ARCHAN RAY – Google

Ajeeb Daastaans reflects sharply upon marginalized Indian people and their struggles to find love. The image they portray is real. It's a sad and often pathetic image of love and it’s so terrifying because it’s true. The struggle of the privileged who can love and struggle of those who can only dream. And those dreams do come true only to exist as an illusion to reveal the reality later on. And the dismay one feels believing that we, underprivileged can be loved. And believing it so much that it felt true. It’s a movie that deals with the somewhat difficult spectrums of Indian culture, the spectrums with which we are in a state of denial. It very much falls into the category of the movie Super Deluxe. But, slightly adds somewhat less artistic value to it. But, it really shows the harsh reality in its naked form. Cinema mostly sells you a utopia, dream but this doesn't that's the best part about this movie.

Mank is not a biography but a drama that portrays Hollywood. Even in the screenplay Gary Oldman playing Mank says “You can’t capture a man’s entire life in two hours.” And that’s what David Fincher did. He didn’t make a biography. He took Citizen Kane and replaced the plot with why Citizen Kane. Now forget Citizen Kane, forget Orson Welles Mank itself has all the ingredients to be a great movie. It’s about losing, falling down, about winning. When I first started watching the movie it was kind of confusing. It lacked dramatic sparks. It was kind of mundane but as it progressed not knowingly I got attached to the drama and the politics and everything. At the time I didn’t know the full story behind Herman J. Mankiewicz and Citizen Kane but I found myself really attached to the movie. When I viewed it a second time, after brushing up on Mankiewicz’s story it was quite fascinating and you can’t really get enough of watching Gary Oldman playing this character. He himself is such a veteran actor now, he is just perfect. What is lacked though is character building. With such extended variety you will definitely feel that something is not there. Even the relationship between Mank and Hearst which is the core of this film and which lead to the making of Citizen Kane, I felt that it lacked connection or it was more of a toned down version of everything. No dramatic sparks. Which by the nature of the movie should be a good thing, I found it otherwise and probably this is the reason some people have been disappointed with the movie a bit. Beside that it's a movie which is based on 1930s Hollywood and Politics and yet so contemporary. The great depression, mass media, powerful people and daily wagers, right wing politics. It really makes you think. “You keep telling people something untrue, loud and long enough, they’re apt to believe it.” Mank (2020) Dir. David Fincher.

“An overcooked masterpiece.” Allegory, some dilemma, rage, aggression, ethics and more.This movie will construct doubts on believe and instincts. With such aggression on screen this movie became its own enemy. An overcooked masterpiece, delivers an utterly different taste. Name of the movie is Jallikattu, which comes from this popular spectacle in South India. It’s a tradition where humans fight the bull to publicize masculinity. And the movie itself falls into the same discipline. Well, not actually. Instead of advertising masculinity it highlights the vulgar and wild caveman side of human beings and the movie does that in such a profound way that it becomes so obvious after a certain time. Like I said before, the movie itself is its own enemy. Now let’s talk about some of the technical parts of the movie. For an Indian movie standard it’s definitely something. It will even challenge some of the best movies ever made. I like how the movie really coordinates with the Indian weather and produces some of the best scenes with some of the very best lighting. But again if you want to do something out of the box, you have to do it in a certain way to achieve the results you want. And in this process a tiny mistake can derail the whole thing. In Jallikattu, they made a lot of these mistakes which results some amateur works and it’s not so pleasing in the eyes of the viewer. Now let’s talk about another obvious course i.e. sound. The background score of this movie is amazing and that is also one of the foremost enemies of this movie. The loud nature as the background score was not so natural. It created this mood which is good for a live action theatre, maybe but for a movie it’s over dramatic. It created the essence of this wild nature so vividly. But, on the other hand, it's the only thing that killed the same essence, many times. The strongest part of the movie is the acting. Antony Varghese has been just perfect and gave an outspelled performance if not best. This movie had to cast for an entire village and everyone just gave their best performance in the given screen time. The acting is so strong in this movie, it will definitely push this one high on the leaderboard. Rating: 7.2/10.

**PROBLEM WITH THESE NEW SUPERHERO MOVIES IS, there is too many characters, too many random faces that I can't really relate to them; so I can't even feel that attachment to the film. So, my initial reaction was bad for this newly released MARVEL movie, too many characters, even not all of them are also from avengers. Being a DC fan, I always disliked marvel movies but today I was in the theater, not with the eyes of a DC fan but with the regular eyes of a cinemaholic and boy oh boy it was fully unexpected. Movie Name: Avengers: Infinity War Director:. Anthony Russo, Joe Russo The name of the movie is totally confusing, the movie itself is a total crossover. I don't know why they just straight up bring on random marketing strategies for the movie name and make it like a super commercial one. Yeah, for sure the movie is not about avengers or the other gangs feautured over here. It's about this one guy named thanos and six highly powerful stones; and that is the technique what Russo used to handle all the characters from different marvel comics. You don't really get lost which a real good thing. Not only that it was really good to see how he handled so many characters so easily and in a more composed way; Kiddos for that. I don't wanna dive right into the main story and plots but each part was alive and you can't really predict what's coming up next. My expectations was not that high, but the movie came up breaking all of that. The cinematography was excellent. The editing was amazing. CGI and Vfx was remarkable. The color channels are pretty usual or slightly more than usual. The blue and yellow contrasts stick it well but at the same time which is pretty common. Art directors put lots of work in this film but it was not super exceptional or highly impressive; let's just say it was okay. The direction was again totally great. Overall acting wise the movie doesn't make any mark, it was pretty decent some actors like mark ruffalo or Elizabeth olsen was really trying to give their best. Again in this kind of movies they don't get that much chance to express their work as at the end of the day it's all skinned with CGI. To conclude it's not a legendary movie like blade runner 2049 or something like that. But it was really enjoyable and somehow retaining that commercial movie type fillings while trying to do stuffs, completely out of the box. For ratings I will give this movie a overall 7.8/10. And I will definitely recommend this movie to all kind of movie lovers out there.