• The film portrays Dr. Manmohan Singh as a nice though weak man but goes hammer and tongs at the Gandhi family in a tacky fashion

  • The most interesting is the portrayal of Prime Minister Narendra Modi (Rajit Kapoor) as a benevolent, caring and concerned patriarch who patronisingly pats Vihaan for being achcha beta (good son). He is as much concerned about his ill mom as he is about Bharat Mata, stays up late till the operation meets a successful end and then celebrates with the team. Surprise surprise he also seems to listen, talk, discuss and communicate and not just through Mann Ki Baat.

  • Nothing woke about this problematic entertainer…

  • The characteristic outstretched arms of SRK get smaller, as does his height, the creative ambition gets bigger but the film stays resolutely middling when it could have been much more

  • Kedarnath for being “insensitive” to the 2013 Uttarakhand tragedy and turning it into a metaphor, is a proof that we are content remaining blind to the bigger picture; that we are not far from disaster but sitting right on top of it.

  • Bhaiaji Superhit is nothing more than three yesteryear stars being forced to embrace their own obsolescence.

  • …the filmmaker indulges in with the child, despite getting enraged at her cuteness being exploited to send the adults on a guilt trip, you ultimately know how it will pan out. But 90 odd minutes of it is way too much of a torture, as much for Pihu, as for us.

  • Ambitious in its visual scale, ‘Thugs of Hindostan’ reveals a disappointing lack of heft and flair when it comes to the story and its telling

  • Like Anderson’s 2007 film, The Darjeeling Limited, which set in India, Isle of Dogs has also been accused of cultural appropriation. Beyond the ‘white saviour’ trope of an American exchange student saving the day, one wonders if there’s more to Anderson’s decision of keeping Japanese uninterpreted. There is so much to be read in the film that Anderson’s claim of it originating simply as the story of dogs in a trash island seems like a distant, unimaginable past.

  • The film captures the little, seemingly insurmountable conflicts of a middle class family very well and also its self-righteousness when it comes to matters of sex and its hypocrisies in putting the mother on the pedestal. It’s in conclusions and closures that things get out of hand. The convenient and sentimental “it’s all about loving your family” route doesn’t quite work with the otherwise cheeky tenor at the start of the film. If only it could have remained consistently so.

Viewing item 1 to 10 (of 141 items)