Review:
When Goal! first came out, it was fantastic. I remember the scene where Santiago Munez jogged along the shores of Newcastle to an Oasis song. Its fantastic scenes drew the best out of the shit-hole that is Newcastle. The action scenes were realistic and well timed and didn’t need the movie magic of a green or blue screen to fill in the images. It had a good solid story of a young man living his dreams and it set the stage and tone to what could have been a memorable trilogy. It left me wanting more.
Goal 2 was horrendous. Hoping to show the world of the pitfalls that surround professional footballers, it showed a little too much enthusiasm for my liking. The writers seemed to have forgotten that there are many football stars that live the good-life without all the parties, sex and booze. Instead, they went all out to ensure David Beckham had a speaking role. If a person is a football fan because of David Beckham then I say that person doesn’t know anything about football. The movie seemed to take forever to finish but when it did, it still managed to provide the next film with an opportunity of a good story. At the end of the movie, Santiago stood up for Gavin Harris saying that he could still make the England World Cup team and Santi also looked to salvage his relationship with Roz who, by the way, is supposedly pregnant.
Enter Goal 3. Santiago plays cameo roles. There is no mention of his efforts to salvage his relationship with Roz besides the reference ‘I messed it up’ in the latter stages of the film. Gavin Harris is gone and replaced with 2 other idiotic characters that in real life would never have played professional football. The story has nothing to do with football and is crammed with highlights from the World Cup. Blue screens are extensively used which shows the poor foresight of the producers to not shoot some of the movie scenes during the actual World Cup and build around there.
To make the movie stink even further, 4 clowns are introduced as fans and they have a mini story within the movie, which is neither relevant nor amusing. The jokes written for them were bad but that was only bettered by the lousy acting of these 4 gentlemen who I believe were only picked for the movie because they look like any typical English bloke; ugly, immature and sexually deprieved.
This could have easily been passed off as a cheap chick-flick movie that squandered most of the production budget on high director wages and paying FIFA for the rights to use the World Cup clips.
What would I have done? Easy. Just as the producers recreated the Champions League to have Real Madrid win it against Arsenal, I would have recreated the World Cup with a fantasy story as well. Where ultimately Mexico would meet England in a match that would see Santiago vs Harris. This doesn’t have to be the final. A second round or quarterfinal game would suffice. England would eventually prevail but only to lose their next game. Leading up to the World Cup, I would have gone with a story of reconciliation between Santiago and Roz as well as Santiago with Glen Foy. But to add a bit of drama, I would have had Santiago get injured and having to face the battle of being fit in time for the World Cup. Doesn’t this sound like a movie you’d watch?
I am scarred so badly by this experience that I want to warn the world; DON’T BOTHER WITH GOAL 3! In fact, avoid ANY movie directed by Andy Morahan AND written by either Mike Jefferies or Piers Ashworth. These guys stink big time and I hope the stench from this movie sticks to them for a long, long time.
I hated this movie. Speaking of trilogies, I think Goal 3 is worse than Matrix 3, Terminator 3, Jaws 3, Rambo 3, Karate Kid 3, Home Alone 3 and Missing in action 3 all combined. I HATE this movie. I hate it so much that I want you to hate it too. That is how much I hate this movie. On a brighter note, there are some pretty hot ladies in this film and Santiago is fat. He reminds me Ronaldo. The Brazillian. Not the Portugese
Watch Online
Review:
The Bottom Line
Will Smith has banked a lot of goodwill with moviegoers and he's going to need to cash some in with his starring role in the depressing drama, The Pursuit of Happyness. Pursuit is a movie designed to have you reaching for your tissues, but unfortunately it's so overwrought, heavy-handed and into bashing the audience over the head with its message that the emotional impact is dramatically lessened as each minute of the running time slowly ticks by.
The Story
Based on true events, The Pursuit of Happyness (the incorrect spelling is explained in the film) follows Chris Gardner (Smith) as he struggles to achieve the American dream. Chris has everything going against him. His wife (Thandie Newton) left him and he's raising his 5-year-old son alone, without any real income. Determined to provide for his son Christopher (Jaden Smith) no matter what, Chris enters an unpaid internship program at a brokerage firm in hopes of landing the one paid position available at the end of the training program.
Sleeping in bathrooms, homeless shelters, and shabby hotels when he's got the money to afford a room, Chris never gives up on the idea he can land a job and provide his son with a better life. Will Chris be able to grab the brass ring? Will his son be raised in an environment of love? If you watched the 20/20 special on the real Gardner, you know exactly how this story turns out.
To Sum It Up
If Jaden Christopher Syre Smith didn't turn in such a terrific performance, the cries of nepotism might overwhelm anything else to do with the release of The Pursuit of Happyness. However the younger Smith inherited talent from his parents and so he actually deserved the big break. That said, there are too many scenes in The Pursuit of Happyness that feel as though they're included in the film just to show off the close relationship between dad and son. Anyone arguing the need for an overabundance of scenes between the two because The Pursuit of Happyness is based on real events is assuming the story faithfully follows reality. It doesn't. Chris Gardner's real son was only two at the time of the events portrayed in the film.
If patience isn't a virtue you possess, pass on Pursuit of Happyness. The film takes forever to get going yet once it's underway, it doesn't seem to ever want to stop.
Watch Online
Review
Can a movie be made in an interesting and crisp format in spite of a boasting of a huge star cast?
Director Sasikumar, who had his tutelage under Bala and Ameer, has proved that a quality entertainer can be made with less-known faces provided the movie has interesting storyline with the right amount of twists.
Designed in a retro classic style, Sasikumar portrays Madurai in a different color and with a new perspective. As the title suggests, the entire movie is set in Subramaniapuram, a hamlet in Madurai.
The story, set in the 80s, takes place in Madurai Subramaniapuram, a suburb of the city. Movies like Palaivana Cholai dwelt around four friends. Perhaps Sasikumar impressed by such classics, has made an attempt of chronicling the life of a group of friends.
They are fun-loving and carefree, who spend most of their time together. Jai, Kanja Karuppu and Sasikumar (the director himself), are typical youths, who do not miss an opportunity to fight when they come across a brawl on the streets. Often arrested, they come out of jail with the help of a neighbor, played by Samudhirakani. The neighbor's elder brother happens to be a former Councilor.
The irony is that Jai falls in love with the Councilor's daughter. When the councilor is ditched by a member of an opposite gang, the trio step in and bump off the man. Unfortunately Samudhirakani doesn't help them this time and the three are remanded for murder. However, they manage to come out themselves.
They then vow to settle scores with Samudhirakani and the Councilor. The revenge plot has enough twists and turns.
A movie is loaded with fun and suspense all through and is pleasant to watch coming across as a whiff of fresh air amidst commercial clichés. Sasikumar and Jai impress. Their body language and diction of the Madurai Tamil are noteworthy.
Due credit should be given to music composer James Vasanthan, a television anchor-turned-music director. He has reminded everyone of Ilayaraja during his heydays, James Vasanthan's background score is scintillating.
Sasikumar is a welcome addition to the list of talented directors taking centre stage in Tamil cinema in recent days.
’Subramaniapuram’ is a must-watch movie for those who love realism in Tamil Cinema.
Watch Online
Review:
The producer in director Shankar is known for spotting the right talent. In ‘Eeram’, he has brought out the filmmaker in his former-associate Arivazhagan. S Pictures, which has made a name for churning out movies on different genre, has dared to deliver an eerie thriller, which is a rarity in Tamil cinema.
Arivazhagan, quiet like his mentor, has come out with a movie that has gripping screenplay coupled with good use of technology. What starts as a crime thriller takes twists and turns to end up as a horror show.
The debutant director has been assisted by a young brigade of technicians and lesser known star cast. ‘Eeram’ lives up to its theme- all is wet and watery in the film from the first frame till the last.
Making a seat-edge thriller on super-natural elements is no easy task. It has to be logical. The young filmmaker takes the responsibility on his shoulder and lives up to the reputation entrusted on him by his mentor.
The movie revolves around Ramya (Sindhu Menon). She is found dead in a bathtub at her posh apartment. Vasu (Aadhi), a top cop takes the responsibility of investigating the death. He suspects foul play in the incident.
He enquires Bala (Nandaa), Ramya’s husband and several other neighbours. However, he is yet to make progress in the case. An interesting flashback reveals that Vasu and Ramya were lovers in Trichy.
They estrange after Ramya’s father (Rajasekar) refuses for their marriage. Meanwhile, four murders take place in the apartment complex where Ramya lived. Vasu gets the shock of his life during the investigation. Revealing more on the story would take away the suspense element. Watch the movie to know what happened next.
Aadhi, who played a rustic youth in ‘Mirugam’, plays a suave cop. With the image makeover, he fits the bill well. Reminding a blend of Suriya of ‘Kaakha Kaakha’ and Vikram in ‘Sami’, Aadhi promises a lot.
Sindhu Menon plays a timid wife. She lends credibility to her role with expressive eyes and neat portrayal. Nandaa, who hitherto played a romantic youth, dons a different role. He deserves appreciation for taking the guts to do it.
The rest of the cast including actor-director Srinath, Saranya Mohan and Lakshmi Ramakrishnan have performed well. The young music composer Thaman (introduced as an actor in Shankar’s ‘Boys’), has come up with soul-stirring music. Visual effects are the USP in the film and it manages to create an element of suspense among the audience.
The scene-stealer however is cinematographer Manoj Paramahamsa, who does his lens do all the talking. He has captured the whole movie on a different colour tone as water finds a place in almost all the sequences, quiet appropriate to the title.
Arivazhagan seems to have begun a journey which would go long and long. However, the second-half seems to be a bit draggy needing immediate chopping of few scenes. Shankar has once again proved that all hopes are not lost in Tamil cinema. Cheers to ‘Eeram’ team.
Watch Online
Review:
When the villains of Kung Fu Hustle introduce themselves with a swishy line dance, you know you’re in for something special. No it’s not the latest Baz Luhrman musical; it’s the new Hong Kong film from actor/writer/director Stephen Chow.
The well choreographed bad guys are “The Axe Gang”, and they’ve just finished killing off their gangland competition. They call the city’s ineffective cops out of hiding to pick up the bodies, and go back to celebrating. It’s 1940’s Shanghai and they have the run of the town. Enter Sing (Stephen Chow), a wannabe gangster and two bit crook. In the poor neighborhood of “Pig Sty Alley” he attempts to con a barber out of some cash. He botches everything and suddenly the whole Axe Gang is declaring war on the residents of “Pig Sty”, with the mewling, prat-fall prone Sing stuck somewhere around the edges.
Sing is unlucky to say the least, and his ineffectual attempts at gangdom keep landing him in wacky trouble. Chow has an amazing knack for comic timing and physical comedy, and it’s on full display in Sing. With the film wildly over the top, he mixes crazy CGI with his own abilities to create vicious and unexpected site gags. The movie just keeps escalating, one-upping each impossible over-the-top moment with something even more hilarious and even more ridiculous. When the Axe Gang attacks, the residents of Pig Sty are defended by the likes of a noodle-maker and an effeminate tailor. The fat, chain-smoking landlady even gets in the act, accompanied into battle by her deceptively sluggish, pajama wearing husband.
Chow doesn’t stop with topping himself with big moment after moment. He packs his film with little details and running gags that’ll keep you laughing in between the intentionally outlandish battles. The local barber sports an Elvis haircut and likes to keep his pants down (Perhaps for ventilation?) and in moments of death, characters consistently forget they speak Chinese. Unexpected little gags like that keep the movie balanced, saving it from drowning in a sea of huge battles and crazy Kung Fu powered old men.
It’s like Chow has thrown Bugs Bunny and Jackie Chan in a blender and then had the resulting film directed by Quentin Tarantino. The movie is packed with energy and never stops moving, even if the characters do. Chow’s previous film, Shaolin Soccer showed flashes of this, but never quite reached the heights this one does, with its killer blending of slapstick comedy and Kill Bill style Kung Fu. It’s cartoony and full of life, Chow has hit his stride in a way few other Asian filmmakers have managed to. The film is a visual feast. Sure it uses a lot of obvious CGI but it works in the context of what Kung Fu Hustle is, in fact for this experience looking cartoony is a plus.
The performances are all around fantastic. Chow as mentioned has a wicked sense of physical wit, but the other castmembers prove every bit his equal. Wah Yuen and and Qiu Yuen easily still the show as the Landlord and Landlady respectively. Kwok Kuen Chan wins points as the silly dancing yet stylish Axe Gang leader, and Sri Lung Leung is wonderful as the flip flop wearing Beast.
If there’s any criticism to be leveled at it, it’s that Sing disappears about midway through the film to make room for Pokemon style gang battles, battles in which the powers of the combatants keep escalating until they’re ready to bring Sing back in to become a parody version of Neo. Of course when we think parody, we think obvious hack jokes. We think the Wayans brothers. Kung Fu Hustle works on a much more subtle, creative level to parody all sorts of things without beating you over the head with them. The disappearance of Sing is a bit odd narratively, though the battles that take place while he’s off camera are hilarious and wonderful. It just makes it a little hard to latch onto him as a main character, when he’s spending so much time off camera.
Kung Fu Hustle is inspired lunacy by design, the sort of movie best served with a hearty pitcher of beer and a big group of drunken friends. It crosses whatever cultural boundaries might normally separate American audiences from more serious Asian movies like Hero to create a universally fun viewing experience. You don’t need to “get” Asian cinema to laugh at the jokes, or giggle at the intentionally zany moves. Chow misses only a falling anvil to make Hustle a worthy, R-rated successor to “Looney Tunes”. This is a filmmaker who clearly loves making entertaining movies, and that joy translates into his absurdly delightful, screwball film.
Watch Online
Review:
The original "The Taking of Pelham One Two Three" (1974) starring Robert Shaw and Walter Matthau is a classic. Tony Scott's remake, "The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3" (2009) is not.
This remake begins with what has become the obtrusive and defining style of Tony Scott's recent pictures.
Frenetic editing, sudden wipes, stuttering frames, rapid focus-pulls, repetitive zooms and ear piercing sound design to punctuate every moment. This style soon becomes sickening and you wish for a moment a shot would simply hold for more than 3 seconds without constant self-conscious cinematic gimmicks.
This arranged marriage of production effects even made me laugh out loud when during a helicopter shot of the New York skyline, the sun disappears behind some sky scrappers and each time it does you get a "whoosh" sound followed by a train "beeep"!
Soon after this nauseous beginning, a simple edit of Denzel Washington sitting at his desk is badly botched when a mid-shot cuts to a close-up and he is looking and sitting in a completely different position!
On top of these shallow post production and in-camera effects, the core of the original has been dumbed down with a profane and ranting script. The joy of the original ending has gone to be replaced by guns, ranting, salutes and machismo.
Gone is the tension and excitement of the original. Gone is the subtlety of performance. Gone is the humour. In fact everything that made the original great has been wiped clean from this horrendous exercise in style over content.
The wife asks for a gallon of milk (a ridiculous scene) and I am sure you would have a better time trying to drink that gallon of milk in one go than suffer this atrocious attempt at film-making.
Tony Scott is less talented than his brother but still showed promise with his early work. If he continues down this route of brain damaged film-making, I will avoid his pictures as I do those of Michael Bay and Ron Howard.
Watch Online
REVIEW:
Gladiator
Directed by Ridley Scott
Majestic and psychological, Gladiator marks the return of a director and a genre to the big screen. While Ridley Scott (Blade Runner, Duelists, Alien) fell into oblivion after more than risky choices (GI Jane, White Squall), and given that the "toga and sandal movie" had become nothing more than the object of amusing kitsch, this time he succeeds with a tour de force. By breathing new life to a deposed genre, he is able to revive the flame of his fiery debut and at the same time create a new movie hero onscreen: a gladiator, and in the flesh: Russell Crowe.
Above all, Gladiator is proof. The film shows that Hollywood can still produce quality films if given the means. In effect, the film that benefits from a colossal budget is of course spectacular and luxurious, but all the same privileged with the psychology of its characters. To give depth to the characters, Scott called for a solid cast with the presence of talented actors, a rare occurrence for a big budget film. Finally, a cinematagraphy rich with artisitc touches does more than gove life to the film; it brings an unexpected aesthetic dimension.
Russell Crowe incarnates a glorious roman general chosen by the dying emperor to succede him. The emperor's son (Joaquin Phoenix) covets the throne, and after getting rid of his father he tries to eliminate his troublesome rival who flees.Maximus falls into the hands of slave merchants and becomes a slave whose only goal is the avenge himself against the emperor responsible for the assassination of his wife and son.
While the script is fairly simple, Scott revisits the "toga and sandle" genre by making direct allusions to the films that marked the era. The film is based largely on Stanley Kubrick's Spartacus as well as Conan the Barbarian. In the image of Spartacus, Maximus uses his hero's stature to rally the gladiators and rebel against the the power in place. Just like Conan, Maximus becomes a slave and gladiator whose only goal is to avenge the assassination of his family. And in the theme of vengeance, motor of the spaghetti western genre, there is also a clear reference to the final duel between Maximus and Commodus as we hear the music take Morriconian accents.
Gladiator is above all a grand spectacle. Thanks to a noteworthy budget, the film is able to reflect the splendors of the epoch through decoration, scenery, costumes, and a pushed attention to detail. The filmaker gratifies us with bloody and grandiose fight scenes with a grand sense of movement and an explosif rage exposing the savage side of said "civilized" society. Yet Ridley Scott does not content himself with just projecting an image of the era. He brings another supplementary dimension with arty cinematography and metaphors. The opening scene of the battle is visually electrifying. The use of ash colored filters contrasting with the lively red of blood as well as an epileptic montage creates an impression of unequal fury going combining with an artistic dimension. A result much more compelling than the overestimated opening shot of Saving Private Ryan. Scott returns to his first love, an aesthetic photography that established his reputation. Certain scenes resemble paintings, even ancient engravings that take him to his first film, Duellists, that established the artistic palette of his camera. Finally, the filmmaker inserts surrealist scenes, metaphors that come to bring a depth to the work (a tendance that seems to apply to epic movies of the moment, judging Luc Besson's The Messenger—notably the scenes in the fields). Knowing the beliefs that were anchored in the epochs renders the preceding even more justified.
Another aspect bringing depth to this film is the attention given to the characters. Between action scenes, Scott establishes a fairly slow rhythm, close to the narration that renders the character more human. Each character is the prey of his or her own demons and not limited to a sole dimension, good or bad. Thanks to dialogue and psychological approach, one understands the mechanisms that push them to act, making the movie more convincing. One also notes that, a rarity for such a film, the female character is not limited to being arm jewelry but also knows how to pull strings. This slow rhythm and this dichotomy of the characters is without a doubt reminiscent of Blade Runner.
In order to render the characters more credible and the scenes more psychological, it was necessary to recruit talanted actors and not just big muscles in togas. Russell Crowe was the perfect choice, since on top of being able to carry the film on his gladiator shoulders, he is one of the most talented actors of his generation. After his excellent acting in The Insider (a film that unfortunately went by unnoticed), it's clear that this film will be the springboard for his career and procure him the recognition his deserves. He passes with ease between despair, introspection, and rage, all of which make the film work. Crowe is supported by a solid cast, with Joaquin Phoenix, always perfect in a role of a deranged and deceitful character; Connie Nielson, who moves between an iron fist and sensitivity; to Oliver Reed in his last role as an old circus lion; Richard Harris as a dying emporer, and finally, and Derek Jacobi as a senator.
The film, more than a quality show is the vehicle for a certain message that the director conceals in a scene between two senators during the fights. These two discuss the discuss the cleverness of the emperor—more likely the sister (Connie Nielson)—in amusing the crowds with "entertainment". In offering them a spectacle in the arenas that are the real heart of Rome, he soothes his people and can in this way gain their favor, influence them, lure them, and manipulate them. It's difficult not to perceive a direct allusion to movie screens, the veritible center of our society, and the power that Hollywood and directors exercise over us. And the fact that reality topples over into fiction like current events and that our decisions or ways of life are sometimes influenced by what we see on the screen further confirms this idea. If the emperor symbolizes the filmmaker and Hollywood and the fights are the cinema, then the gladiatior symbolizes the actor—or the star—whose power captivates our society.
Despite some cliches and a conventional script, Gladiator is simply a success that we'd like to see more of in Hollywood, thanks to Ridley Scott's angle on this story. It's this angle that makes this a spectacle of quality, making it stand out from other low class products that Hollywood tosses at us. And the approaching release of Roland Emmerich's The Patriot oddly plays with the same themes and identical scenes, rendering the contrast between Gladiator and the rest of these foul marketing productions even more obvious.
Watch Online
Review:
Stag Night tell the story of four friends celebrating their buddies last nights as a bachelor in NYC. The movie begins, with the four men leaving one strip club to make their way uptown to another bar. There choice of transportation being the subway. Entering the train, run into two strippers from the club they just left. Not wasting time, two of the men proceed to get friendly with girls. One welcomes the advance the other does not. Resulting in her attempt to make her point spraying mace in his face. This results in group forcing the doors of the train open to get air. Unfortunately, doing so at a station long since abandoned. Before they have a chance to realize what they have done the train, pulls away. Leaving the group, trapped in the station. From there the terror ensues, as the group fights to make it out of the subway tunnels alive.
Having lived in NYC for many years. I have to admit, the premises of the movie is not that far fetched. I have seen and can attest some homeless men, do indeed look like this that live in the tunnels. The shanty town do or at least did exists. The inhabitants of these underground villages have indeed, found ways to get electricity and running water, in certain cases. Yes, the chickens and the dogs are accurate. There are abandoned stations, on all the lines.
Unfortunately, as strong as the premises is and the amount of material the director had to make this into above average horror movie. It just never quite brings it home.
Although, entertaining, with most of the elements of a good horror movie. It still falls short. Leaving you with a moan rather than a scream! The special effects and gore do deliver and are well done. However, the camera work is annoying and distracting. The acting is mediocre. Over all the movie lacks the tension and suspense needed to hold your interest and really get involved. In my opinion the movie Creep, a earlier horror flick set in the London's subway system. Was much more effective in this aspect.
The fact the movie never actually climaxes, it seems stumble along. The end result resembles a big long, "run on sentence"!
Watch Online
REVIEW:
Directed by: Todd Phillips
Written by: Jon Lucas, Scott Moore
Starring: Bradley Cooper, Ed Helms, Zach Galifianakis, Heather Graham, Ken Jeong, Justin Bartha, Jeffrey Tambor, Mike Tyson
Although the summer has become primarily the domain of special effects blockbusters, there will always be high demand for a few solid feel-good comedies as well. While the ones with the biggest stars inevitably tend to get the most attention, this year it may be a different story.
The Hangover does not have an Adam Sandler or Will Ferrell to rely on to bring in the crowds, so instead, it has been forced to build buzz the old fashioned way: by being hilarious. To be fair, Bradley Cooper, Ed Helms, and Zach Galifianakis are not entirely unknown (Ed Helms currently stars in The Office, while Cooper is known for his roles in Alias and movies like Wedding Crashers and Yes Man), but they’re also far from being bankable Hollywood A-list actors (yet). In this case, their relative anonymity is precisely what makes the movie work. None of these guys overshadow the film with their own established personalities, and instead they create a dynamic that is natural and relatable as a group of friends involved in a bachelor party gone wrong in Las Vegas.
The Hangover is, in essence, a creative twist on the “one crazy night” and “road trip” comedy templates. I don’t think it’s necessary to go into much detail as far as the plot is concerned; all you need to know is that a groom and his three groomsmen head out for a night of debauchery, and then wake up in the morning to find that their hotel room has been completely trashed and the groom has vanished. They have no recollection of what happened the night before, but as they try to retrace their steps, things get more and more out of hand.
One of the movie’s greatest strengths is the way in which the story is told; the audience is kept in suspense as the mystery unravels essentially in real-time. The shared state of confusion between the audience and the characters only serves to heighten the hilarity. I can’t think of too many comedies that use this little narrative trick, but it works wonders here. While it could limit the film’s replay value if the humour was too heavily dependent on shocks and surprises, this is not the only thing the movie has going for it.
As I mentioned, the chemistry between the cast is top notch, and much like the show Entourage, it isn’t about brilliant jokes and punchlines so much as it is about that feeling of camaraderie and trash talking among close friends who are stuck in a tense predicament. The script alone isn’t extraordinary (it’s written by the same guys who did Four Christmases, Ghosts of Girlfriends Past, and Rebound starring Martin Lawrence), but when combined with the incredulous reactions of the actors and what I assume are some improvised bits, it all becomes that much more infectious. The movie has a great sense of pacing for the most part, and manages to keep upping the ante and increasing the energy level along the way.
Although there isn’t any one actor whose individual performance makes the movie, I have to admit that Zach Galifianakis kind of steals the show. Ed Helms is the responsible square of the group, and Bradley Cooper is the straight man with a frat boy sensibility, but Galifianakis is the wild card. His character is introduced as an outsider to the group, being the brother of the bride, so no one quite knows what to expect from him. Viewers unfamiliar with Galifianakis may anticipate a stereotypical obnoxious fat guy act, but he turns this idea completely on its head with his strange demeanor, soft-spoken delivery and weird, sensitive moments. There’s no question that this is going to be a breakout role for him.
One supporting actor who brings a pretty noteworthy solo performance as well is Ken Jeong (Role Models, Knocked Up). His turn as the quirky Asian gangster Mr. Chow is so out there that you can’t help but laugh, and is certainly going to be another one of the most talked about elements of this film. Jeffrey Tambor (Arrested Development) also has a few funny moments as the father of the bride, and Heather Graham looks good while breastfeeding (!). Then, of course, there’s Mike Tyson.
Out of all the stuff that had the most potential, I felt that Mike Tyson’s scenes fell a bit flat. Maybe it’s because some of those moments were spoiled in the trailers, and maybe it’s just because Tyson is more funny in real life than in a scripted comedy. It could also be that it felt like they were checking off “ironic celebrity cameo” from their checklist of required elements for a successful comedy (they also have a musical number, full frontal male nudity, and yes, everyone’s favourite buzzword: bromance). There were also a few scenes that felt like they were upping the obscenities in order to inject life into some dull dialogue. All that aside though, the cards are just stacked so much in favour of The Hangover that it’s hard to imagine anyone not having a good time with it.
The movie is even pretty visually impressive for a summer comedy; Todd Phillips (Old School, Starsky and Hutch) knows how to take things to the next level, and cinematographer Lawrence Sher previously shot such indie films as Garden State and The Promotion. I particularly loved the way they put together the gambling sequence that parodies movies like 21 and Rain Man.
The bottom line is that The Hangover is a great movie to watch with a crowd, and by the time it reaches the soon-to-be-legendary end credits, there’s a strong chance you and everyone around you will be rolling in the aisles. How they managed to maintain an R-rating here is beyond me, but it is such a brilliant way to cap off the film that it seems only appropriate.
We’ve still got Year One, Bruno and Funny People to look forward to, but already I think there’s a good chance The Hangover will end up being the biggest comedy of the summer. If not in terms of box office numbers, then at least in terms of lasting impressions. This is one road trip you don’t want to skip. — Sean
Watch Online
Jaggi Vasudev
Sadhguru Jaggi Vasudev is an Indian yogi and mystic. He is the founder of Isha Foundation which administers yoga centers around the world, including India and the United States.
Jagadish Vasudev was born in Mysore, Karnataka. At the age of twenty-five on September 23 1982, he had a deep spiritual experience, and subsequently established Isha Foundation, a non-religious, not-for-profit, public service organization, which addresses all aspects of human wellbeing. The Isha Yoga Center near Coimbatore was founded in 1992, and hosts a series of programs intended to heighten self-awareness through the ancient practice of yoga. These programs are offered to people ranging from the highly educated to the illiterate, from corporate leaders to prisoners.
Sadhguru spoke in four panels at the 2007 World Economic Forum, addressing issues ranging from diplomacy to economic development, education and the environment. In 2006, he addressed the World Economic Forum, the Tällberg Forum in Sweden, and the Australian Leadership Retreat. He has also served as a delegate to the United Nations Millennium Peace Summit and the World Peace Congress. He is the only speaker to have been invited to the World Economic Forum three years in a row.
Sadhguru has had interviews with the BBC, Bloomberg, CNBC, CNNfn, and Newsweek International.
He was a delegate to the United Nations Millennium World Peace Summit , and a participant at the World Economic Forum in 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2009.
Sadhguru is a practitioner of yogic temple building and consecration, creating the Dhyanalinga yogic temple in 1999. The consecration process employed Prana prathista which is different from the Mantra prathista process prevalent in Kumbabishekam rituals in practiced through the modern times. Ancient Indian alchemical processes were allegedly used extensively in the temple building and consecration. Contrary to science, it is claimed that the presence of solid mercury at room temperature can be observed in the building.
Project GreenHands and initiative to plant 114 million saplings to increase the existing tree cover of Tamil Nadu State by 10 % is spearheaded by Jaggi Vasudev. The project entered the Guinness Book of World Records for planting the maximum number of tree saplings on a single day.
Vasudev was a key participant in the 2006 documentary film ONE: The Movie.
Sadhguru going to consecrate one more temple as Linga Bhyravi a very powerful feminine temple which will be very useful for the spiritual practicer's and spiritual seekers.
Videos
References
