Om Shanti Om, a review by dfmorgan
Director: Farah Khan
Cast: Shah Rukh Khan, Arjun Rampal, Deepika Padukone
Overview: The makers of 'Main Hoon Na' are back with the biggst film of 2007!
Farah Khan, one of the most accomplished directors in India, weaves a spectacular story of romance, revenge and reincarnation.
'Om Shanti Om' is a romantic saga of a boy next door, Om Prakash Makhija (Shah Rukh Khan) who works as a junior artiste in bollywood in the 70's. He is madly in love with the superstar of that time, Shantipriya (Deepika Padukone). His dreams and aspirations to become a superstar and be with his lady love are thwarted as he witnesses the brutal murder of his beloved Shantipriya by a mercenary producer Mukesh Mehra (Arjun Rampal). Om Prakash dies, trying to save his Shanti.
But destiny has something else in store when 'Om Prakash' a junior artiste returns as 'Om Kapoor' the superstar of 2007! His journey of rediscovering himself, his past life and avenging the death of his beloved is the story of 'Om Shanti Om!
'Om Shanti Om' is a tribute, especially to the joyous and exultant era of Bollywood - the swinging 70's! It has captured the imagination of the audiences worldwide with its dramatic storytelling, musical narration and stunning performances, making it the 'Highest Grossing film of Bollywood ever!'
Watched: 5th Mar. 2011
My Thoughts: I quite enjoyed this film. Many of the references to Bollywood old and new were lost on me with my current lack of depth of knowledge about Bollywood but that didn't detract from the overall enjoyment. The big climatic song at the end for the final reveal reminded me very much of Sir Andrew Lloyd Webber's "The Phantom of the Opera"
My Rating: An enjoyable 3
(From Dave's DVD/Blu-ray Reviews on March 6th, 2011)
Love in the Time of Cholera, a review by KinkyCyborg
Title:Love in the Time of Cholera
Director: Mike Newell
Length: 138 Min.
Video: Anamorphic Widescreen 2.35:1
Audio: English: Dolby Digital: 5.1, English: Dolby Digital: 2-Channel Stereo
Subtitles: English, Spanish
Gina Bernard Forbes
In the lush tropics of South America, an innocent desire blossoms into a romance for the ages in this stunning epic starring Academy Award® nominee* Javier Bardem (Before Night Falls, No Country for Old Men). At the turn of the 20th century, youthful romantic Florentino Ariza spots the stunning and sheltered Fermina Daza and immediately falls in love. Denied by her father, Florentino refuses to give up his dream of winning her hand...even if that means waiting decades to fill the passion in his heart.
*2000: Actor, Before Night Falls
A sweeping love story that is both touching and pathetic at the same time... a man moons over a woman he can't have for more than 50 years only to finally fulfill his dream when he has one foot already in the grave.
Javier Bardem shows his immense range as an actor with this performance. I find his character's life tremendously humorous as he pledges his undying love for one woman and yet as the years pass he gets more ass than a toilet seat.
Hector Elizondo is great as his uncle and benefactor who mentors and grooms his nephew in business while unwillingly catering to his ridiculous obsession.
Women will love this movie for obvious reasons. Men will like it for the buckets full of irony and the many exposed boobies.
(From KinkyCyborg's Random Reviews 2010 on August 2nd, 2010)
Tom's Buffy and Angel Marathon, a review by Tom
01. City of Angels (1999-10-05)
Writer: Joss Whedon (Created By), David Greenwalt (Created By), Joss Whedon (Writer), David Greenwalt (Writer)
Director: Joss Whedon
Cast: David Boreanaz (Angel), Charisma Carpenter (Cordelia Chase), Glenn Quinn (Doyle), Tracy Middendorf (Tina), Vyto Ruginis (Russel Winters), Christian Kane (Lindsey McDonald), Jon Ingrassia (Stacy), Renee Ridgeley (Margo), Sam Pancake (Manager), Josh Holloway (Good Looking Guy), Gina McClain (Janice), Michael Mantell (Oliver Simon (uncredited))
A good start to the series. Back then I was a little skeptical that a Angel series could work, but this episode had shown, that this series has potential.
Maybe a little too much exposition forced into it, to get new viewers up-to-date.
But what is with the ugly and strange vampire make-up in this episode? I don't remember if this new make-up was just an experiment in the beginning of the series, or if it was actually used throughout the Angel series like that.
I have just read on Wikipedia, that they tried a new vampire look in this episode, but were unhappy with it and returned to the vampire look known from Buffy.
(From Tom's Buffy and Angel Marathon on March 6th, 2009)