Macbeth is yet another adaptation of the famous 17th century Shakespearean tragedy. The film is a story of loyalty, seduction, desire, betrayal and ultimately, justice. Anyone who has ever even heard of the famous Bard could arguably be well aware of the story of Macbeth. Macbeth has been adapted countless times into film, from Akira Kurosawa’s feudal Japanese Throne of Blood (1957) to Roman Polanski’s more traditional Macbeth (1971) or even Vishal Bhardwaj’s Indian backdrop of Maqbool (2003). But the question is; does Justin Kurzel’s version bring anything new to the famous story of betrayal? Macbeth is visually stunning, with each scene cleverly expressed through fog or sunlight, creating a genuinely haunting atmosphere. But apart from its visual representation, Macbeth lacks the narrative depth of the original Bard’s play. The soliloquies are uneven and awkward at times, the character motivations seem unconvincing and the key events occur throughout the film because the plot demands it, rather the characters convincingly acting the emotions out themselves. It’s quite a shame because Michael Fassbender and Marion Cotillard seem ideal casting for the story but quite frankly, both of them have given better performances in other films. It is apparent that Kurzel tried hard to revitalise the tale with poetic imagery but it ultimately overbore the narrative itself, muddling the sense of awe and wonder one would receive after watching a magnificent Shakespearean adaptation. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Still of Michael Fassbender in Macbeth (2015)[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Still of Marion Cotillard in Macbeth (2015)[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Still of Michael Fassbender in Macbeth (2015)[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Still of Marion Cotillard and Elizabeth Debicki in Macbeth (2015)[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Still of Michael Fassbender in Macbeth (2015)[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Still of Marion Cotillard and Michael Fassbender in Macbeth (2015)[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Still of Marion Cotillard and Michael Fassbender in Macbeth (2015)[/caption]

A story with multiple characters, the main one being Mark Baum (Steve Carell), about the world financial crisis in 2008 and highlights the greed, fraud and utter misery that occurred as a result of it. Miseries like unemployment, loss of housing, loss of pension, and the downfall of Wall Street firms. It starts off with the bombardment of finance related terminologies and people explaining the meaning of each term. The directors made this process entertaining by explaining it in unconventional ways; a memorable example of which was a scene when well-known chef and television show-host Anthony Bourdain talked about dumping fetid fish that nobody bought and put it into a stew that he, hypothetically, sold to people, to explain how customers may not even know that they are getting rotten fish. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qAZzCQpl79E Think Confessions of a Shopaholic meets The Wolf of Wall Street — economic concepts explained to the everyday man combined with almost the primal greed and immorality often seen in human nature. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Screenshot[/caption] The central concept that the story revolves around is that before the financial crisis, the American banking system sold housing mortgage bonds, which were, for the most part, according to Baum, “dog shit.” [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Screenshot[/caption] One man, Michael Burry (Christian Bale), notices the discrepancy and realises that if the losses suffered ever rise to eight per cent, then that is doomsday. The collapse of the American, as well as other economies. Everyone thinks these people who predict the collapse have lost it, and so, they venture to make a profit on their prediction, by betting against the survival of the American economy. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Screenshot[/caption] The fact that the percentage is like a ticking time bomb — four per cent, five per cent, will it reach eight?—adds to urgency and thrill of the movie’s intellectual experience. The film has multiple recurring characters each knowing about the impending doom, and it shows how each of them plan to, fail to, and eventually succeed at gaining profit out of the disaster. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Screenshot[/caption] Baum, the main character, starts off in the film an angry, disgruntled man who has just suffered a tragic loss. The most characteristic trait of his is that he is not afraid to tell anyone “I told you so” or that they are completely wrong. He doesn’t trust the system either, because he’s worked in banking himself. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Screenshot[/caption] There was relatively less character development in this film. Eventually, he learns to open up about his problems and his personal losses, and stopped saying “I told you so” to people. This character arc, however, was not shown to the audience directly, just stated in the end credits, which in my opinion was not the best strategy because to the audience, he was just an angry man yelling at people. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Screenshot[/caption] What I learned from this film is that human beings are always seeking authority figures who know what they’re doing, from lawyers to teachers to bankers, and that these authority figures know that people without their knowledge are likely to give them their blind trust. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Screenshot[/caption] If I had to summarise the purpose of this movie, it’s to make its viewer realise the essence and importance of questioning authority, the masses, and basically everything, even one’s own knowledge. This brings into context a quote from Mark Twain displayed in the beginning of the movie:

“It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so.”

Violent, bloody and unapologetic; that’s why I love Quentin Tarantino films. His work entrails a certain love for cinema which sadly lacks in many major Hollywood productions today. The Hateful Eight is a good reminder as to why his vision is still relevant in the world of cinema today. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Publicity[/caption] With The Hateful Eight, Tarantino marks his second take towards the Western genre. The story starts off a decade (or so) after the American Civil War. An American landscape that may have, for the time period, resolved the issue of slavery but the social/racial backdrop still remains to be cultivated into the newly founded freedom for the black folks. A stagecoach rides through the snowy landscape of Wyoming, where a bounty hunter named John Ruth (Kurt Russell) needs to deliver his fugitive Daisy Domergue (Jennifer Jason Leigh) to collect his $10,000 reward. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Kurt Russell. Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Jennifer Jason Leigh. Photo: Screenshot[/caption] Along the way, they encounter Major Marquis Warren (Samuel L Jackson), a black former union soldier turned infamous bounty hunter and Chris Mannix (Walton Goggins), a southern renegade who claims to be the town’s new Sheriff. In the midst of a relentless, ghastly blizzard, they seek refuge in a Minnie’s (Dana Gourrier) Haberdashery Cabin. And thus, the real story of The Hateful Eight begins. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Samuel L Jackson. Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Walton Goggins. Photo: Screenshot[/caption] Hateful Eight is, in essence, a Kammerspielfilm. A plot centered on a certain group of characters, trapped within the confines of a single room (or in this case, a cabin). Every gesture or reaction has consequences and in the end, all bets are off. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Samuel L Jackson. Photo: Screenshot[/caption] What’s great about almost all Tarantino films is the bizarre mixture of snippy dialogue, eccentric characterisation and jarring imagery. He is unapologetic to his critics for his use of violence or foul language but presents them in such a delicious, dark, humoristic fashion that chances are you will chuckle at its absurdity. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Samuel L. Jackson, Jennifer Jason Leigh and Kurt Russell. Photo: Screenshot[/caption] Each of the Hateful Eight have a unique character that one would love to explore deeper into their past. From Jennifer Jason Leigh’s tobacco chewing addiction to Goggins’s obsession with the ‘good old days’ of the pre-Civil War South; they are all wonderfully ludicrous. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Kurt Russell. Photo: Screenshot[/caption] However, the problem of the film lies within its own narrative structure. The film clearly lingers on every scene a bit too long and thus the audience is not allowed to assemble the puzzle of a particular scene within their own heads. This might be due to the fact that Tarantino is clearly too in love with his own writing. While his previous films like Pulp Fiction(1994) and Jackie Brown (1997) had displayed his poignant yet understandable character motivations, his later films like Django Unchained (2012) and The Hateful Eight tend to muddle those motivations by over explaining them. It’s an age-old argument in cinema that visuals should reflect the storytelling and not the other way around. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Quentin Tarantino, Jennifer Jason Leigh, Tim Roth, Kurt Russell and Robert Richardson. Photo: IMDb[/caption] The absence of certain reaction shots of other Hateful Eight members during crucial dramatic moments within the cabin are also clearly jarring and might take the audience out of the moment. If guns are blazed, certain heads should turn or a level of concern begs to be displayed. They are all somehow conveniently absent. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Channing Tatum. Photo: Screenshot[/caption] But even with its obvious flaws, The Hateful Eight shines when it needs to the most. The scenes involving the letter and the tale of Jackson’s encounter with a certain Grayback fellow are undoubtedly hilarious and make you feel a tad bit guilty for laughing at its serious subject matter. Other than the loose whodunnit plot, the film thrives wonderfully through its production design. The white Wyoming landscape, the blue coffee pot, the broken cabin door; they are all just as important features as the ensemble cast of this film. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Jennifer Jason Leigh, Kurt Russell and Bruce Dern. Photo: Screenshot[/caption] If Django Unchained was Tarantino’s homage to the Western genre then The Hateful Eight is a tad bit unclear as to what it’s aiming for. It starts off as a traditional Western and ends as a murder mystery. This tonal shift might be bothersome for some but it never takes away the credibility of the film’s ludicrous yet hilarious nature. The film proudly states two facts about the film’s production in the opening credits: 1. It was shot on 65mm Ultra Panavision 70 [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Quentin Tarantino. Photo: IMDb[/caption] 2. It’s the eighth directorial film of Quentin Tarantino [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Publicity[/caption] Since his first film, Tarantino has clearly grown as a filmmaker and it’s his relentless energy to always experiment and explore the landscape of the cinematic language that is commendable and appreciated. His love for cinema is clearly visible through his work. Even if it’s a flawed Tarantino film, it’s always worth a watch.

Here we go again, yet another tediously mindless sequel. If torturing us with the 2013 action thriller, Olympus Has Fallen, wasn’t enough the producers come up with a bigger and dumber version. Was there even a demand for it? I mean come on, is anyone in here even aware of the predecessor let alone calling out for a sequel? Why, just why? [embed width-"620" height="348"]https://vimeo.com/145566585[/embed] The original featured terrorists taking over the White House, with Secret Service agent Mike Banning (Gerard Butler) having to rescue President Benjamin Asher (Aaron Eckhart) while averting a nuclear cataclysm. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Aaron Eckhart.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] Banning’s battlefield has now shifted to England’s capital. Blowing up an American city is a little old-fashioned now and London is currently the city most en vogue, in terms of destruction. Case in point, both Thor and GI Joe franchises with their contribution in forcing the London bridge fall down. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Gerard Butler.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] I personally get all excited whenever I happen across anything that’s to do with Pakistan in a foreign language film, but unfortunately, nine times out of 10 the excitement is short lived, since the reference somehow or the other has roots in terrorism. London Has Fallen didn’t disappoint with the stereotyping either, with Pakistani connection strong with the antagonists. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Screenshot[/caption] If we are talking genre, London Has Fallen is in essence a siege movie, a cheap knockoff of the greatest siege movie ever made, Die Hard (1988). If you ask me, even mentioning London Has Fallen in the same sentence as Die Hard should be a criminal offence but, nevertheless, I begrudgingly concede that London Has Fallen is basically an appallingly bad Die Hard in the city of London. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Gerard Butler.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] The narrative kick starts into motion when the British PM suffers a fatal heart attack and the US president accompanied by Banning, along with other world leaders, fly into the capital for the funeral at St Paul’s Cathedral. Now right before the funeral, a carefully orchestrated series of attacks take out five heads of state and mayhem ensues. Banning manages to get the US president out of harm’s way, but what follows is a tiresome game of cats chasing the mice. The proverbial feline gang is virtually the whole city whose police and secret service agents have either been infiltrated or compromised by terrorists. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Aaron Eckhart and Gerard Butler.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] The story really only acts as an excuse to put Butler and the gang in front of more baddies with guns, with no consideration whatsoever paid to character and plot development. But for anyone out there who is still reminiscing those ripped eight-pack King Leonidas sported in 300 (2006), we’ve got loads of Butler. He’s gruff and ruthless, and occasionally funny too which is probably the sole reason this movie is remotely bearable. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Screenshot[/caption] It’s as if there’s not enough real-life terrorism out there for us that we needed the wearisome London Has Fallen to fill in the gaps. And you know the worst part, you can bet this isn’t the last we’ll see of this jingoistic eyesore. [poll id="455"]

From the tragic to the absurd, the Coen brothers’ names have become synonymous with dark comedy, snappy dialogue and an unprecedented love for filmmaking. With Hail Caesar! (2016), the Coen brothers pay tribute to the golden age of Hollywood but the story takes place when the studio system is at the brink of a downfall; television was introduced to mass audience and threatened the very existence of cinema and filmmaking. The film portrays the life of a studio fixer who is caught in major production of film, Hail Caesar!, celebrity gossip, a foreign plot to overthrow the Hollywood establishment and his guilt of being an unfaithful catholic. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ioOGOIpVG8 The film stars an ensemble cast of Josh Brolin, George Clooney, Scarlett Johansson, Alden Ehrenreich, Ralph Fiennes, Tilda Swinton and Channing Tatum. Watch the video above for the full review. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Scarlett Johansson.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] George Clooney.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Channing Tatum.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Josh Brolin.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Ralph Fiennes and Alden Ehrenreich
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Josh Brolin and Scarlett Johansson.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Josh Brolin and Tilda Swinton
Photo: Screenshot[/caption]

Some animated characters remain with us even after years of their first appearance in a movie. Case in point: Po, the fun-loving Kung Fu fighting panda – the antagonist of the Kung Fu Panda franchise. Even after Po’s debut appearance, in the first part of the Kung Fu Panda movie series in 2008, the series still have novel offerings for the audience with each of the sequels that followed. [embed width-"620" height="348"]https://vimeo.com/131208776[/embed] With the release of Kung Fu Panda 3, viewers went on another adventure with Po (Jack Black) and his friends, Tigress (Angelina Jolie), Master Shifu (Dustin Hoffman), Master Viper (Lucy Liu), Master Monkey (Jackie Chan), Master Mantis (Seth Rogen), Master Crane (David Cross) and others. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Santa Banta[/caption] Entertainingly, the producers and writers have managed to keep not just the stories of all three editions of the Kung Fu Panda movies different, they have slickly ensured to keep the movies visually appealing and gripping, without it becoming a drag. Kung Fu Panda 3 begins with Po realising his dream of becoming the master of Jade Palace, which he has inherited from the retired Master Shifu. He discovers, however, that teaching Kung Fu is hard when, as a result, the Furious Five members are injured. Po is left dispirited as a teacher, but is advised by Master Shifu to be himself. One day, Po heads to his father, Mr Ping’s (James Hong), noodle shop where a panda named Li Shan (Bryan Cranston) breaks Po’s dumpling-eating record. Both soon learn that Li is Po’s biological father and they bond with each other much to Ping’s jealousy. Previously, Li Shan appeared in Po’s flashback memory in Kung Fu Panda 2 (2011); this time he has a larger role in the movie. Po, then, visits the secret panda village with his father and learns about his history. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Screenshot[/caption] However, Po does not realise that in his absence from the Valley of Peace, an evil warrior, Kai (JK Simmons), has escaped from the spirit world and is stealing the ‘chi’ of all the warriors living in Po’s valley. Kai’s next target is the panda village. It is up to Po now to beat Kai, and to teach every one Kung Fu, after all, he is the Dragon Warrior and Master Shifu’s successor. Will Po be able to train everyone? Will he transfer all of his knowledge before Kai returns? Kung Fu Panda 3 has carried on the tradition of hilarious one-liners and dialogues that keep the audience chortling. Two such scenes in the movie are hilarious; first when Po meets his father for the first time and the village animals are anticipating that Li Shan will recognise Po because there is no other panda living in the valley. And the second is when Po first meets Kai. You do not want to miss these two scenes, so make sure you buy the popcorn and snacks in advance. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Screenshot[/caption] A major twist awaits viewers at the climax of the movie – something that will bring tears to the eyes. Whether they will be tears of joy or sorrow is for me to know and you to find out. DreamWorks Animation has done a fantastic job with the animations, especially the panda village with its lush green hills, mountains, and the picture-perfect natural landscape. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Screenshot[/caption] Although Kung Fu Panda 3 has a different story with the main characters experiencing new adventures, the movie also promises a handful of déjà vu moments. I believe Kung Fu Panda 3 is the best movie in the franchise for many reasons. After two movies, Po finally meets his father and his fellow pandas. This can create a new story for a fourth sequel or a spinoff series focusing on Po and his family. Second, Kai is perhaps the strongest of all the villains Po has faced so far. In the first part of the franchise, Po fought Tai Lung, a snow leopard who was seeking revenge for his imprisonment in Kung Fu Panda (2008). And in the second part, Kung Fu Panda 2, it was Lord Shen, a peacock who killed Po’s family with his feathers. However, in Kung Fu Panda 3, the evil Tai, a yak, is a spirit warrior who can capture chi from any warrior, leaving them defenceless. This means Po has to dig deep inside to teach everyone Kung Fu and understand his own potential to defeat Tai. While facing Tai, Po has another personal issue; his two fathers both pulling in different directions. Po will have to balance his two fathers at a time when Tai is heading towards the panda village. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Screenshot[/caption] Kung Fu Panda 3 is the perfect weekend movie. Jack Black’s swift dialogue delivery, Dustin Hoffman’s sober voice for Master Shifu, JK Simmons’ evil personification of Tai, and Bryan Cranston’s deep voice of Li Shan add meaning and depth into the characters and the story. Watch this movie if you are a Jack Black fan or if you want to have a good time. Kung Fu Panda 3 will not disappoint you at all. In fact, I can bet you will enjoy every second of it! Skadoosh!!! [poll id="463"]

All right, now here is a definitive list of all the people who under no circumstances can miss out on the chance to watch Kapoor & Sons while they can. The perfect elder child - Rahul Kapoor (Fawad Khan) [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Koimoi[/caption] If you are tired of living your life under the weight of all the expectations that come your way for acting to fulfil the ‘faultless child’ tag that you are burdened with and need to break free from the shackles of being eternally considered responsible. The quintessential black sheep – Arjun Kapoor (Sidharth Malhotra) [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Koimoi[/caption] If living forever under the shadow of a successful sibling, always thought off as second best and immature has worn you out. The estranged couple - Harsh Kapoor (Rajat Kapoor) and Sunita (Ratna Pathak Shah) [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Screenshot[/caption] If constant bickering about anything and everything, right down from a leaked pipe all the way up to the serious business of household finances, is slowly eating up your already gone sour relationship. The happy go lucky daddu (Grandpa) – Amarjeet Kapoor (Rishi Kapoor) [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Screenshot[/caption] And finally, if you are a weed-smoking, porn-watching octogenarian who is acting as the glue for a family slowly crumbling under the load of anger and resentment, then you better stop whatever the hell it is that you are doing right now and go grab yourself a ticket, because nothing can be as bizarrely therapeutic as watching the latest release from Dharma productions, Kapoor & Sons. [embed width-"620" height="348"]https://vimeo.com/154953351[/embed] It’s not just what has been noted above that will help all of you out there in a similar predicament to empathise with in the film. The fact every member of the Kapoor clan has additional skeletons in their respective closets is what makes this dysfunctional family such a curatively riveting watch. As for the rest of you, I bet you all have personal demons of your own that Kapoor & Sons can surely help exorcise. On the face of it, it is a relatively simple drama. Kapoor & Sons is the story of a mercurial Punjabi khaandaan (family) where the ever squabbling pair of ageing parents (Rajat and Ratna) have two sons, Rahul and Arjun who are not on the best of terms with each other. With such strained relationship dynamics this ought to be a recipe for dinner table disaster. But fear not, things aren’t coming to a head any meal-time soon since the brothers are living entirely separate lives in London and New Jersey. The perfect elder one, Rahul, is a bestselling novelist based in London. While the younger one, Arjun, is a struggling writer and a drifter, currently working as a bartender in New Jersey. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Screenshot[/caption] One fine day, the quirky grandfather (Rishi Kapoor) whose favourite prank is playing dead, actually suffers a heart attack and the separated siblings are summoned back home to be by his side and all familial hell breaks loose. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Screenshot[/caption] What follows is a household that’s teetering on the brink. Seething with bitterness, yet busy with the daily chores of life – like all dysfunctional families – the Kapoor clan too is always just one dinner-time talk away from reconciliation, but yet at the same time, also just one small act away from completely unravelling into total disintegration. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Screenshot[/caption] But there is still one person who is obliviously enjoying the reunion: daddu. Now having experienced death at close quarters with the attack, the eccentric patriarch of the family has a simple final wish. A family photograph! But amidst all the Kapoor madness, this straightforward desire turns out to be anything but. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Ndtv[/caption] This could be the account of any family anywhere and that is what makes Kapoor & Sons special. The drama is a bitter-sweet slice of your own life. It could have been Sardar & Sons or even Khan & Sons. Heck! ‘Put your own family name’ & Sons, could very well have been the title of the movie, for each of you would find your life parallel to the narrative of the movie at some indeterminate point. The tale is fascinatingly engaging despite being rooted in the everyday. You might even describe the plot as wafer-thin but what sets it apart from others is the command that Shakun Batra, the director has on the art of storytelling. Watching the trailer you could be forgiven for confusing Kapoor & Sons as yet another archaic love troika from the stables of Karan Johar. Despite Alia Bhatt’s introduction as a potential trigger to the ticking time bomb that is the edgy Kapoor siblings’ relation, the film steers clear of the Kuch Kuch Hota Hai (1998) and Kal Ho Naa Ho (2003) variety of regressive storytelling. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Screenshot[/caption] Alia plays her hyper, ditzy, blonde girl act yet again and along with Sidharth Malhotra, the duo is the weakest of the lot in terms of acting. It actually might be a little harsh to bracket Siddharth with Alia, mainly because he was saddled with a one-toned character and would have performed a lot better had his younger-brother character been crafted in a layered manner. https://www.instagram.com/p/BCHkccAtLCm? [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Screenshot[/caption] But there were no such characterisation issues with the elder sibling, Fawad Khan who owns the movie with his nuanced performance. His range of complex emotions is a total show-stealer and without giving too much away, hats off to him for displaying some real artistic cojones, playing a complex multi-layer character that no other leading Bollywood actor would have dared touched with a barge pole. Rajat Kapoor and Ratna Pathak Shah play the almost alienated couple with much ease. The pair manages to showcase love and resentment in a marriage so well, that they will remind you of your own parents. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Screenshot[/caption] Rishi Kapoor with all the prosthetic work, as the slightly naughty, partly grumpy and completely hedonistic grandfather, lusting after Mandakini in a wet sari from Ram Teri Ganga Maili (1985), is the cherry atop this captivating familial cake. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Screenshot[/caption] The choice of setting, the town of Coonoor is a spectacular idea and the cinematography does the hill station full justice by capturing the freshness with frames where you can, well, almost smell the greenery. https://www.instagram.com/p/3yoFcZC-7W? Dialogues are as un-Bollywoodish as you can imagine with a lot of subtext and nothing silly, forced or fake about the lines. Speaking of lines, there is one in Leo Tolstoy’s Anna Karenina regarding families.

 “All happy families are alike, each unhappy family is unhappy in its own way.”

Zootopia is the latest Disney 3D animation production that tells the story of a rabbit named Judy (Ginnifer Goodwin) who wants to change the stereotypes between predators and their prey. Along the way, she meets a con artist fox named Nick Wilde (Jason Bateman) and together they solve the case of missing animals in Zootopia. Directed by Byron Howard and Rich Moore, Zootopia is the 55^th animated feature in the Walt Disney Animated Classics series and subtly touches upon dark subject matters like racism, ethnicity issues and sexism. Could this film continue the winning streak of Disney’s animation films? [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Judy (Ginnifer Goodwin).
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Gazelle (Shakira)
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Judy (Ginnifer Goodwin) and Nick Wilde (Jason Bateman).
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Judy (Ginnifer Goodwin) and Nick Wilde (Jason Bateman).
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Judy (Ginnifer Goodwin).
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Judy (Ginnifer Goodwin) and Nick Wilde (Jason Bateman).
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Judy (Ginnifer Goodwin) and Nick Wilde (Jason Bateman).
Photo: Screenshot[/caption]

Behold! The Dark Knight goes up against the Man of Steel! The moment all of us comic book movie nerds have been there for and it was inevitable. It was waiting to happen. And it finally comes at us with all of Zack Snyder’s visual glory. But underneath all the hype and excitement for this movie the real question is: Was it any good? [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Ben Affleck and Henry Cavill.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] The answer is in one word. YES! Yes, yes, and a million times YES! This movie is good with a capital G. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bha24P9uw-E From the get-go, with the brooding tone and Hans Zimmer’s amazing score (once again) you are welcomed at the helm of Bruce Wayne’s worst nightmare, and it all goes uphill from there. The story is captivating, the action is intense and the payback is immensely satisfactory. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Ben Affleck.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] Ben Affleck is the best thing to happen to Batman series since Christopher Nolan. From the first scene he was in, I told to my friend next to me,

“THAT is Bruce Wayne!”

Since the very first Divergent book and then the movie, its fans know well that the story is about five factions of people in the city of Chicago which is surrounded by a wall separating the factions from the outside world. The much awaited third instalment of the Divergent series, Allegiant, finally shows us what is beyond the wall. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tE8LEPSTK6A Now, there are no factions, and the people of Chicago are divided by their emotions towards the prisoners; unsure whether to be merciful or outraged. The story starts with sheer irony as main characters Tris (Shailene Woodley) and Four (Theo James), who is deathly afraid of heights, are climbing up a building to get a peek of what is on the other side of the wall. However, when the people try to escape Chicago to explore the world beyond their cage, a lockdown goes into effect. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Theo James and Shailene Woodley.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] As one can expect from a post-civil war zone, it is unclear who is in power. At the end of Insurgent (2015), the second instalment, we saw Jeanine die. And at the beginning of Allegiant, her murderer does not come forward, but makes sure plenty of blood is further shed in the name of revenge. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Screenshot[/caption] What’s different about Allegiant is that in the previous movies, there was always one singular war going on within Chicago, and now, there are two happening simultaneously that the audience needs to keep up with. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Theo James.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Shailene Woodley.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] This movie is jam-packed with action, relationship drama, betrayal in all forms, fistfights, heart-breaking deaths and bleeding skies. It is about a struggle for power and a realisation that the antagonist and protagonist are never truly clear. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Screenshot[/caption] My favourite part was Tris’ character arc in the entire trilogy. In Divergent (2014) she transforms from an anxious rebellious teen to a fearless fighter, and now in Allegiant, from the brave, free-thinking soldier to a true leader. Indeed, this brings to light my favourite quote from the movie:

“Great leaders don’t seek power; they’re called by necessity.”

The movie 10 Cloverfield Lane will capture your attention right from the very start, a feature we normally experience in movies directed by JJ Abrams; although he has only produced this one. You will instantly relate to the life changing events Michelle (Mary Elizabeth Winstead) faces, without knowing what led to her being locked inside a bunker with two men, Howard Stambler (John Goodman) and Emmett DeWitt (John Gallagher Jr). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yQy-ANhnUpE Her last memories were of her driving a car and colliding into something, followed by waking up in a bunker with her leg chained to a wall. Will these men kill her before she escapes? Why are they in the bunker? The sheer curiosity regarding both men will keep you absolutely glued to the screen during the first half of the movie. And in the second half, the mysteries only grow to a great extent. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Mary Elizabeth Winstead.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Mary Elizabeth Winstead and John Goodman.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] The two men convinced Michelle that a deadly virus has plagued the city. Yet had there been a deadly virus, why had they chained her leg to the cinder block? While watching the movie I was wondering if it has any connection with Cloverfield (2008). And later I realised that 10 Cloverfield Lane carries the same essence as Cloverfield, but that’s about it. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Mary Elizabeth Winstead, John Goodman and John Gallagher Jr.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] Although the movie focuses on only three characters in an underground shelter, the story is still compelling enough to keep your eyes wide open. John Goodman’s character of Howard Stambler will keep you hooked, as he plays the role extremely well, despite the fact that Michelle is the protagonist. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Mary Elizabeth Winstead and John Goodman.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Mary Elizabeth Winstead and John Goodman.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] The dialogues during certain scenes remain minimal, while their facial expressions and gestures keep you anticipating what’s coming next. Even the slight raise of an eyebrow will lead to a shocking scene. A conspiracy theory buff and someone whose perspectives about the unknown changes by the minute – claims to know what will happen next. Goodman’s character shows two extremes; at some points he is calm as the sea before a storm and then he takes the form of a furious tsunami. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Mary Elizabeth Winstead, John Goodman and John Gallagher Jr.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] The action sequence mounts after a few scenes of suspense that builds with events unfolding outside the bunker. The characters sense relief once they are assured that the external disturbances has subsided, only to enter another phase of stress. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Mary Elizabeth Winstead.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] The bunker is equipped with the necessities of life including proper lighting, a sitting room, a dining room and a music player. Even in such an intense scenario, the director and the screenwriter managed to include music along with light humour to ease off the mounting tension. What this does, however, is that it pushes the panic button without warning. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Mary Elizabeth Winstead and John Gallagher Jr.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] Dan Trachtenberg did a fantastic job in his directorial debut. And JJ Abram at the helm of production, has flaunted his signature style of mystery throughout the movie. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Dan Trachtenberg.
Photo: IMDb[/caption] On the downside, 10 Cloverfield Lane may not have the brilliance of Cloverfield for obvious reasons. The latter was a first-person narrative shot in the open with a giant monster terrorising the city. Having said that, 10 Cloverfield Lane does bring to screen the intimidating inscrutabilities that sends your mind jumping to many possible conclusions - even in the safety of a bunker. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Mary Elizabeth Winstead and John Gallagher Jr.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Mary Elizabeth Winstead.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] With the suspense growing by the minute, Michelle eventually finds out the truth. The audience only have their instincts to make assumptions. Is there an alien invasion? Is it a war? Is it a chemical warfare or a nuclear attack? The curiosity rises to extreme levels, as the three characters try to figure out the truth by the sounds they hear on the outside; of vehicles, helicopters and footsteps. Throughout the movie, Howard and Emmett give their narratives as to what they think is manifesting above them. Later, one of them dies. How? Can’t tell ya’. The answer will be a spoiler. Michelle tries to escape the bunker despite one of the men’s efforts to keep her inside. However, she falls short in her steps once she witnesses reality through the door’s thick glass. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Mary Elizabeth Winstead.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Mary Elizabeth Winstead.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] Were the men being honest with Michelle about the dangers prowling outside the bunker? Will she be able to handle the truth? Will she be able to face whatever it is outside the bunker? You will get these answers, but not before watching the movie. The movie could have ended in a better way. It leaves you with a myriad of questions. The last few seconds reveal the big truth. Overall, 10 Cloverfield Lane is a movie you should watch in the cinema with lots of popcorn and soda by your side. In case you watch it at home, keep the lights turned on, for fear will grip you without caution.

After years of speculation and film production, Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice is now finally a reality. The film portrays two of the most iconic characters in the comic book universe, delighting fans and general audience alike. The story takes place 18 months after the events of Man of Steel (2013). An enmity has ensued after billionaire Bruce Wayne from Gotham City saw his Wayne tower get destroyed during the combat between Superman and General Zod that resulted in chaos. Now Bruce Wayne’s alter ego, Batman, has decided to bring Superman to justice because he believes that Superman is a threat to humanity. Meanwhile, Superman Clark Kent is obsessed with the Bat vigilante running around in Gotham City and the Metropolis billionaire Lex Luthor (Jesse Eisenberg) wants to pin these two super heroes against each other. Who will come out on top? The film stars Ben Affleck, Henry Cavill, Amy Adams, Jeremy Irons, Jesse Eisenberg and Gal Gadot. [poll id="480"] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Ben Affleck and Henry Cavill.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Henry Cavill.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Ben Affleck.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Jesse Eisenberg.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Gal Gadot.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption]  

Ever found yourself involved in a heated debate where the arguer is trying to prove his point by being obnoxiously loud, regurgitating the same information over and over again and, worst of all, diluting his own case due to a total lack of subject comprehension by providing supporting arguments that totally fly in the face of what he is arguing for. This is precisely how I felt watching Ki & Ka, where Cheeni Kum (2007) famed director R Balki completely soured an intriguing premise of gender role reversal by a mishmash of a screenplay. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2fxtycjf_I Ki as in larki (girl) as in Kia (Kareena Kapoor) is a ‘corporate robot’, who is hell-bent on being top dog of a company, rather than be queen of the kitchen, thus a conventional Bollywood caricature of a hard-core feminist. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Arjun Kapoor and Kareena Kapoor.
Photo: Bollywood Curry[/caption] Ka as in larka (boy) as in Kabir (Arjun Kapoor) on the other hand, is a topper from India’s version of Harvard Business School and also heir to his father’s successful business empire. But since he is so fond of his late mother he wants to be like her, and what better way to pay homage to your late mother than to be exactly what she was; a housewife! [poll id="495"] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Arjun Kapoor.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Arjun Kapoor and Kareena Kapoor.
Photo: India Forums[/caption] Ki and Ka’s meet-cute fittingly happens in a flight since the writing takes a massive nosedive after this particular point. They meet, they click and they get married. The pair agrees that Kia will continue following her corporate dream and be the breadwinner while Kabir will do all the household work; something he always wanted to and be the breadmaker. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Arjun Kapoor and Kareena Kapoor.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] Over time, the role reversal puts the focus on Kabir and jealousy starts to rear its ugly head. This is precisely the point where the big idea of reversing conventional roles starts losing its hook and all is downhill from here. Credit where credit is due, the film’s concept deserves a huge round of applause. The movie had so much potential to steer away from your typical Bollywood garbage but filmmaker’s failure to delve deeper to understand the real issues surrounding gender equality proves to be the bane of this potentially promising fare. Arjun Kapoor’s character had the potential to be truly revolutionary. Here is a guy who willingly wants to stay at home and unconditionally supports the career ambitions of his wife, but then all of this comes crashing down when the film bewilderingly paints Ka with a Bollywood brush. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Arjun Kapoor and Kareena Kapoor.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Arjun Kapoor and Kareena Kapoor.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] His not so subtle insistence on his house-husband tendencies to not be considered gay is borderline homophobic while not liking the colour pink possibly inferring that a particular hue can in any way be emasculating, is just plain shallow. For the record, one my favourite wardrobe items is a button-down which is, yes you guessed it right, ‘pink’ in colour. Haters gonna hate! [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Arjun Kapoor and Kareena Kapoor.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] To further add insult to the dim-witted injury, there is a totally random scene where to prove Ka’s masculinity, he thrashes a couple of baddies in front of Kia and consequently turns her on. It’s as if this film can’t possibly imagine a guy being masculine who doesn’t want to stress himself with the corporate rat race and instead prefer being a stay-at-home husband. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Arjun Kapoor.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] Ki & Ka pretends to be avant-garde with its commentary on gender stereotyping, but what it does not realise is that it requires a certain level of maturity to deal with this sort of subject, which it clearly lacks. The movie might even have a good message at the end of it all but screaming it right in our faces starts reinforcing the very stereotypes it set out to negate. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Arjun Kapoor and Kareena Kapoor.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] As for the discussion on the lead actors, Arjun Kapoor must be commended for selecting a role that on the face of it was ground breaking. But unfortunately for him, turns out he was saddled with yet another trite Bollywood character. Kareena looks like Kareena, which I reckon is bad news for any typical B-Town lady since their whole career in the industry is solely based on physical appearance. And that’s the thing with looks, unlike acting there is only so much variation you can up with in this regard before you are dated. And sadly for Bebo, she is already way past her sell-by date. There is, however, one evergreen couple that the movie can boast of, that of Amitabh Bachchan and Jaya Bhaduri Bachchan. The pair appears in a cute cameo discussing the complexities of gender equality evoking memories of Abhimaan (1973), one of the best Indian films made on the aforementioned subject. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Amitabh Bachchan, Arjun Kapoor and Jaya Bhaduri Bachchan.
Photo: Facebook[/caption] It is so unfortunate seeing a film with such a progressive outlook on man-woman relations resorting to regressive Bollywood clichés to elicit emotions out of the audience. But still the peculiarity of the idea makes Ki & Ka noteworthy, but that regrettably is damning it with the faintest of praise. [poll id="496"]

Are we on the brink of total lack of creativity in the art of film-making? The year 2015 proved to be otherwise. One just needs to broaden their horizons in their perception of cinema and what it could accomplish. Last year, the world of cinema saw many films that broke preconceived notions of Hollywood and filmmaking in general. A sequel/ reboot that defies critics and audiences expectations, a period piece proving that melodrama can narrate strong storytelling and a stop motion animated film that proved to be more ‘real’ and touching than most live action films out there. After reviewing countless films from all over the world, here are my top 10 films of 2015: 10. Sicario https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sR0SDT2GeFg 9. Aferim https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mmTYOY_jQWc 8. Hard to be a God https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11sMDQIgggA 7. Carol https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EH3zcuRQXNo 6. The Tribe https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEKlhmLICAs 5. The Revenant https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LoebZZ8K5N0 4. Mommy https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d7rtSqI0ZeA 3. Mad Max: Fury Road https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hEJnMQG9ev8 2. Anomalisa https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xg8MtJv2Oec 1. Best of Enemies https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j6qW-ZKxZss Watch the video to find out why these movies made the cut.

Ashir Azeem, who has many accolades to his name, be it director, actor or writer, was given the label of a patriotic entertainer after his popular drama serial, Dhuwan. His directorial debut movie, Maalik, has been amongst the most anticipated movies in Pakistani cinema due to the popularity of his previous drama. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=reyC2wuvFVI Maalik is a tale that every citizen can identify with in one way or another. It has various stories within the entire plot. The main story line revolves around an SSG officer, Major Amjad (Ashir Azeem) who starts a private security company after having faced a major tragedy in his life. What may have seemed like a simple job of serving his nation, turns out to become more complicated than just following orders from the higher ups. Another story within movie highlights an on-going grudge between a feudal lord and a righteous school master, Master Mohsin (Mohammed Ehteshamuddin). Lastly, another story in the movie emphasises a family fleeing from a Soviet war torn Afghanistan and settling down in Karachi. There comes a point in the movie, when these three stories entwine as one and that’s what makes Maalik an engaging tale of love, patriotism, power, revenge and feudalism. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Maalik Facebook page[/caption] Performance wise, Ashir Azeem’s acting is calculated and accurate - he delivers exactly what the character requires. Hassan Niazi, playing the chief minister, gave a stellar performance, while Adnan Shah Tipu, the CM’s sidekick, came off as an exceedingly entertaining character - was played very well too. He managed to add a tinge of light humour to an otherwise serious movie. Sajid Hassan and Mohammed Ehteshamuddin are great in their respective roles as well. Putting aside all praise, I’m still confused as to why Farhan Ali Agha, playing the role of Major Haider, starred in the movie considering there was absolutely nothing significant I could see in his role. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Maalik Facebook page[/caption] Performances aside, the music of this movie is definitely worth a mention. The title track by Saahir Ali Bagga and Man Mora by Rahat Fateh Ali Khan were my favourites. But that does not mean the remaining songs were not great either. Naina Roye by Massoma Anwar came in third on my list of favourites. [embed width="620"]http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x41ojre_maalik-theme-song-full-audio-video-by-sahir-ali-bagga_music[/embed] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItzJmd7H8Z4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHMpuhrGTBk The cinematography of Maalik is beautifully executed; it is so brilliant that it keeps viewers captivated throughout the movie. Shot in interior Sindh and parts of Balochistan, the scenery is exotic and provides a fitting background to the movie. I want to give a special mention to the action scenes, which were intense and extremely realistic. Ashir Azeem, has without a doubt, confirmed that he is a talented director and actor, and can sail through any rough tide with extreme capability. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Maalik Facebook page[/caption] I felt the only flaw in the movie was that it wasn’t edited as well as it could have been. Some scenes could have been cut out, plus the ending was too abrupt, leaving many aspects of the movie unclear. I am pretty sure most of the audience will be left wanting answers. Overall, Maalik is a decent attempt and has raised the bar for Pakistani cinema. It’s a movie that sends out a strong message. Watch Maalik and take ownership, since that’s what the movie is all about.

The Boy is a new addition to the long running psychological horror genre of movies. Directed by William Brent Bell  (The Devil Inside) and starring Lauren Cohan from the TV series, The Walking Dead, The Boy delves into the story of an American nanny hired by an English family to look after their son, who in actuality is a life-sized doll. The audience might expect to see a boy, as the title suggests, but you won’t. It’s just a plain simple doll. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Lauren Cohan.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Lauren Cohan, Diana Hardcastle and Jim Norton.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] The story line may seem more or less like Annabelle (2014), but trust me when I say Annabelle was way scarier and entertaining. The Boy, on the other hand, comes across as a family drama, definitely not an actual horror movie. Lauren Cohan is a powerhouse of talent. I mean, have you seen her in The Walking Dead? She is brilliant, but her character, Greta Evans falls short of saving this movie from being a complete disaster. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X1U21VBSbSs [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Lauren Cohan.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] It would be unfair to say the movie is a complete failure; it does have a few interesting moments, but the movie cannot be termed as truly frightening. Although I must say the scenes where Greta is interacting with the doll are quite commendable. Maybe if the writers had spent more time focusing on character development and had chosen to include scenes that cause fear rather than wonder amongst the audience, the movie could have lived up to its expectations. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Lauren Cohan.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] Also, I really don’t get why this one is being sold as a psychological horror. The Sixth Sense (1999) and Silence of the Lambs (1991) are psychological horror movies. There is nothing psychological or horrific about The Boy. The movie could have been so much better considering the setting and the talent in hand, but it fails miserably and gives the audience nothing memorable. Even the allegedly scary doll is not scary. It’s just a doll. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Screenshot[/caption] After an hour of playing hide-and-seek with the doll, one expects a lot from the climax, but in this case the climax does not do any good for the viewers or for the movie itself. The movie does have a surprise ending which intends to be the big reveal, but falls flat on its face ending up being a failed attempt to shock the audience. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Diana Hardcastle and Jim Norton.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] Overall, the The Boy is for those diehard horror movie fans who will want to watch anything to keep their appetite full, but if you want to watch this because you enjoyed horror movies like The Conjuring (2013) or the Insidious trilogy in the past then stay away from this one. The Boy is far from a spine-chilling movie. [poll id="507"]

Ever since bursting onto the scene in 1996 with the excellent action-thriller The Rock (1996) starring Nicolas Cage and Sean Connery, director Michael Bay has steadily become one of the most commercially successful and critically reviled directors in Hollywood. His films never shy away from shameless levels of jingoistic patriotism, product placement, racist undertones and stereotypes, objectification of any and all female characters and a stunning amount of disdain for the CIA. His disregard for character, plot or any visual coherence for that matter is at times alarming. Oh, and he loves blowing shit up. So hearing that Michael Bay directed a film about the tragic real life events of the September 11, 2012 attack on two US compounds in Benghazi, Libya surprised me at first, because firstly it’s very rare to see a Michael Bay movie that isn’t just for teenage boys and secondly because handling such a story requires a great deal of nuance and subtlety, something Bay is not known for. Adapted for the screen from Mitchell Zuckoff’s book by writer Chuck Hogan, 13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi finds Bay trying to show and tell how it all went down on September 11, 2012, in Benghazi, Libya when militants attacked the US diplomatic compound and a nearby CIA stronghold on which four Americans were killed, including Ambassador J Christopher Stevens. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4CJBuUwd0Os Back in 2012, these events became what can best be described as ‘political football’ in the Presidential race for the White House with then American Secretary of State Hillary Clinton getting most of the blame by the Republicans. But 13 Hours smartly strays away from the political mire and instead focuses on six buffed and bearded private military contractors who have been directed to protect CIA operatives gathering intelligence. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] James Badge Dale and Saif Braik.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] The amount of restraint Bay is able to pull off with 13 Hours is surprising considering it’s a Michael Bay film and the mayhem is certainly tame for Bay’s standards, but that is no compliment because 13 Hours quickly escalates into an incoherent and visually annoying shoot-em-up and a jingoistic, against-all-odds story of American bravery where Americans must do anything and everything to protect themselves from whom they constantly refer to as the ‘bad guys’. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] David Denman, John Krasinski, Pablo Schreiber and Dominic Fumusa.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] The script from Chuck Hogan does little to give any real characterisation to the six interchangeable mercenaries played by John Krasinski, James Badge Dale, Pablo Schreiber, Max Martini, David Denham and Dominic Fumusa, but to the actors’ credit they manage to come across as more human than you’d expect from a Bay movie. An empathetic John Krasinski and a grizzled James Badge Dale particularly stand out. But apart from that it’s all quite revolting. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] James Badge Dale, David Denman, Max Martini, Adam Lieberman, John Krasinski, Pablo Schreiber, Dominic Fumusa and Saif Braik.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] The Libyans are basically anonymous thugs and blood bags who blow up when shot at. The dialogues are atrocious and full of lines that do little more than demonstrate how ‘macho’ these characters are, and show one, of the film’s few, female characters what ‘real-men’ are capable of. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Andrei Claude.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] The storytelling is clunky, the runtime which clocks at a testing two hours and 24 minutes is bloated and the scattershot editing is so incoherent that it blurs the characters and turns a simple set of locations into a twisting maze. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] John Krasinski and Dominic Fumusa.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] Surprisingly, the action-set pieces are actually one of the film’s very few positives because for once, there are actual stakes and there’s a little more to it than giant robots fighting giant robots but the murky and shaky visual aesthetic that’s full of handheld shots gets so annoying at times that it takes a lot away from enjoying these set-pieces. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] David Denman and Pablo Schreiber.
Photo: IMDb[/caption] 13 Hours works on a surface level. It has some nice action and some cool explosions and if you’re a 15-year-old teenager who loves first person shooter games, you might not have a particularly bad time with this. But as a war movie, 13 Hours falls flat because it doesn’t really have any concrete perspective and everything from proper characterisation to coherent editing is thrown out the window, nor is the film engaging on anything more than a gut level. It’s commentary on Middle-Eastern politics can best be summed up by the scene in which Pablo Schreiber’s character tells a local,

“Your country’s gotta figure this shit out”.

Mustang is the internationally co-produced film directed by Turkish/ French filmmaker Deniz Gamze Ergüven. The film takes place in a Turkish village and depicts the lives of five free-spirited young girls who are confined into a house for illicit behaviour by their elders. But with their fierce love for one another, they feel empowered and end up creating a bond that can’t be broken by any force created by the conservative antagonists. The film was screened at the 2015 Toronto International Film Festival and was nominated for Best Foreign Language Film at the 88th Academy Awards. But could this film live up to its hype? [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Elit Iscan, Günes Sensoy, Doga Zeynep Doguslu, Tugba Sunguroglu and Ilayda Akdogan.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Elit Iscan, Günes Sensoy, Doga Zeynep Doguslu, Tugba Sunguroglu and Ilayda Akdogan.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Günes Sensoy and Ilayda Akdogan.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Günes Sensoy.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Doga Zeynep Doguslu.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Ilayda Akdogan.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Elit Iscan, Günes Sensoy, Doga Zeynep Doguslu, Tugba Sunguroglu and Ilayda Akdogan.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Günes Sensoy.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Elit Iscan, Günes Sensoy, Doga Zeynep Doguslu, Tugba Sunguroglu and Ilayda Akdogan.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Günes Sensoy and Doga Zeynep Doguslu.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Elit Iscan, Günes Sensoy, Doga Zeynep Doguslu, Tugba Sunguroglu and Ilayda Akdogan.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption]

Biopics are usually a pleasant watch and Eddie the Eagle can be said to be the same. Directed by Dexter Fletcher, Eddie the Eagle is a true story revolving around the British skier, Michael Edwards, famously known as Eddie “The Eagle” Edwards. He was the first person to represent England in the 1988 Olympics in the category of Ski jumping. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Eddie 'The Eagle' Edwards and Taron Egerton.
Photo: IMDb[/caption] Despite wearing leg braces as a child, Eddie (Taron Egerton) dreamt of competing in the Olympic Games. Doctors advised him not to engage physically strenuous activities, yet he persisted with training in pursuit of his dream. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6FWAiXll_jw Taron Egerton, along with the remaining cast and crew, did a commendable job in bringing Eddie’s story to life. Moreover, Egerton has done justice to his role by bestowing Eddie Edwards the cinematic praise he rightfully deserves. The ensemble cast also includes big names such as, Hugh Jackman playing the role of Bronson Peary – a former American ski champion and Christopher Walken, who appears in a cameo role as Warren Sharp, Peary’s coach. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Hugh Jackman and Taron Egerton.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Hugh Jackman and Taron Egerton.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] With any movie that features an underdog, there will be, no doubt, scenes that are packed with emotion, and Eddie the Eagle did itself justice in this regard. In my opinion, the most powerful scene is when Peary and Eddie are seated near a ski jumping hill. Peary is seen trying to uplift Eddie’s spirits, telling him to have faith in himself and his sporting abilities. Although the story centres around Eddie’s desire to make it to the Olympic Games, it also focuses on his attempt to score big in the Winter Games in Canada. He faces numerous trials and tribulations on his journey to qualify for the Olympics. The biggest conflict arises when Eddie begins to face health issues during the course of the movie. If that wasn’t enough, an elitist jury running the British Olympic ski team is conspiring to keep him off the squad for the Winter Games. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Taron Egerton.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] Eddie’s character is not akin to a sports hero. He is an average person but he has a certain eccentric charm to him. He wears glasses, has curly hair and bears a normal physique – obviously, the world does not expect him to be extraordinary. However, he chooses to become just that, and that is what the story is about; breaking rigid stereotypes and remaining optimistic through life’s hurdles. Focusing on the movie’s cinematography, which is the selling point for any sports movie – it is spot on. Owing to Matthew Margeson’s 80s flavoured soundtrack and great CGI effects, the high jumps and ski action scenes keep viewers on the edge of their seats. Storytelling is this movie’s best feature. It remains simple, straightforward and keeps the tang of the 80s alive. The comic relief timing, especially amidst emotional scenes, balances out tears and smiles. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Hugh Jackman and Taron Egerton.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] One might cast Eddie the Eagle as yet another stereotypical biopic with a common story line and character; a hopeless athlete facing financial restrain, inspired to compete in the Olympics and later he encounters a unique coach. Add to that his father being against him, the judges not wanting him and the constant bullying by Scandinavian contestants. Nevertheless, Eddie the Eagle manages to incorporate various elements on screen to make it unlike any other biopic; the story flows smoothly from the beginning to the end with unsuspecting plot twists, keeping the audiences thoroughly engaged and glued to their screens.

The Jungle Book is the latest live action adaptation of the famous collection of short stories from Rudyard Kipling’s The Jungle Book. Mowgli (Neel Sethi) is a boy that was abandoned by his biological parents and finds shelter within a pack of wolves. These wolves adopt him and raise him as their own. Later on, Mowgli comes across colourful characters such as Bageera and Baloo. They protect him from the evil Bengali Tiger, Sher Khan, as he threatens to not only kill the boy, but to slowly take over the law of the jungle. There have been countless Hollywood adaptations of the famous novel; most notably the 1967 Disney animated film The Jungle Book. This is the first ever adaptation where all the backgrounds and animal characters are purely CGI (computer generated imagery). Can the film live up to its hype or is it just another lazy Hollywood money grab by the Disney corporation? [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Mowgli.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Mowgli.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Mowgli.
Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Screenshot[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Screenshot[/caption]