James Hilton

Almodóvar’s worst film by far. Atrocious “acting”—performances are wholly wooden. Boring, boring, boring dialogues. An entirely unbelievable premise. Impossible to relate to or feel any empathy for any of the characters. Swinton plays a character so deeply and thoroughly vicious and unpleasant that it’s a relief when she finally kills herself and as a viewer one no longer has to put up with her imperiousness, aggression, and endless bleating and mewling. Watching this film is TORTURE.

A sick abomination. Neither of the lead “actors” could act their way out of a paper bag. She simpers and giggles; he glowers. These have to be the worst “actors” on the planet. Trite, superficial, boring “dialogues”. Superficial treatment of the deadly serious social problem of heterosexual IPV—the film just explains away the battery because the aggressor shot his brother when he was a kid. WHAT? OK, so accidentally shooting your brother when you’re six is traumatising, but it doesn’t turn you into a rapist wife beater. There is ZERO explanation in this film of the power dynamics and perceptions of gender roles that usually are the cause of IPV. The only things that makes this a 1* film—rather than a zero-star one—are the scenes featuring the two young actors (Atlas and Lily as schoolchildren), and the actor who plays adult Atlas (a fairly decent actor who plays a credible character). It is a sick, trite, superficial abomination of a film. To be avoided at all costs.

2.5* Passable action movie to while away a rainy evening, but not worth a special outing to the cinema. The first half is reasonably engaging, with enough storylines developed to hold the viewer’s interest, but after the interval things quickly head south: no discernible plot, muddled storylines, way too many characters, way too much fake blood, and an overdose of saccharin melodrama. A strong performance from Anjali as an honest prostitute, regular acting from other members of the cast, and a dreadful wooden performance from Neha Shetty who seems capable of only one expression—and why is she plastered in all that horrible pale make-up? What was also missing here was the Godavari itself. This mighty, holy river is rarely seen in the movie—the film’s called Gangs of Godavari, so let’s get a lot more views of, and action on the river.

Hilarious first half introduces the key characters and the dilemmas around which the movie will be premised. This part of the film keeps the audience engaged and very amused. However, the second half of the film after the interval is chaotic, jumps all over the place, loses focus, and lacks any humour at all. It’s just plain boring, and a real let-down after the entertaining first half. If the second half of the film had been stronger the film could have been a 3* entertainer. As it is, the dull, unfunny, badly structured second half makes this film a 2* bore.

Hugely engaging 3* entertainment. It’s a shame that the film fails to explore many storylines in more depth (the bank fraud, friendships and relationships) and is very superficial in this regard. However, the fight scenes featuring Mammootty, his mundu swirling about him (but amazingly never falling off!), ensure this film becomes a 3* entertainer. Bindu Panicker as Mammootty’s mother is hilarious, while casting Raj B. Shetty as the diminutive, black-garbed, psychopathic baddie was a stroke of genius.

Asif Ali is superb here as a thoughtful, intelligent, introspective Kerala cop who can also have recourse to his fists and sharp retorts to protect himself if necessary. When tasked with solving a murder case he leaves no stone unturned and follows up even the smallest of leads in order to identify the assassin. This fascinating, intelligent film throws out plenty of red herrings, thus sustaining the viewer’s interest. In a final twist very similar to classic British detective films, the motive for the killing is revealed to be an historic personal tragedy of immeasurable proportions. Biju Menon also performs well here, and the device of including the narrator for the television crime show and the mad novelist/dramatist add extra narrative voices that strengthen the overall story. Definitely one to watch.

Pretentious; boring; way too long; lazy camerawork (meaninglessly cropped frames that looked like an amateur effort, filming characters’ backs, etc.); pretentious camera angles, e.g. up through the gaps in the ceiling of the chalet; jarring, out-of-tune soundtrack (e.g. the kid playing piano) —beyond pretentious and sooo obvious; the crassest characterisation (the prosecutor’s a skinhead 🤦); crass, unsubtle attempt to generate sympathy for the kid by making him disabled and attached to his pooch; no narrative structure —it wanders aimlessly all over the place; crass, pretentious attempts at literary diegesis in the courtroom scenes; a central character (Sandra) who fails to incite any identification in the viewer —to the extent that the viewer really, really doesn’t care if she lives or dies; build-up of sexual tension between Sandra and the French lawyer (which the director lazily leaves unresolved); utterly pathetic ending. And that’s just for a start. I could go on... My friend and I came out of the cinema feeling like we’d been smashed around the head with a mallet, so noxious are the effects of watching this ABOMINATION of a movie. Avoid. Avoid. Avoid. Watching it is 2.5 hours of your life you’re never gonna get back.