it comes to romance, there's a bit of it with a Mr Nice Guy who turns up to rescue Praful from her difficult circumstances, while their relationship is sweet though, it becomes an unnecessary distraction after a point. The dude is just too nice, put him in a ghagra and he'd be a 90s heroine. The other characters in the film are all one note and don't really make an impression.
If you're a Kangana fan, you can forgive the film for its flaws if only to see 'Simran' running to catch a metaphorical train...not for a happy ending with a man, but for a beginning for herself. If you're going to watch this movie thinking the experience would be like Queen and Tanu weds Manu then prepare to be heavily disappointed cause in reality, it's far from it and just OK at best.
Jab Harry Met Sejal (2017)
Jab Harry met Sejal and told her not to watch the movie
What happened to Shahrukh from Chak De India and Swadesh? That Shahrukh who used to do good movies like that and now he keeps churning out bad movies back to back. Can anyone call that old Shahrukh and send this new Shahrukh to whatever hellhole he came from!? This movie is no different from his earlier movies he has done before, it's not even an original movie but a copy of Hollywood romantic classic "When Harry met Sally". They will tell you it's different..yeah, right! If Shahrukh is not going to do a original movie and copy-paste some movie and then at least do it properly...you had one job for god sake!!!
Shakrukh is 51 years old but still he is doing romantic movies, he should start doing movies which suits his age. In this movie, he is playing a lover boy who is in his 20s-30s. He looks more like a grandfather of Anushka than her love interest. Shahrukh did an overacting as usual, just horrible horrible like he is suffering from seizure which is coming every one minute. If that's not his acting and that's how he has became in real life, then he should check those seizures out from a doctor, my sympathy for him and although, sometimes Anushka does an amazing job but in this, she has those expressions in her face which makes me want to punch her. I think that has to do with her botched lip surgery, that's why she can't emote and speak properly. While they travels the world together in this movie, they should go to a doctor together too.
What to say about this movie? Nothing new, just another one where boy meet girl, girl meet boy and then they eventually fall in love with each other like we haven't seen clichés like this which has been rehashed like 5677234556 times. The movie was so awful that I should be given some kind of award for managed to sit throughout the end. Firstly I don't find the story enjoyable. To make a whole film about two people meeting through various stages of their lives and slowly, or should I say very slowly, starting a relationship is boring. Secondly I did not find anything funny. I was looking for some laughs, but it turned to be a total dud, like it's trying too hard to be funny. I could not focus on the film and whatever story there was in it, because dialogues were mostly forced and unnecessarily long. Maybe this is poor writing, maybe poor editing, but in any case, it resulted in a film that is hard to watch. What happened to the directer like Imtiaz Ali like his mind was too distracted while making this movie.
You will only like this movie if you are too blinded by love for Shahrukh that you refuse to see any fault in his movie. They won't even agree with my review too like I'm not allowed to give an constructive criticism like you can see how they are giving this movie 9-10. I bet most of them haven't even seen the movie. Then again, it's the case with most of the Shahrukh movies where fake up voting is necessary so that general public can't see how piece of crap his movies are actually are. So watch this movie if you're a Shahrukh fan and if you are neutral like I am, then prepare to be disappointed AGAIN!!!!!
Dunkirk (2017)
Probably the most historically inaccurate war movie
As a person who respect Christopher Nolan as a director, I was so excited that he is finally making a war movie, but Dunkirk left me disappointed. It is probably the most historically inaccurate war movie that has ever made.There is no mention of Indian soldiers who were also fighting in Battle of Dunkirk. Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk, claimed that Britons stood alone against Germany once France fell,when, in fact, hundreds of millions of Indian soldiers were also fighting with them.They were led by Mr Dawson who answers the call for a civilian armada and sets across the channel in his little boat to take part in the great evacuation.
There is no room in the film for the pluck of the hundreds of thousands of soldiers from undivided India who fought for the British in that war, the largest volunteer army in history. At least four companies of the Royal Indian Army Service Corps served in France during the campaign and three contingents were evacuated from Dunkirk and one taken prisoner by the Germans.
One of the evacuated officer, Jemadar Maula Daud Khan even won a Distinguished Service Medal for showing magnificent courage, coolness and decision. When his troop was shelled from the ground and bombed from the air by the enemy he promptly reorganised his men and animals, got them off the road and under cover under extremely difficult conditions, but there is nothing about him in Dunkirk.
Nor does the film have any room for the many lascars who operated the merchant ships that came to rescue the British troops stranded on the beach. By 1938, one in four crewmen on merchant ships were lascars mostly from South Asia and East Africa. Instead the only brown to be seen in the film is the tea that the Englishwomen offer the English soldiers scrambling aboard the rescue boats and ships.Even the Indian mules, some 2,500 were shipped from Mumbai to Marseilles, did not get a cameo.
Like I said I respect Nolan as a director but now I have realised that making a war movie is not his forte. How I wish another director or director/actor who has proved himself in making a war movie and still currently active in the Hollywood would have directed it because Dunkirk was an very important part of history that I am sorry to say, have gone bad in the hands of Nolan. I hardly write a review but others were claming it "the mother of all realistic war movies" and I couldn't just let that go so Dunkirk compelled me to write one. My rating is 1/10 for balancing out the unwarranted 10s full of biased reviews.
Raees (2017)
Another FAN by Shahrukh
This movie is like another fan, it's not a compliment cause this movie is that bad. First half is okayish but second half is so long and boring...disappointed. Efforts put into publicity is directly proportional to how bad the movie is. Raees is like dejavu of the worst 'action' films from the 80s. Shahrukh should stop doing action roles, he doesn't suit in them at all and continue to do the only thing he's good at and that's romance. He doesn't have the physical stature or inherent attitude that made Amitabh pull off the most far-fetched of scenes with panache. Nor is he believable as the poor, wronged boy turned angry young man. He doesn't have the angst, the fire that made Amitabh so effective. Even though, the only good thing about this crap is Nawazuddin performance, he as a policemen completely overshadowed shahrukh but a policeman going after alcohol sellers in a dry state is hardly the stuff that stirs the soul. This movie is strictly for Shahrukh fans, only they can eat this crap, as you can see how they are giving this movie 9-10 rating. Leave your brain at home and bring daring to watch this movie.
Sultan (2016)
On the league of Bajrangi Bhaijaan
This movie is challenging "Bajrangi Bhaijaan".. both in terms of positive reviews by the critics and praising from the public. People are comparing Sultan to Bajrangi, gotta say Salman once again has given the best performance in his career, movie has the repeat value like watching it again and again. The director has brought out the best from Salman....Anushka surprised me as a wrestler, she was amazing, brilliant performance from both of them. This movie has class stamped all over it. Sultan is a touching love story with emotions, comedy, action & a powerful message; Never let success get to your head, it is complete winner, everything is just perfect be it acting,music,emotions,direction,cinematography.
Dilwale (2015)
Even worse than Chennai Express and Happy New Year
I have no idea why this movie is getting higher ratings in here, must be bots up-voting the horrible movie. The movie was a pain to watch, with a handful of original comic moments. Shah Rukh Khan did a pretty horrible job of acting. Its disappointing that another bad movie of Shahrukh will do so well in the box office. Seriously, where are Bollywood's standards. I understand this is supposed to be a comedy/drama movie, but come on. Oh well, its made by Rohit Shetty, could not have expected anything better. The direction is horrible, more of a Tamil/Tollywood movie than a Bollywood movie. Cars flying, hero beating the crap out of 5-10 guys at once, I guess that turns on the audience.