Reviews

Aamir Khan must understand that he cannot fool the audience with an illogical and unrealistic climax.If a thriller does not thrill then it is not doing it's job.Talaash is not stimulating.What I mean by "stimulating" is adrenaline-rushing and heart pounding or keeping you at the edge of your seat. Each scene in Talaash failed to reveal something new, no matter how slight it is.And Reema Kagit the director, please don't tell us about stuff that has nothing to do with the story. I feel that the single greatest characteristic of a thriller is the obvious one. It "thrills" as one watches it. The plots are scary, the characters are at great risk and the novels are constructed in a manner that makes the reader really want to turn the page. Vijay Anand's Teesri Manzil,Raj Khosla's "Woh Kaun thi" as well as "Mera Saaya", Yash Chopra's "Ittefaq", Raja Nawathe's "Gumnaam" are all classic thrillers.Aamir should better stick to movies which give social message. He is not good in selecting a good script for an intelligent thriller.

Legendary filmmaker Yash Chopra signed off with a flourish with his romantic drama 'Jab Tak Hai Jaan' - his last film before his death this year. The film has his signature courtships and nuanced complexities set in India and London.But the film falls far short of expectations that come attached to swansongs. Chopra, who's the master of emotional dramas such as 'Kabhie Kabhie' and 'Silsila', simply fails to create a magnum opus with JTHJ. The scrutiny is greater because Shah Rukh Khan, the protagonist of the film, is back to the genre he ruled for over two decades before experimenting with science fiction and negative roles in classic remakes.So what went wrong in 'Jab Tak Hai Jaan'? And how could the film have been a better send-off for the iconic director.'Jab Tak Hai Jaan' falls far short of expectations that come attached to swansongs.Plot: For starters - the film is weighed down due to the lack of a cohesive plot. The film hinges on one women's promise to God to stay away from the man she loves for the rest of her life. It's not only far-fetched, it's downright silly. She makes that promise right after he is hit by a car. She makes her peace with Jesus Christ in the end, but not before she has wasted 10 years of her life. Shah Rukh on the other hand returns to India and enlists for the Indian Army - age be damned. The man who was shown waiting tables in London because he wasn't cut out for any specialized career, becomes the army's most coveted bomb disposal expert, to hell with logic. People expecting a tragic twist in the end were rewarded with a happy ending to the romance that waited its turn. But somehow the ending falls flat. A better screenplay would have elevated the film to another level.Cast: There is no doubting that Shah Rukh is Indian cinema's quintessential romantic hero. He's the boss in the matters of the heart. Or he was, until age begun to mark his face with its lines and creases. His 25-year-old portrayal of a busker in London just doesn't cut it. The heroines look much younger than him and his moments with Katrina came across as stiff and awkward. An older female lead cast would have worked wonders.Heroines: Heroines have always formed a crucial part of Yash Chopra's romances. From Rakhee to Rekha, Waheeda to Madhuri, the Chopra heroines are all about understated sensuality and elegance. Though immaculately turned out, Katrina is wooden throughout the film. She's glamorous and has perhaps scripted the best piece of percussive party dance number ever but fails to add depth to her character, making it very difficult for her audiences to feel any sympathy for her. Anushka Sharma as an over-eager intern for the Discovery Channel is much more believable. She tries to channel Kareena Kapoor in a 'Jab We Met'-type pitch to Shah Rukh, but for the most part she's annoyingly chatty and overdoes her brief.Music: This isn't your usual AR Rahman. The maestro's magic touch is lacking and none of the songs are memorable even after months of promotion. The selection of background voice artistes is poor, because Shah Rukh and Katrina's voice do not match with them and the resulting product jars on the ears. Different leads: Though it sounds improbable, but could Chopra have chosen different leads for his film? Though Shah Rukh makes the role his own, he does not fit into the lover-boy image at 47. Who could have worked for this role? Ranbir Kapoor would have been a good alternate choice along with Parineeti and Priyanka Chopra.Length: The length of Jab Tak Hai Jaan is a major issue. At 179 minutes it feels far too stretched. The editing could have been crisper.Attention to details: A struggling Pakistani, who could not hold down a job long enough to save some money to send back home, makes it big as the manager of a posh eatery in London in 10 years' time with the help of a fist full of bank notes. A rich NRI girl falls for the busker. A reporter shoves a camera in the face of a bomb disposal squad officer while he's defusing live ammunition. The same reporter, who is supposedly an expert swimmer, plunges into a freezing Ladakh lake for a dare and almost drowns. It's the lack of attention to details that takes away half the joy from watching JTHJ.Sex: Sex and intrigue have always been integral parts of Chopra's films. While a pair of dandelion would have sufficed in the 60s and a shot of two pairs of legs rubbing against each other in the 70s, it simply does not make the cut in 2012. Audiences are bred on much rougher stuff in films, videos and television series and the sexually loaded moments in the film fall flat.

I love to watch movies which are entertaining.So,I enjoyed watching Housefull very much because it is a very good entertaining movie without hurting the intelligence of the viewer.This is an excellent movie in terms of Bollywood entertainment.I am sure that this movie will not get any awards and this movie will not get any 5 star rating from expert critics.Sajid Khan is not the best director in Bollywood.I feel that Sajid Khan- the director is superior to many Bollywood directors because he exactly knows what the audience wants. Housefull is full of comedy.Editing is very fast.The length and time duration of the movie is correct.Production values are very good. The hero of this movie is the screenplay.This movie is made from the audience's point of movie. So, ninety percent of the movie buffs are going to enjoy watching this movie.I remember that Manmohan Desai's movies were never appreciated but people used to watch three or four times. I can assure that after you finish watching Housefull from beginning to end, you will surely have a big smile on your face.You will also like to watch it two or three times because this is a complete repeat value movie. This is not overconfidence because I have this belief that this movie is purely made for the audience.And when I say audience then it does not mean only the masses or the front benchers or single screen audience. By audience, I mean people who love to watch movies for entertainment. I feel cinema is about entertainment.No movie can change anybody's life. No movie can cure cancer. No movie can bring changes in the society. Movies are made mainly for providing entertainment. About 200 to 300 movies get released every year from Bollywood but only 5 or 6 movies become box office successes and ninety nine percent of the movie become flops. And the main reason for these flops are that these are not entertaining movies. These movies actually irritate people and that is why they become flops.Those filmmakers are making movies for themselves and not for the audience.I hate movies which irritate and bore people. I love movies which entertain people.Housefull will entertain you completely because this movie is made for the audience.

Raavan is a total disappointment everythingwise. Unfortunately, Raavan is high on hype, but low on substance. I feel that Raavan will neither appeal to connoisseurs of meaningful cinema nor strike a chord with the hardcore masses.The first half is so bad. Actually I had almost forgotten the bad experience of watching Kites. But Raavan reminded me of it again. Throughout the film, there is rainfall and waterfall everywhere. It is so slow that I took a nap for sometime because I was sure that I am not going to miss out on anything important.Abhishek is good but not very convincing. He has hammed in many scenes. His role, inspired by the mythological character Raavan, was supposed to be the most evil character and create fear whenever he enters the frame. But he comes across as a crack head. I do not want to take away the credit for his honest performance but he becomes too predictable and a bore.Mani Ratnam. The name itself is enough to generate tremendous curiosity and excitement for a film. So, as the lights go off in a cinema hall and the titles roll, you expect nothing short of a masterpiece from a master film-maker.Coming from the maker of classics like Nayakan, Roja and Bombay, his latest offering Raavan is a complete letdown. It simply fails to connect with the viewer!Director Mani Ratnam fails completely in keeping the viewer's interest alive.Frankly, Mani is letdown by the script of the film. The film tries to strike a balance between realism and make-believe, but falls flat from tip to toe. What makes matters worse is that Mani's storytelling lacks the hammer strong impact that this genre demands. In fact, the stamp of a genius is sorely missing in the film, even though the film does boast of some fine performances. But can the best of performances camouflage the harm inflicted by a weak screenplay? Never!

Rann is truly a well-made film. No two opinions on that. The film should be patronised by viewers of serious, sensible cinema.Rann is a serious film and Ram Gopal Varma knows what he's talking this time. It wouldn't be erroneous to state that you recall Ram Gopal Varma's Sarkar while watching Rann, even though the two films are as diverse as chalk and cheese. You recall Sarkar because Rann is an equally powerful film that shows a world we've only seen from the exterior. Rann is for those who enjoy serious cinema. It's more for the intelligentsia, for the thinking viewer. Definitely not for those who seek refuge in frivolous masala capers.

Veer suffers from formulaic overkill. There is just so much contrived jabber-jabber you can take about defending your honour, about duty versus love, and about drinking the blood of the British. The film's director, Anil Sharma, may have touched a chord with a similarly jingoistic approach in his Sunny Deol-starrer Gadar: Ek Prem Katha, but in Veer the chest-thumping melodrama appears mechanical and excessive. The film, then is watchable for Salman Khan's arresting screen presence, his charming romantic overtures, and a degree of involvement from him that you haven't seen before. Unfortunately, what lets Veer down in the end is the fact that it overstays its welcome. At almost two hours and forty minutes, it's way more than you can handle on an evening out. It doesn't help that key parts are filled by weak actors like Sohail Khan, Puru Raaj Kumar and Aryan Vaid who rob the film of any shred of credibility it might have otherwise earned.Watch it if you're a die-hard Salman fan. It's an epic-sized period film with tacky special effects. Unacceptable in these times. From Cameron's Pandora to Anil Sharma's Pindhari, we've come a long way. The film's action is visceral with several blood-splattered slaughter scenes, but often runs the risk of coming off as ridiculous. A Gladiator-style duel ends with Salman literally twisting a man's head 360 degrees around, and there's another one in which he yanks out a rival's insides with his bare hands.The film also suffers on account of too many songs that don't take the narrative forward, including one in which Neena Gupta jiggles and wiggles and heaves her bosom suggestively at the entire Pindhari clan including her grown-up sons who dance along merrily.Much of the film's first half holds up because there's conviction even in the stupidity. You may find it hard to believe that one man can single-handedly fight an armed gang, but Salman and his director dive into the most preposterous scenes unblinkingly.

Chance Pe Dance is only a little over two hours in running time, but feels much longer because the screenplay limps lethargically in no particular direction.Chance Pe Dance is an annoying, exhausting film that entirely fails to entertain. The dance portions here are impressively performed by Shahid Kapoor, but you could interchange each of the sequences and it would make no difference to the final film. Much of the blame for that must by shared by composer Adnan Sami who delivers an uninspired soundtrack of indifferent tunes.Chance Pe Dance doesn't work because you feel no empathy for its protagonist. The film's writers -- if you can call them that, considering there is no script to speak of -- fail to invest even a hint of vulnerability in Sameer. More so, Shahid Kapoor's surface-level performance doesn't help convey the desperation his character's supposedly feeling.The obligatory romantic track between Sameer and an upcoming choreographer (played by Genelia D'souza) is so random, it adds no dimension to the central plot. This is a film without any character arcs, or plot progression. To be honest, Chance Pe Dance is a film that probably started shooting before a script was ever written; a one-line idea that never developed into a complete story.

I saw the paid premiere of 3 idiots today.On the whole, 3 idiots is a winner all the way everythingwise.3 idiots suits the term 'landmark cinema' and has all it takes to help Bollywood take a giant step into world cinema with pride.3 idiots is a sparkling example of qualitative cinema.3 idiots not only entertains, it also enlightens.3 idiots is forward-thinking, but also makes you recall your roots. It promises lots of laughs and also a heartwarming message.There are movies aplenty, but very few remain etched in your memory and possess recall value. 3 idiots is one of those films. Indisputably and undeniably, this Aamir-Madhavan-Sharman outing is worth the price of the ticket and more.The film will set new records and has the merits to emerge one of the biggest hits of all times. The weekend business should be historic, the Week 1 business should be unparalleled, the lifetime gross should be amongst the biggest of all times. In short, 3 idiots has 'Blockbuster' written all over it.The story of 3 idiots has been told differently and most importantly, the story offers so many twists-n-turns that you just can't guess what would unfold next.There's so much happening in every scene and the screenplay is so gripping that you don't feel the need to look at the auditorium ceiling or at your watch at brief intervals. You aren't restless. 3 idiots demonstrates how strong film-making can enhance and elevate an already solid concept.An Aamir Khan film is nothing short of an event. The supremely talented actor acts in one film a year and no two films are ever identical in terms of plot line.To sum up, 3 idiots is commercial Hindi cinema at its best. The film has 'Hit' written all over it. Let me put it this way: Cancel whatever you're doing today and go watch 3 idiots instead.Director Rajkumar Hirani strikes a fine balance between humor and emotions. The comic portions are executed with panache, the drama is attention-grabbing and the emotional quotient is strong enough to turn you moist-eyed. The marriage of humor and emotions as also technique and content is what drives 3 idiots to the winning post.

How much you enjoy Kambakkht Ishq is directly proportionate to just how low your standards have fallen. This battle-of-the-sexes saga starring Akshay Kumar and Kareena Kapoor is a loud, vulgar and seriously offensive film that has reportedly been made at a price of Rs 60 crore. In that much money, you could feed an entire starving nation. And you'd be blessed for it.I'm not saying the makers of Kambakkht Ishq have no business spending so much money. I'm just saying, if you must spend Rs 60 crore, the least you can do is give us a good film.Watching Kambakkht Ishq, you know you can't apply logic to a film like this. There are dozens of questions that have no answers - Who allowed her to keep her watch on while performing surgery? What kind of battery does this watch run on for it to break into music every hour inside a man's stomach? What kind of stuntman can afford a luxurious condo overlooking the sea? Where in the world can you expect to find Sylvester Stallone lurking in alleys waiting to come to the rescue of hapless girls?Provocative, but just for the sake of it, director Sabbir Khan resorts to cheap gimmicks for the sake of cheap thrills - like a group of girls flashing their breasts to the men at a wedding reception, and Akshay Kumar grabbing Kareena and smooching her forcibly on the lips.In terms of performances, there is very little that can be said about both leads. Kareena Kapoor, an actress blessed with scorching screen presence and immense talent, stoops to a new career low with Kambakkht Ishq. I can't imagine why any respectable actress would agree to play such a crass character and participate in the film's sexist jokes which include - on at least two occasions - her yanking her neckline down to reveal more cleavage and raising her hemline up to show more leg. Think of it as Welcome or Singh Is Kinng but about twenty times more tasteless. Of course it worries me that that description might excite some viewers to check it out!

The sight of Kareena Kapoor in a two-piece bikini is about the only thing that wakes you up from your sleep while watching Tashan — the mega-disappointing, mind-numbing new film at the cinemas this weekend. Bad films are bad films and we see some every week, but Tashan is not just a bad film, it's a terrible film. Terrible because it takes its audience for granted, terrible also because the filmmakers expect to get away without a plot or any common sense only because they've got big movie stars onboard.Written and directed by Vijay Krishna Acharya, Tashan is what you'd describe as a road movie, but one that's going in all the wrong directions. Saif Ali Khan stars as Jimmy Cliff, a call-centre executive who's hired to teach English to Bhaiyyaji - that's Anil Kapoor playing an ambitious UP gangster, desperate to go cool. Jimmy's got his eye on Pooja, the gangster's pretty young assistant (played by Kareena Kapoor), who uses Jimmy to swindle her boss of 25 crore rupees. Determined to recover his money and also to punish both Jimmy and Pooja, Bhaiyyaji recruits his most trusted henchman to do the job. So you have Akshay Kumar as Bachchan Pandey, the gangster's faithful aide from Kanpur, who tracks down the culprits and recovers the stolen money that's hidden across the length and breadth of the country.Much like those bad eighties potboilers, Tashan too is held together by a threadbare script centred on a vendetta plot. But the treatment's so over-the-top, so indulgent that it fails to establish any connect. Instead of a coherent screenplay or a traditional three-act structure, you get a handful of set pieces around which most of the scenes are loosely constructed. That garish item song in the desert, the bullet-dodging action scene at a Rajasthani fort, Kareeena's bikini moment, even that ridiculous climatic action scene complete with shaolin monks, a water scooter zipping through a dirty naala, and believe it or not, even a Dhanno-style horse-driven tonga. In all fairness, not all these set pieces are badly done - the item song in the desert is quite neat actually - but very little of it makes any sense in the larger picture, because you're just going from one piece to another without any help from the script really. Little do you expect in a seemingly fast-paced road movie, to find a sickeningly sentimental flashback track about childhood sweethearts.You see the problem with Tashan is nobody associated with this film knew what film they were making. What's more, I don't think they cared either - the film reeks of arrogance. Arbitrarily packing in elements of every genre without actually bothering to stop and see if the mix does work, Tashan is like an overcooked stew.There are films that kill you softly, and then there's Tashan, a film that kills you with excess. Packaged snazzily with glossy-finish camera-work, exotic locations and fancy costumes, every frame of the film probably cost lakhs to put together, but it still feels like a hollow piece in the end because the story doesn't hold. Borrowing narrative from Tarantino and style from Stephen Chow doesn't help either because they don't blend with the film's wafer-thin plot. One may have complained a little less if the characters were more engaging, but Anil Kapoor's grating Hinglish dialogue makes you want to slit your wrists, and Saif Ali Khan fumbles through the film foolishly, unable to find his feet. Kareena Kapoor, meanwhile, queen of over-the-top delivery, does a decent job. But of course, if Tashan is salvaged to some extent, it's thanks to Akshay Kumar's irresistible presence and his spontaneous approach to the character. You cringe when he's cupping his crotch repeatedly, and you scowl when he delivers those double-meaning dialogues, but not for a moment can you take your eyes off the screen when he's up there.Despite some good music from Vishal-Shekhar, the songs seem like they're only prolonging your misery. Well that's because Tashan is a test of your patience. In case you didn't know, Tashan means style. I'm sorry to say, this film has none.

In director Vipul Shah's Namastey London, Katrina Kaif plays an Indian girl born and raised in the UK, who's turned out to be something of an infant terrible who guzzles vodka like it's water, dresses in micro-minis under her salwar-kameez, and frightens away prospective grooms by telling them false stories about her promiscuity. But worse than all of this, and the reason her dad's having sleepless nights actually, is because she's seriously considering a marriage proposal from her white boyfriend, a cad who's already been married thrice in the past.No wonder daddy dearest Rishi Kapoor whisks her off to good ol' Bharat where after several failed attempts to find a suitable groom for his daughter, he finally coaxes her to tie the knot with the son of an old friend, a sort of small-town bumpkin Akshay Kumar, who's already fallen head over heels in love with his peaches-and-cream complexioned wife. Promising to consummate their marriage back in London, Katrina brings Akshay home, but only to reveal to him and to her parents that this shaadi was all a sham, and her heart still beats only for her gora boyfriend. Shaken, but not entirely defeated, Akshay decides he's going to stay on and win her back with love. I can bet my last pay-cheque that the one thought that came to your head while you heard me narrate the film's plot is: 'Hey, haven't I heard this story before?' Well, yes, you have and several times over actually. It's clear, straight off the bat, that Namastey London is a been-there-seen-that story inspired from a variety of films including Dilwale Dulhania Le Jayenge and Hum Dil De Chuke Sanam to name just two. Look, the one thing that a film must have in order to hold your interest, is unpredictability. It's very unlikely that you're going to enjoy a film if you know exactly how it's going to turn out in the end. But let's face it, unpredictability of plot is something that very few Hindi films can boast of. In which case, when you do know what direction a film is going in, when you do know what's going to happen at the end of the film, the only thing that is likely to keep you entertained, is the manner in which the filmmaker or the writers arrive at that ending.You know the beginning, you know the end - now can they make the middle so interesting and so unique that you're willing to stay with the film even though you know where it's all leading upto? The same is true of Namastey London. It's a Hindi film, you know Akshay Kumar is going to melt Katrina's heart in the end, now we just need to know how he does it.Vipul Shah and his writers use the old-fashioned approach - true love conquers all. Some of you may find that archaic and outdated, but once in a while I think earnestness, sincerity and some old-fashioned simplicity can do the trick. Namastey London certainly has its heart in the right place. But sadly it goes about making its point in the stupidest manner. Why is it essential to portray every white person as a racist bigot in order to convey what a desh-bhakt our hero is? That party scene in which a white man makes Indian jokes only to be put in his place by Akshay is so over-the-top and so blatantly manipulative, it makes you cringe. Ditto for that scene at the mosque where Akshay drives sense into Upen Patel's head by explaining to him why nothing and no one's worth changing one's name and religion for - it's a scene that's screaming out for a pat on the back - "Look at all the good values we're trying to propagate." Now don't get me wrong, I'm not a cynic, I'm just saying this film is so caught up being self-congratulatory that it doesn't even realize where its slipping up. Like the humour for example, which is so juvenile at most times. Or all the stereotypes that the film tends to reinforce.By the time the lights finally come on and the end credits begin to roll, you feel like you've been in that hall for what seems like an eternity. Namastey London is too long for a story that's too familiar to begin with. It's not a bad film, but it's often dull and you can pretty much predict its every next step. Of the actors Upen Patel turns in a surprisingly decent piece as a British-Asian boy confronted with cultural dilemmas. Now if only he'd work on his dialogue delivery and accent, they wouldn't have to dub his voice. And someone please ask him to keep his shirt on, we've seen enough of his shaved torso already. As the patient and hopeful romantic, Akshay Kumar plays his most restrained role yet, and he's not bad at all, it's just that his character seems so ludicrous; you're unable to take him too seriously. For Katrina Kaif, playing the rebellious protagonist of this film, it's a part that fits her like a glove. Her acting's also considerably improved since the last time she was on screen.But for me, the only actor really worth mentioning in this film is Rishi Kapoor. Both in his comic scenes and his dramatic portions, he brings a degree of naturalness that none of the other actors can serve up. He is easily the emotional anchor of this film and his performance; it's only real strength.In many ways it's modeled after those well-meaning 70s films - one part Dev Anand romance, one part Manoj Kumar patriotic saga. It's sweet and it's simple but that's just the question - do we still have an appetite for steamed rice when everyone else is eating biryani?

From prolific filmmaker duo Abbas-Mustan Naqaab.In this film that's set in Dubai, newcomer Urvashi Sharma and Bobby Deol play a young couple engaged to be married. It's another thing he's a multi-millionaire with a home the size of a palace, and she works at Burger King and pays him rent to live under his roof. Just days before her marriage to Bobby, she meets and strikes up a friendship with an aspiring actor played by Akshaye Khanna. Sparks fly between the two, but on Urvashi's insistence their friendship is kept strictly platonic. On D-Day, however, just moments before she exchanges marriage vows with Bobby, Urvashi has a change of heart. Up until this stage, the film made perfect sense to me, but it's from this point onwards that Naqaab turns truly bizarre. It would be unfair to reveal any more of the plot because that would give away the surprise element of the film. But believe me, you'd never have guessed where this film was going anyway, because it's so ridiculous and unimaginable. Now you're probably wondering why I'm complaining if the film is unpredictable, because unpredictable is a good thing, right? Well, there a difference between unpredictable and ridiculous, and the thing about the twists and turns in Naqaab is that they're absolutely ridiculous. For years Abbas-Mustan have ripped off popular films from Hollywood and delivered successful Hindi remakes: Khiladi, Baazigar, Daraar, Chori Chori Chupke Chupke, Ajnabee, Humraaz and Aitraaz.But with Naqaab they've hit their weakest note because it's a thriller without any thrills if you ask me. There's none of that nail-biting tension, no suspense and an anti-climax to top it all. I could pick a hundred holes in the screenplay but I don't even want to bother, because that would still mean putting in more effort than the writers and the directors have. You know one's willing to suspend disbelief if your script can convince me to make that leap of faith. And Abbas-Mustan know that better than anyone else. We've happily gone along with their stories of mistaken identities, reincarnations, double roles, death-avenging relatives, and murderous spouses.But with Naqaab they come up with something so bizarre that's it's really difficult to digest. In all honesty, I was so stunned by the banality of the plot that I was convinced this couldn't be a rip-off. It had to be some amateur writer's amateurish effort which Abbas-Mustan decided to direct. But to my surprise I discovered that Naqaab is not only a bad script, it's also not an original script. It is copied from a film called Dot the I starring Gael Garcia Bernal. The directors of Naqaab have plundered, lock stock and barrel from that obscure American film. It's not just the plot and the premise of that film that's been borrowed, even dialogues from that film have been directly translated into Hindi and shamelessly used. When a film's not working for you, you can usually find a million things to not like in it. As far as Naqaab is concerned, I have to ask if the costume designer of the film was smoking pot while at work. How else do you explain the horrifying clothes that she's draped most of the actors in—red lace gloves for the leading lady, pink satin shirt with a matching pink waistcoat for Bobby, and double-layered clothes for Akshaye. Hell, why? Also what's with all those ugly sets? From the outside Bobby's home looks like the Queen of England's holiday home, but the interiors are the kind of tasteless sets they used to construct at Hyderabad's Banjara Hills for those B-grade family dramas in the eighties. There's little one can say about the three actors in this film, they perform adequately but fail to make much of an impression and it's hardly their fault given the kind of material they're working with. Abbas-Mustan's Naqaab is far-fetched and illogical and there's hardly anything to like about it.

Some films should never be made and Vikram Bhatt's Red is exactly that kind of film. Disguised as a thriller, Red is the most predictable film you've possibly seen, even a four-year-old can correctly guess where it's all leading up to. What's worse, you can make that guess 10 minutes into the film. The sorry excuse for a plot centres around Aftab Shivdasani who's saved from imminent death by a heart transplant. The heart in question belonged to a man who just died in a car accident. This man happens to be Celina Jaitley's husband and less than 10 minutes since he's discharged from hospital Aftab starts stalking Celina.Before you know it, the two of them are chewing each others lips off and making out like a pair of rabbits. As the affair continues, Aftab learns from Celina that her husband had been having an affair with her best friend Amrita Arora, who's responsible for her husband's death. When Celina complains she's being harassed by the person who killed her husband on Amrita's instructions, Aftab kills the guy to protect his lady. But it all becomes an ugly mess when the police discover enough clues that are traced back to Aftab. You know, it doesn't even take an expert to point out the root cause for why this film doesn't work – it's got a plot that's as flimsy as Celina Jaitley's nightgown. Believe me, I've read class five essays that are better written. What amazes me is the fact that nobody who worked on this film realised that something as basic as common sense was so badly missing in the script. As a result, every minute of this film is sheer torture to endure.When you don't have a story to tell, why make a film at all? That's the question I'd like to ask the producer, the director and the writer of Red who have wasted both money and time in bringing this nonsense to screen. Vikram Bhatt once made some half-way decent Hollywood rip-offs, remember Kasoor and Raaz – they weren't too bad. Red as far as I can see, is not a copy of a Hollywood film – which makes perfect sense because Hollywood wouldn't be so stupid to make such a rubbish film. I must add here that throwing in a generous dollop of love-making can't salvage a film as lame as this. So, all the heaving and sighing, all the grunting and moaning, all the bumping and grinding between Aftab and Celina, does nothing for Red. Of the principal cast, it's a miracle Amrita Arora manages to show what a lousy actress she is in barely five minutes of screen time. Celina Jaitley, for her part, has close to two hours to display her incompetence. Doused in make-up, even while doing a wet, shower scene, she simpers and whimpers and plays the damsel in distress so unconvincingly, you're willing to pay her admission fees to a good acting class. By virtue of the fact that the other two perform so badly, Aftab Shivdasani comes off looking just marginally better, although this is hardly the kind of work to be proud of. There are very few films that have no merits at all, usually you'll like at least something in every film. But Red is a picture that's devoid of any artistic credibility at all. I still don't know what's the significance of the title. Did they call it Red because they anticipated the colour of anger that you'll be consumed with after seeing the film? Or is it because Red rhymes with "dead" which is how you feel when you leave the cinema?

Now this one's meant to be a coming-of-age drama about five friends who discover the harsh realities of life after graduating from college. It's a film about the tough choices one must make and about the consequences of one's choices. The film stars Dino Mora, Aftab Shivdasani, Sammir Dattani, Nauheed Cyrusi and newcomer Anjori Alagh as this bunch of best buds who decide to meet five years after graduation to see who's the happiest one of them all based on the direction their life would have taken in the five years ahead. I'm not going to play the spoilt-sport here by telling you who wins the bet, who emerges the happiest of the five, but I will tell you who's not terribly happy at the end of the film and that person would be me. It's way too long, it's dead boring, it doesn't tell you anything you didn't already know, and quite frankly, the film makes its point in such a round-about fashion that you feel like you're a class five student being forced to attend a moral science lesson. Films like Life Mein Kabhie Kabhiee make me really angry because I can see the film's director doesn't really give a hoot about this film. His disinterest, his indifference is evident in every frame of the film, and forgive me, but how can you expect anyone to give this film a chance, if the man who made it didn't invest any sincerity in it himself? 've seen many films directed by Vikram Bhatt and several of them have been quite terrible, but in all honesty I haven't seen one as pointless, as purposeless, as meandering and as indifferent as this one. To begin with, there's very little in terms of a plot here, every single character is a stereotype, the screenplay is straight out of a bad eighties film, the production value is as shoddy as a school play, the camera-work is consistently flat, and as far as Vikram Bhatt's direction is concerned, I suspect he did it in his sleep. Now remember, cinema is expected to be progressive and forward-moving, but Life Mein Kabhie Kabhiee is like taking two steps backwards. An upcoming actress must compromise on her honour in order to make it in the movies, an ambitious middle-class girl can only achieve her dream of becoming super-rich by conning a millionaire into marrying her. The only way to get ahead in politics is by sabotaging the opposition, and no business can be a success if you haven't greased enough palms. Can you imagine, these are the themes of this film! How many times have we seen all this before, and why do we have to see it all over again — especially since the director has nothing new to say? If you're brave enough to survive an entire screening of Life Mein Kabhie Kabhiee, then do inform the Limca Book of Records, surely this is exactly the kind of record that deserves mention in their hall of fame. I say this because it's difficult to sit through a film where you know exactly what's going to happen next, where you can predict every dialogue and every scene. I could sit here and analyse much of the film and tell you what works and what doesn't. But hey, isn't that what the director should have done after the script was written? If he had actually read the script closely and measured it's strengths and weaknesses, chances are this film would never have gotten made. And that would have been a favour to everyone associated with it including the actors who simply fail to rise above the damaged script. That's a thumbs down and only one out of five for director Vikram Bhatt's Life Mein Kabhie Kabhiee, it's exactly the kind of film they stopped making fifteen years ago.

Noble intentions alone don't make a good film, and that becomes clear as crystal while watching Pooja Bhatt's film Dhokha. The film, her third directorial outing after Paap and Holiday, is unarguably the most relevant of her three films because it touches upon themes that are significant and critical.Newcomer Muzammil Ibrahim stars as a young Muslim police officer who learns that his cute-as-a-cupcake wife Tulip Joshi may have been a suicide bomber responsible for the death of many innocent people.It's a discovery he can't quite come to terms with because it dawns on him that he may have never really known this person he shared his home, his heart and his life with for two whole years. Determined to get some answers, he sets off on a mission to trace why and how she may have led this double life.Now with this film Pooja Bhatt makes an earnest attempt to address so many urgent issues – everything from communal prejudices and cultural stereotyping to terrorism in the name of religion and exploitation at the hands of the establishment. Problem is, in her over-enthusiasm she forgets that key rule that movie directors can never really afford to forget – feature film is a popular medium, it must engage. It must not become a lecture that bores the audience.Despite a solid premise, Dhokha fails to realise its potential because the screenplay is often contrived, often convenient, and at times just hopelessly idealistic.An everyday policeman just tumbles into a full-fledged terrorist outfit. A suspicious spiritual leader shows up out of thin air to participate in a never-ending question-answer session on the relevance of jihad. And a suicide bomber strapped with kilos of RDX gets to go home scot-free after he's persuaded not to blow up VT Station. If only the world were so simple.On the up side, I'm happy to say that unlike Pooja Bhatt's previous directorial offerings, Dhokha is not a Hollywood-film remake, it is instead inspired from real events.The case of the 19-year-old student Ishrat Jahan who was gunned down by the Ahmedabad police for allegedly plotting the murder of Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi is as much an inspiration for the plot of this film as is the case of software engineer Khwaja Yunus, a suspect in the 2002 Ghatkopar blast incident who was allegedly killed in police custody.This is a film you badly want to like because it's well intended and because it's got its heart in the right place, but how you wish it didn't go about its job in such a perfunctory manner.Few films these days have much to say, so when you come across a film that does, it's a pity it doesn't make its point hard enough. And by hard enough I don't mean, beating the audience on the head with a message, rather driving the point home by illustrating its repercussions.Of the film's cast, veterans Gulshan Grover and Anupam Kher lend credibility to the occasionally over-dramatic scenes, while Munish Makhija as the spiritual leader is as expressive as a block of wood.Mercifully we are spared the full range of Tulip Joshi's incompetent acting because she's barely in the film and has less than three dialogues to speak, but we must endure instead newcomer Aushima Sawhney's labored performance as the cop's ex-girlfriend who turns up just in time to lend a supportive shoulder. In many ways, the star of Dhokha is model Muzammil Ibrahim who makes his acting debut as the betrayed husband. Much in the same way that she photographed her previous leading men John Abraham and Dino Morea, director Pooja Bhatt for the most part films her new hero as a Playgirl centrespread, baring his perfect abs in romantic scenes, in shower scenes, even in fight scenes and chase scenes. But surprisingly, there's more to him that the six-pack – Muzammil delivers a confident performance and shows some genuine star potential.The film itself could have been so much more. Remember, the films you either immensely enjoy or even violently detest are the ones you're likely to remember for a long time to come. But Dhokha turns out to be one those average films that evokes no strong reaction.It's a film that you only feel indifferent towards. Pooja Bhatt's Dhokha unfolds at a pace slower than my 81-year-old grandmother.

In director Ram Gopal Varma's Nishabd,newcomer Jiah Khan plays an 18-year-old temptress who initiates and entices her classmate's 60-year-old father into a complex, inexplicable relationship while she's staying with the family at their hill-station home one summer. Amitabh Bachchan plays the man in question, who finds himself falling for this brash, spoilt teenager who's showering him with the kind of attention he hasn't experienced before. Despite working off a script that borrows generously from the Drew Barrymore thriller Poison Ivy, Ram Gopal Varma makes it very clear he's back in form as he sinks his teeth into what is perhaps his first all-out emotional, character drama. Varma casts a mood of gloominess, a sense of impending doom all over this film, which is reminiscent of the manner in which he'd treated Bhoot. What I like about Nishabd is Varma's conscious attempt to avoid clichés and stereotypes. The affair takes place not sneakily and surreptitiously, but right under the nose of Bachchan's wife and daughter who are just too naïve to read all the signs. When the affair is finally discovered, there's none of that typical filmi-style screaming and shouting, instead Varma treats the moment realistically using shock and silence to convey the sense of feeling betrayed.Admirably, the director's decided not to spoon-feed his audience by explaining every character's every motivation. While it's more or less clear why Jiah falls for Bachchan, you are yourself expected to interpret his reason for responding to her affections. It could be the thrill of physical intimacy to a nubile, young girl. It could stem from a sense of responsibility he feels towards her. It could be a momentary lapse of judgement on his part, or then the result of suppressed apathy he feels towards his frumpy wife. I suspect it's everything put together. Because much of Nishabd is shot in real time - the entire second half to be specific - it does seem too long and too stretched out, especially since there isn't very much happening. But don't be fooled, that's exactly the mood Varma's going for. Remember, Nishabd is essentially about loneliness, and this leisurely pace that Varma creates for the film only contributes to that feeling of loneliness.I suspect most people, women particularly are going to have a problem with the film's ending. As much as I'd like to elaborate, I won't because saying any more here will give away too much. I must confess I had a problem with the film's ending myself, but for another reason completely - I feel it's a cop-out. A compromise ending to a bold, brave story. I could have predicted the ending, and it's no fun when that happens. How I wish Varma had pushed the envelope all the way and gone with a truly bold ending that us regular Hindi-film junkies would never have predicted and would have been totally surprised by! For the most part, Nishabd is watchable because it's held together by a truly awe-inspiring performance by Amitabh Bachchan. Unlike other clearly defined roles that are like a road map for actors while constructing their performance, his role in Nishabd is one that has no reference point. It's a performance that Bachchan creates out of thin air, based on his own understanding of the character. Remember the toughest roles to play are the ones that are too simple, too normal. It's not easy playing an average joe, but Bachchan does it marvelously. Watch him in the scene where he breaks into a laugh in the middle of the night, or watch him in that pre-intermission scene where Jiah confronts him with her feelings, or even that scene where he's singing to himself much to his wife's surprise -- everything from his expressions, his dialogue delivery, even the movement of his eyes! It's difficult to imagine any other actor doing justice to a part so simple and therefore so difficult to play. His co-star Jiah Khan is perfectly cast as the troubled girl who's very aware of her effect on this man. Wearing her sexuality on her sleeve, Jiah sashays in and out of scenes, showing so much thigh, you feel like you're in a mutton shop. Also is it just me or did you also notice that Jiah seems to be suffering from a Sharon Stone complex, she's constantly uncrossing her legs -- when she's standing, when she's sitting, when she's lying around on the floor -- everywhere. I don't think there's a single scene in the film where she's got her legs together. All said and considered, Nishabd is bold even though it doesn't overstep the invisible moral line. It is, nonetheless, an experiment on Varma's part because it's unconventional in every sense - the narrative is not linear, the pace is leisurely and the plot itself is brave. For these reasons I suspect there will be many who will not embrace it. Which is fine. It makes you uncomfortable and shifty and even restless at times. It's everything that makes for a good character study. Give it a try.

The Train, incidentally, is an unapologetic, shameless rip-off of the Clive Owen-Jennifer Aniston thriller Derailed, and this desi version's been directed by Hasnain Hyderabadwala and Raksha Mistry who last plagiarised the Tom Cruise starrer Collateral to give us The Killer. Now the thing about The Train is that although it faithfully follows the blueprint of the original film, it does so lethargically at an almost snail-like pace, killing you slowly with its misplaced sense of morality.In a nutshell, the film's about a married man and the price he must pay for adultery. Emraan Hashmi is the man in question, newcomer Sayali Bhagat his wife, and Geeta Basra the other woman. The story's set in Bangkok, although till the end of the film I couldn't figure out why they needed to go outside our very own Filmistan Studio because the directors don't exploit the city to lend character to the story. The basic flaw with The Train is its own inability to understand what story it wants to tell. The screenplay plods along wearily and what's meant to be the big turning point in the plot is so predictable, you've guessed it a good forty minutes before you actually see it happen on screen. Then there are those terrifying performances by Aseem Merchant playing the bad guy, and leading lady Geeta Basra – who's so buried under make-up you can't even see her expressions. Put it all together and you've got a recipe for disaster.The reason The Train fails and so miserably so is because the filmmakers' conviction is so clearly missing in the film. You can't just rip off a Hollywood film frame by frame and expect your film to turn out exactly like the original – no, that's not going to happen. Look at some successful rip-offs – Murder and Kaante…You'll notice both of these films had clearly developed characters and a fairly solid screenplay, even if the screenplays weren't entirely original. The Train sadly has neither, and that's why it's such a royal bore. It's true what I said in the beginning; Emraan Hashmi isn't half as bad as he usually is. He's having a bad hair day and looks a bit like a lost lamb, but that aside, it's an earnest attempt. Not that it helps actually because the film itself is just very difficult to sit through. Hasnain Hyderabadwala and Raksha Mistry's The Train is loose and it's weak and if you ask me honestly, this train's going nowhere, so get on at your own risk.

Few films have made me laugh as much as N Chandra's Yeh Mera India, and funny thing is, it's not even a comedy. A message movie that addresses everything that's wrong with our country -- from communal hatred and corruption in the system to the class divide and sexual harassment -- Yeh Mera India bites off way more than it can chew. Using a bunch of characters whose lives intertwine at some point, the film sheds light on the social evils that threaten to rock our great nation. Problem is, the acting's embarrassingly weak and the scenarios all exaggerated. Take that scene in which an oily call-centre owner (played by Rajit Kapur) celebrates an employee's birthday by ordering cake and gifts, then proceeds to molest her in full view of his cheering staff. Or the one in which a young fellow frustrated about his car just being stolen, vents his anger by vandalising a wall with thought-provoking graffiti. Even if there are some credible ideas floating around, director N Chandra struggles to put them forward in an accessible manner, resorting instead to convey them in a bombastic, over-the-top, and ultimately unconvincing style. What's more the solutions offered by the film to deal with the social evils it talks about are too simplistic and idealistic even. Talented actors like Seema Biswas, Anupam Kher and Rajpal Yadav are wasted in poorly developed parts, and by the end of the film you feel like you've bludgeoned on the head by a bunch of crazies. N Chandra's Yeh Mera India wants to make some important points, but sadly it doesn't have the skills. Watch it only if you have nothing else to do.

Put your hands together for Johnny Gaddaar, director Sriram Raghavan's brilliant thriller about a gang of five cons who raise Rs two-and-a-half-crore between themselves so they can participate in a shady deal that's going to double their investment. A motley mix of the young and the more experienced, this gang has the perfect plan. But that plan goes horribly wrong when one of them hatches a foolproof plan of his own, and discreetly steals everyone else's money. It's a job so well done, that the traitor slips right back into the gang without anyone suspecting him for the betrayal. The gang, now furious over losing their money, set out to find out who, after all, was the mastermind behind this double-cross.Unquestionably one of the smartest films I've seen recently, the biggest strength of Johnny Gaddaar is its unpredictability. Unlike most conventional thrillers with a heist at its core, this one's not a whodunit – it can't be, because you know all along who's done it – the question instead is, how's he going to get away with it? That premise of course makes for an exciting two-hour film. Only problem is, Johnny Gaddaar is well over two hours – two-and-a-half-hours to be precise – and for a nail-biting thriller, that's just way too long.Unfolding like a Coen Brothers film where a series of fortunate accidents or divine interventions keep the plot from ever getting mundane, Johnny Gaddaar avoids clichés and smashes stereotypes as it makes its journey from opening credits to the end. Really the film's biggest accomplishment is the manner in which it compels you, the viewer to think differently – midway through the film you've got the drift, you begin to expect the unexpected, you even begin to predict what's going to happen next. That's the level of involvement you're able to muster up for this film.To give credit where it's due director Sriram Raghavan delivers on both style and content. Peppering his film with pop cultural references in a manner reminiscent of Tarantino's trademark style, Raghavan pays homage to Vijay Anand and his oeuvre of pacy thrillers – Jewel Thief, Teesri Manzil and of course Johnny Mera Naam, from where Raghavan's film derives its title. Revelling in its unflashiness, Johnny Gaddaar is stylish in a way that other films are not – its style lies in the ordinariness of the way crimes and murders are committed in the film. No fancy slo-mo shots, no piercing sound effects, just the immediacy of desperate crime. Raghavan scores big points on characterisation, he writes his every lead as a real, flesh-and-blood person, and then casts just the perfect actor for every role. Dharmendra as the mastermind behind the operation, Zakir Hussain as the crass club-owner, Vinay Pathak as the smarmy card-shark, and Neil Nitin Mukesh as the rookie, the youngest member of the gang – you couldn't find better actors to fill out these roles. Zakir Hussain in particular, stands out with a performance that is ingenious in every sense of the word. And Neil Nitin Mukesh makes an inspired debut; he's clearly an actor to look out for. If there's one problem and one problem alone with Johnny Gaddaar, it's the fact that the screenplay slips up in the second half. The film's about 30 minutes too long, and as a result, even the unpredictability becomes monotonous. It's a thriller very unlike his own previous film Ek Hasina Thi, and very unlike most thrillers you've seen recently. Watch it because it's that rare film that actually expects you to use your brain.

In director Siddharth Anand's Ta Ra Rum Pum which releases at cinemas this week, New York-based racing-car champion Saif Ali Khan hits a bad spell when he's injured in a racing accident that leaves him with the kind of emotional scars that he doesn't quite recover from even a year later when he returns to the racing track. He's lost his speed and as a result, he loses his place on the team. With no savings to fall back on, and no job that'll stick, Saif has no choice but to move his family from a sprawling home in Manhattan to a modest apartment in Queens. His loving wife Rani Mukherjee stands by him like a rock, they decide to face all hardships with a smile, never once letting their two young kids realize that they've fallen upon hard times.Taking up odd jobs here and there, the couple try their best to make ends meet, until one unfortunate incident involving their child, makes Saif return to the race track to regain his lost glory and save his family forever. How do you even begin to explain what's wrong about a film, that does nothing right to begin with? The one, the only, the real problem with Ta Ra Rum Pum is that there's absolutely nothing new about it. The plot's been borrowed generously from such films as Cinderella Man, In America and Life Is Beautiful, but it's also littered with so many Bollywood clichés that barely twenty minutes into the film, you can predict exactly where it's going and how it's going to end. Another big problem I have with this film is the ooh-so-cute factor which almost made me puke. Kids should behave like kids, and watching them starve themselves to save money, or reach for other people's half-eaten doughnuts is just not cool. I know it's all meant to tap at your tear-ducts and choke you up, but honestly the only feeling you're overcome with is anger towards the director for his blatant attempt at emotional manipulation. Also, when will we ever be spared those Bollywood stereotypes - the heroine's father who insists his daughter has chosen the wrong guy? Then years later when she's going through a bad patch, he'll remind her that he'd warned her not to marry this guy. And the honourable heroine who'll defend her husband and reject any help that her dad is willing to offer. God help us, surely Siddharth Anand could have done better.Like so many movies before it, Ta Ra Rum Pum is one of those glossy-but-soulless films which aren't insufferable to sit through, but they're an exercise in futility because they fail to touch you or move you or affect you in any way whatsoever.Even though it's meant to be an emotional story, you can't really empathise with the characters because it's all so plastic, so fake, so calculated and clinical.This family doesn't have food to eat but they're still dressed in designer clothes! Also I'd like to ask the director of this film if he really thinks this film is meant for kids. Dude, what do you want them to take from this? That revenge is okay? That it's cool to be speeding like a madman even when you're not on the race-track?Also, will someone please tell me why everyone's screaming in the film's first hour? Rani, Saif, Javed Jaffrey, why're they all yelling at the top of their lungs? I understand Ta Ra Rum Pum is a well-intended film and it's probably even trying to send out a positive message. But the way it goes about doing so is unimaginative and dull, to be honest.Even the car-racing scenes aren't particularly impressive - there's none of that edge-of-the-seat, nail-biting tension that you'd like to see.In fact I'm going to go so far as to say that there's a sense of indifference I get from this film. It just seems like nobody cared enough to work hard on this picture. Vishal-Shekhar's music is way below average, nothing to sing and dance about. Rani Mukherjee's been styled so badly, you can't help wondering if her designer was getting back at her for something. Of the performances, neither Saif Ali Khan nor Rani is able to make much of an impression because their characters are so unidimensional and boring. Saif's just playing himself all over again and that's because the writers didn't bother to give him anything solid to work on. As for Javed Jaffrey who's playing Saif's best friend and team-manager, I don't know if that kind of humour is funny anymore - speaking English with a smattering of Gujarati thrown in, it's just annoying if you ask me.You know, when you leave the cinema after watching Ta Ra Rum Pum , you're overcome with a sense of exhaustion. You feel like you do after a long, hard day at work. And that's not a good thing because cinema is meant to entertain you not wear you out.It's old wine in a new bottle. What you take back with you at the end of the film is a pain in the backside because you've been stuffed in that seat for so damn long. In fact I came up with a jingle for it - Ta Ra Rum Pum, have mercy on my bum, ta ra rum pum!

Feroz Abbas Khan's Gandhi My Father, a film that sheds light on the fractured relationship between the Mahatma and his son Harilal Gandhi. For a story that's as dramatic as the one this film attempts to tell, it's a pity the director fails to tell it dramatically. Gandhi My Father is narrated to you like that boring history lesson that put you to sleep at school. Now the film aims to convey one very interesting point - the fact that Gandhi in his attempt to be a fair person, ended up being an unfair father. This point is made in the film many times over, and one of the examples given to make this point is that scholarship to England, which Gandhi twice denies his son. Instead of showing us how exactly Harilal dealt with this betrayal and what went on in his head, the director just moves along with the story, thus never letting us be witness to the growing resentment Harilal feels towards his father. Which is why when we finally see an outburst from Harilal, it comes off looking like he's over-reacting.

The point I'm trying to make here is that we never really get to understand exactly why Harilal became the rebel that he did. We never really understand why he turned to Islam, and then back again to Hinduism. The thing is, we never really understand Harilal at all. And that's because the director of this film is too busy focusing on Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi and his role in the freedom struggle, a story most of us are already familiar with. To put it simply, Gandhi My Father promises to examine the strained father-son relationship, but it doesn't so much as show us where the cracks in this relationship first set in. We understand Harilal had to live with the burden of being Gandhi's son, but show us why that was a burden to begin with. Show us incidents of their early conflict. For example, it's not enough that Gandhi merely says he's opposed to Harilal's early marriage, tell us why this opposition? It's not enough that Kasturba blames her husband for the way her son turned out - for constantly shuttling him between schools in Gujarat and South Africa, for making him relocate every time Gandhi needed to relocate. Words are not enough, show us how these incidents shaped the character of Harilal Gandhi.What's more, instead of sticking with the prickly theme of this tenuous Gandhi versus Gandhi relationship, the film goes off on too many tangents, thus diluting the impact of the central theme. This was never meant to be a film about the struggle for Independence, and yet on many occasions that's exactly what it seems like, because the director feels almost obligated to take us through all the main events leading upto that historic moment, even though much of it has no relevance to the film's basic premise - the stormy father-son relationship. So you see the problem with this film is not that it's a bad film, but it's certainly a very confused film. What happens to Harilal's children after his wife's death? Does he ever have relationship with them? Where do they suddenly vanish after that one scene in which we see them with the Mahatma and Kasturba? None of these questions are answered in a film that's basically meant to be about relationships in the Gandhi family. The film version of an immensely popular play directed by Feroz Abbas Khan himself, Gandhi My Father is a disappointment, no questions asked.Cinematically, it struggles to translate the filmmaker's ambitious intention to the screen. Practically every single scene in the film opens and closes with fade-ins and fade-outs, never quite seamlessly leading into each other. On the positive side, there is inherent nobility in the film, which you recognise. The filmmaker makes every effort to deliver a balanced narrative, trying hard not to take sides, never once judging either father or son, painting neither as the villain. What the film does do, however, is make clear the fact that Gandhi was a difficult patriarch whose ideals may have shaped the nation, but evidently alienated his family. Of all the actors in the film it's only Akshaye Khanna who really shines in the role of the luck-deprived Harilal Gandhi. It's a wonderful performance, and it's not easy since the role covers virtually the entire lifespan of the character. But Akshaye brings a rare concoction of innocence and despondency to that part and succeeds in making Harilal a pitiable figure. Just watch him in that scene in which he discovers his wife's dead, and you'll realise how much he conveys through body language alone. Darshan Jariwala, meanwhile, who plays Gandhi Senior, adopts a caricaturish approach to playing the Mahatma in his later years, but it's the way he humanises the man in his early years as a barrister in South Africa that is the actor's best contribution to that role. The abundantly gifted Shefali Shah plays Kasturba, the woman who's meant to be torn in this father-son conflict, but if she's unable to bring across that feeling of helplessness then it's really not so much her fault as it is the fault of a rickety script. Much effort's gone into the making of this film and that's evident throughout, but the film suffers from that inevitable flaw that is eventually what you'll remember about it when you leave the cinema - it's just so boring.Director Feroz Abbas Khan's Gandhi My Father is a sincere effort yes, but also a film that could have done with a much tighter screenplay. What we learn from the film is that Gandhi and Harilal made each other very unhappy. And with this film, the director makes us too.