Change Your Image
adithyasivas-234-471768
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Lists
An error has ocurred. Please try againReviews
The Accused (1988)
Shocking and highly relevant, even today.
There are so many rapes which take place in every country around the world, every minute. Many people hardly do anything about it, and this movie focuses on that. It explores a lot of themes, mainly, that instigators are just as responsible for rape, as the actual perpetrators are. The complexity of the lead character, and her lawyer are commendable, being that this was among the very first movies which dealt with rape on a huge basis. Towards the end, there is the recounting of the rape, which might be highly disturbing for some to see, but this is what happens around us, and many of us hardly do anything about it. Jodie Foster is exceptional in her truly well deserved Oscar performance here. Kelly McGillis, herself a rape victim, plays a lawyer with tremendous character. This is high intensity drama at its best, and explores situations where the woman is put the blame upon for wearing over-revealing clothes, or behaving in a certain way so as to attract males, which is false, of course. Flirtatious, or being over-friendly does not account for the woman saying yes to her opposite sex, which many males mistake even today. And this ends up in rape, and leads to disgusting "reasoning" for their actions. It is highly imperative that all of us watch this movie, and learn a lesson.
True Detective (2014)
Season One. Brilliant.
I had just completed viewing season one, and I am reviewing this anthology series without any knowledge on how the second season went about. McConaughey and Harrelson, with a strong cast of supporting actors make this series binge-worthy. Before proceeding, I have to make it clear that I am a huge fan of detective thrillers. I had just finished viewing Mindhunter's epic first season and the third season of Bosch when I came across this. When I did start viewing, from the get go, the episodes took on a dark tone of storytelling. The non-linear style teleplay also aided in its mysterious aura to a huge extent. All that being said, it truly is a two-men show of Harrelson who whizzes through his scenes with a hint of charm and huge amount of grittiness. McConaughey is exceptional. He plays an emotionless, chain-smoking character whose intentions are made clear with his backstory, not over-developed, but revealed the right amount. Harrelson's character is just the opposite. He plays Detective Hart, a man with loyalty and drinking issues. What happens when these two are paired up, two polarizing characters, to solve a case, its hardships, and how they end up at a closure forms the story. Again, I have no idea on how the second season is, this being an anthology, but it is every bit worth watching for its first season alone and it definitely is great on its own. Do watch it.
Inside Look: The People v. O.J. Simpson - American Crime Story (2016)
One of the most realistic docu-dramas on the Case of the Century!
I had seen the Investigation Discovery documentary which did not have any commentary whatsoever, rather, just the implementation of letting the real-time footage speak for themselves and it was excellent. All crime cases spur me on to read or dig in deeper about them, and this was no exception. This was also the first time I had learned about O.J. Simpson after hearing his name and case in passing for a long period of time. I had heard mentions of O.J. on the Adult TV series, South Park, and really wasn't curious to know much further. I knew he existed, and that was all. But, upon watching the documentary, and various interviews of him, after the case, and the people who were involved, I felt I wanted to know more about the case; educated would be too far-fetched a word, so I'll use the word: "curious". And I came across this T.V. series by FX. I didn't need anybody to tell me to watch it; I immediately did so myself! The first episode is terrific, and that's all I have seen until now, so this review may seem biased, but the overall accumulation of reviews are anyway way on the upwards of 8 so it really wouldn't matter. Being a David Schwimmer fan, and a die- hard John Travolta fan made me want to watch this series even more! Go for it! I'm sure the remaining episodes are going to be as taut and thrilling as the first one!
Hereafter (2010)
Another masterful flick from the sagacious Eastwood.
I had avoided this movie ever since I had come across it, probably for a year or so, going merely by the review aggregates of the Rotten Tomatoes, Metacritic, and IMDb, who had also lambasted this movie.
A user had pointed out (going by the name of 'viewerindepth' from Egypt): "I can't believe I was gonna miss it because of bad reviews!" His statement was spot-on.
Usually, a couple of movies that did not fare well with RT and Metacritic are relinquished on IMDb. ("Payback" for instance.) But not this. I desperately wonder why.
I'm not gonna reveal ANYTHING whatsoever about this movie; but I will tell you this:
I have been on an Eastwood movie watching frenzy for the past couple of weeks and I chose this movie as a last resort because I'd already had the DVD and could not get my hands on his "Blood Work" just yet.
I have to admit, I was hooked from the first frame. The movie has a very unique screenplay that has to be seen to be understood. It has an ensemble cast, and although the movie does not delve into the complexities of the subject matter much, nevertheless, I'm sure 90% of the audience would understand what it tries to convey after watching it.
I came across a couple of reviews which underlined Eastwood's pronto direction, and Damon's performance, but undermined the screenplay and pointed out that the movie just does not come to the point. I can understand why those set of people do not like it, or get it; the point of the movie is not of the in-your-face sorts, but is still magical if you're in for a Shakespearean treatment.
"Why Shakespearean?" you may ask. Because you'll understand and be able to endure what the movie wishes to put forth upon you only if you allow yourself to think outside the box, and make all the correct assumptions. Don't get me wrong; 'assumptions' was used in a totally metaphorical sense. That said, you will love this movie if you just let it play without asking too many questions, and immerse yourself into what it is trying to convey.
You must definitely give it a watch; and if you do not get it, give it a watch again, because the movie is exceptional and has an 80-year-old Eastwood showing his badassery and command over directing, yet again.
Blood Work (2002)
6.4 out of 10??? Seriously??
Alright, I'm gonna keep my reviews and thoughts short and sweet.
I think this movie did not get as much as it deserved. Of course we have the overacting of the actor who portrays Arrango; my God, the dude overacts from the first scene in which he is present and as the movie progresses, one cannot stand him! But man, what a brilliant story! You cannot simply guess the ending! Just when you think that you've got it all figured out, you have a substantial plot twist, which by the time you come to the end of the movie it may seem abrupt, but it's brilliant! Eastwood is a bit of a lesser badass than most of his previous lead encounters; but if you're expecting a Dirty Harry sort of movie, then DO NOT have similar expectations, because comparing the two are like comparing Apples and Oranges; the two are not alike.
I'm not gonna discuss the movie's plot-line. It's just a great suspense/thriller with Clint Eastwood at his most un-badass-like with a bad ticker. The cinematography, the acting and the top notch direction accompanied by the slick editing does wonders to this movie. Is it like a Mystic River? No. But you should watch it, because Eastwood deserves it.
The movie does seem longer than it actually is; this is totally understandable because the subject matter is of the sort. It cannot be given a Michael Bay treatment or a John Woo treatment by going overboard with the budget just because you have an action/explosion fetish. The movie seeming to be longer than it actually is actually really great.
You can also not have it in your top 10 lists; of course, there's nothing exceptionally exuberant in the movie; but it's worth your time. Absolutely. And it will not bore you even for a tinge of a second. Having an overall of 6.4/10 is an utter disgrace to the legend. With the exception of the guy who takes overacting to a whole another level, who portrays Arrango, there is absolutely nothing wrong with this movie. That is the only downside that I felt was existent. Go for it.
True Crime (1999)
Not Eastwood's best; mainly because of the ending!
The first 117-odd minutes of this film make it seem like a masterpiece. The build-up on achieving the ultimate target is flawless. But the ending seems a bit rushed. This film and subject matter does not deserve an ending like that!
All that aside, Eastwood breezes through his role and in achieving the best of directing for most of the part. All his movies have exceptional music and cinematography, and this is no less. The acting is flawless too; you love the people the movie tells you to love and you hate the people the movie tells you to hate. This is a very interesting subject matter because it deals with crime, and its intricacies, laced with a tinge of racial discrimination. How Eastwood's character derives the necessary details forms the outline to the rest of the story.
I was awestruck for the first 117-odd minutes of this movie. The rest of the movie's runtime, well, not so much. But don't go by the movie's ratings. Give it a watch, just for Eastwood and Isaiah Washington. You will not like the way that the ending was dealt with; I'll give you that.
Anger Management (2003)
Disappointing Sandler flick which Jack Nicholson has to uplift
If there wasn't Nicholson in this movie, there would've been people waiting to be rescued from the theaters. Nicholson arrives just in time to lift a rather slim storyline. There are a lot of funny moments, but it just ends up getting repetitive after a while. There's only so much a Sandler-film-viewer can tolerate, you know.
I'm not going to give any of the plot away. You can pretty much guess what it'd be after the first couple of minutes after the movie starts. But only when the story becomes totally clichéd that Nicholson steps in to lift the movie with his bare hands. It is only him and Marisa Tomei that lift the film from the bottom and make it somewhat watchable.
Adam Sandler is an actor with so much potential, but ends up making rom-coms and plainly senseless comedies. I'd love to see him in a role similar to the one in Punch Drunk Love for which he actually got nominated for a Golden Globe. He can act. There was never any doubt in that. People would just like to see more of its display in the coming years.
As Good as It Gets (1997)
A Beautifully filmed drama-comedy
No CGI. No special effects. No over-the-top action sequences. Just pure cinema.
Acting: Jack Nicholson might as well be the best actor of the later 20th century alongside Meryl Streep. Having subtle OCD myself, I was amazed at the authenticity with which Jack Nicholson displayed his role. You kind of just end up saying the wrong things at the wrong time, display hatred towards the more or less normal and sort of abnormal aspects of life, and have an obsession towards cleanliness. Jack, Helen Hunt and Greg Kinnear are the pillars of this movie. The talent which Helen brings to the table is unbelievable. Greg Kinnear does full justice to his role as well. You just feel like you've known a couple of people with similar traits all your life and that is exactly where this movie succeeds in balancing comedy with drama and realism. It isn't one of those lame Adam Sandler rom-com flicks. This movie just has a bit of everything, and keeps moving at a strong pace. You want to watch true cinema at the end of the day. This movie fulfills that duty.
The Movie: Not one minute of this movie's runtime would you feel bored and just curious to just press the fast forward button. You feel like you're in the movie. Jack Nicholson is a legend. Truly. Helen Hunt joins the fun by bringing an equal amount of realism to her craft. She plays a loving mother who works as a waitress and is just looking for a male companion who would understand her situation and cater to both her son's and her own needs. Jack Nicholson is an author and an OCD infused character who goes to the restaurant where she serves and just does not feel comfortable if she doesn't serve him. Greg Kinnear's back story and how the three get connected and how the story moves forward is the basic crux of the film. Besides all these things, there are also a lot of beautiful themes that one must look upon, such as: A younger woman and an older man. Can they be romantically compatible?
There are definitely more themes, but I don't want to give them away and end up spoiling the viewer's experience of the movie.
Story, Screenplay and Direction:
James L. Brooks definitely does justice to Mark Andrus's taut screenplay. It's like they both complement each other. There is not one wasted shot, and no wasted screen-time for any of the actors. It is just beautifully evened out. Hans Zimmer provides a fun-filled background score, which is vastly different from the scores he writes today. I didn't know that it was Zimmer's score until I went through the credits. John Bailey's cinematography is beautiful and makes you wonder if this really was a 1997 film.
Overall, this is a wonderful film which has many recurring themes, and must be watched at least twice. I hadn't known that this was nominated for a couple of Oscars, and actually ended up winning two until I had finished watching the film. But then, I really felt that Nicholson, Helen Hunt, and Greg should at least have been nominated for their work in the film, and was glad to see that Nicholson and Helen won an Oscar for their work. This was Jack's 3rd Oscar win with a whopping 12 nominations and Helen's first win and nomination. Just sit back on one beautiful day and enjoy this 139-minute film to its fullest.
Heartburn (1986)
A Highly Underrated Film
Am I blind, or did I just see that this film has an overall rating of 6.0/10 on IMDb and a 47% approval rating on RottenTomatoes?
Acting:
Alright, so let me start this review by stating that I'm a die-hard fan of Jack Nicholson. So, I might be slightly transparent about the flaws of the movie, but there aren't many. This film is very hard to get a hold of actually. I stumbled upon a used DVD store and being a collector of Jack Nicholson's films and a huge fan, I immediately purchased it. I hadn't ever heard of this film until then and made a quick research on IMDb and Wikipedia about the movie. This movie's story is written by Nora Ephron and is loosely based on her life and relationship with real-life journalist Carl Bernstein. On paper, the story of the movie goes like this: Divorced woman meets a sort-of heartless playboy, falls for him, marries him, has children with him, and leaves him after figuring out that he's been cheating on her. Sounds so simple, but in reality, it isn't. That's the reason why we have veteran actors like Nicholson and Meryl Streep on board. Meryl Streep is brilliant. Totally. Even in totally clichéd scenes, she performs to her fullest. Many people might be surprised, but this is actually the first film of Meryl Streep I've seen. I had always wanted to see her work ever since learning that she has the most number of Academy Award nominations for Best Actress or Supporting Actress, but never really got around to doing so. I wonder what her really brilliant performances would be like, if this was off the hook itself. Jack Nicholson plays the uber cool guy he always is and as we always have more often than not, there is a scene of him going totally crazy. But I don't want to give away too many things. You should check out the movie for yourself. This movie also marks the feature-film debut of Kevin Spacey, whom I was quite surprised to see actually, but it turned out that it was only a small cameo.
Story, Screenplay and Direction:
Enough about actors. Lets get down to the story, screenplay and ultimately, the execution of the overall film. This film is ultra-realistic. Except a couple of teeny-tiny moments in the film, you'll be surprised at how super realistic that this film is. Being born in the 90s, I was able to get a slight sense of how life revolved in the 80s and was super-thrilled and totally upset in not being able to experience the US of that era. That is also where the film goes awry, in a sense. It is so realistic, that it loses itself onto you at a point where you wouldn't know what is going on. There are hints of Mark (Jack Nicholson) being a brilliant and a sincere reporter, but we really don't get to see much of that. However, we do get to see a couple of scenes of Rachel (Meryl Streep) working in her NY paper where she's a food journalist, but it doesn't go beyond that. Basically, the emphasis is so much on the character's emotions, especially Streep's, that the film kind of weighs down a bit when you reach the 58 minute mark. Other than this slight niggle, this film is amazing. Streep showcases her character's emotions so perfectly that you actually start to feel for her and get a tight sense of what her character is going through. Jack Nicholson shines in whatever scene he's in, as always, but is ultimately weighed down by a superb display by Meryl Streep. I was surprised that she hadn't gotten an Oscar Nomination for this, but hey, Nicholson didn't either, for 'The Shining (1980)', which was one of his best works in the 80s.
Technical Work:
The cinematography is top-notch too, considering the fact that this was the 80s. I had initially thought that this was a Stanley Kubrick film, which always has the best camera work. But it was good to know that Mike Nichols also had an affinity towards great camera work and composition to each and every scene. Lastly, I had learned that this film had become even more popular because of the superb musical score by Carly Simon. 'Coming Around Again' is too good. Whoever you are, whatever era you were born into, you would surely have heard this song, even if you might not be able to recognize it just by reading the name.
Overall, this is a brilliant film, with a very few cons. You should definitely watch it, if only for Meryl Streep's performance.
This is a very, very highly underrated film.
Trisha Illana Nayanthara (2015)
Misleading and Over-hyped Adult Comedy
**This review does not contain spoilers**
First off, let me get a few things straight. I did NOT watch this movie with any great expectations. And I didn't try to nitpick that much. I was ready to accept anything which happens in this movie because I knew this movie would be filled with many slapstick comedy sequences with satire and black comedy.
But this movie eventually adds up to none of the aforementioned categories. I have to definitely accept that there are stupendously funny sequences here and there. Anandhi's dub syncing is also commendable and kudos to her. But, ultimately this movie adds up to nothing. At one point you think this is a satire, and at another you think that this movie is a Adam Sandler-like movie.
There really isn't any message. The storyline of this movie is so very simple that I can sum it up in a couple of sentences: 1. Boy meets two girls. 2. Boy has feelings for both the girls, but chooses the readily available one. 3. Boy and girl break up. 4. Boy gets into a relationship with the second girl. 5. Boy ultimately breaks up with the second girl and gets back with first girl only to break up with her again. 6. The end. I'm not nitpicking. Another problem with this movie is that it is filled with sexist lines. The main character in the movie wants his girlfriend to be a virgin. And he feels that she shouldn't drink, at all.
I guess it was intended to be comedic, but it just is plainly sexist. Nothing less. Of course, it is also filled with many sexual references many of which you can find in Boys which came out in 2003. Speaking of Boys (2003) the main reason why that movie worked perfectly and this doesn't is because TIN tries so hard to be catering to the young guys of today that it soaks itself into nothing. It seems like they've made this movie just to get an 'A' (adult) rating, so that they can attract the youth. Boys (2003) works and it was rated U/A and was also filled with many double-meaning dialogs and many references.
G.V. Prakash, no doubt, shines, given that its only the second movie in which he's acted. Other than a comedic chemistry between VTV Ganesh and G.V. Prakash, and a couple of other scenes, this movie just tries to miserably emulate Boys (2003). You can watch this movie, but just don't expect any impactive social message, or something different, because you'd be very much disappointed. Just enjoy the two hours of runtime with a vastly open mind. If you're looking for something about the youth, with adult humour, and social messages, watch Boys (2003) instead.
American History X (1998)
Edward Norton Steals The Show
This is by far, one of the greatest films I've ever seen which tackles the issues on racism, social inequalities and stereotypes.
The movie is basically about a neo-Nazi skinhead who is an extreme racist, and part of a supremacist group mainly because of influences from his father, and Cameron Alexander, who is a hate-writer and a racist on the same grounds as his father.
We don't get to see it much, but Cameron mainly serves as a father figure for Derek, which is why he does half the things he does throughout the course of the plot. How Derek finally realizes his mistakes, and reforms as a good and normal human being forms the crux of the plot.
The movie swings between black and white visuals, and color, the former which signifies the skinhead days and flashback of the Vinyard family which is told in both Derek and his brother's perspective, and the latter being the new and reformed Derek's story.
Edward Norton is the main show-stealer in this movie. After Primal Fear, and Fight Club, this is a 30 pound heavier Norton who plays a badass, and a normal human being throughout the course of the film. Tony Kaye's cinematography is brilliant, as is Anne Dudley's superb compositions which reverberate throughout the film's runtime.
I was surprised that only Edward got an Oscar nomination, which he did not win (another surprise). I also felt that Tony Kaye, the film and Anne Dudley's score should also have been recognized.
Other than a few niggles here and there, such as the actress who plays Norton's girlfriend in the movie's not so great performance, this movie is a treat to watch from the first minute.
A must-watch.
Yennai Arindhaal (2015)
Thala Ajith Steals the Show!
When you have Ajith, Gautham Vasudev Menon, and Harris Jayaraj working together in a film, you can expect only one thing. Exuberant class. This film brings an end to GVM's police trilogy, and what an amazing piece of work to do so! From his moment of entry, Thala Ajith oozes charisma. Hats off to GVM for mixing a few commercial elements of classic Ajith as well as giving him a few intense acting scenes.
The few English dialogues in between, and the muted foul language add more to the excitement of this film. The script is fast-paced, and, in my opinion, not draggy for even one second. Dan Macarthur's ravishing camera work is pure bliss and Harris's background score is insane! Compared to Harris Jayaraj's previous few films, this has got to be his best soundtrack in recent times.
The film is all about the life of a man named Satyadev and the events that happen in his life from the time he is thirteen years of age, till the time he is 39. Trisha looks wonderful and this is one of her best performances till date. The transition is shown perfectly, and the chemistry between Satyadev and his adopted daughter works perfectly. Arun Vijay provides full justice to his character, as does Vivek, Trisha, Anushka and others. Vivek's portions in the film provide a much needed relief for a rather dark and intriguing screenplay.
Two sides of Ajith are shown through this film. His natural acting talent, and his tremendous screen presence. The fight sequences and the sound engineering accompanying it is so well done. The final twist in the climax, and the final fight sequence are done brilliantly well.
Do not leave immediately after the roll of credits! I think it would be fair to say that out of the three movies in the police trilogy of GVM, this has got to be the best.
Ajith, Gautham Vasudev Menon, Harris Jayaraj, and Dan Macarthur have come up with a brilliant film that is sure to stay in our hearts forever.