r/IndianCinema

Street Fighter looks like huge global stage for a martial arts star like Vidyut, really happy for him

Movie is good. Don't get me wrong: it's good but Part 1, Part 2 was a masterpieces and it left me asking for a lot more.

This part, the conclusion part, was so simple and they just wrapped it up. Not much twist, or suspense, or creativity, or thinking. All of this was missing.

It was like, "Yes just let's do it and let's get over it."

If Drishyam would be series this would be the shortest episode.

It couldnt get better than this to conclude the Drishyam franchise. It fulfills all the expectation of audience who were waiting for protagonist's final punch. Very cleverly Vijay outperform all traps laid by Poice and Lawyer.

Full marks to story and script writer for engaging thriller.

Pace of the first half of the movie is slow but second half live upto the expectation.

====================

Direction: Brilliant. Director made sure movie remains story centric rather than stars.

Story and screenplay: 10/10. All actors have their space in script. Audience will remember characters who had small role.

Acting: All actors performed well.

Cinemtaography: Good nothing great as such. This story premise doesnt demand great lighting anyways.

Editing: Very good except first half needed some minor cuts.

Background score: Perfect. It elevtaes the scene.

Production values: Good.

Bollywood never ceases to amaze me in how low it can get, they have now found a loophole to fake bms reviews so moving forward you can expect a lot of indian movies to follow the same

I know there are a lot of users who follow moctale but since it's still a niche I don't trust the reviews as it's heavily biased by the sm users who are influenced by west and its ideologies

So what else are we left with other than waiting for genuine word of mouth.

As far as I could see for every 100 reviews that just says "user" there are 1 or 2 with actual name but that also seems fake

Hi all,

This is going to be a super long rant about the disappointment I felt when I saw these two films. I know it is not nice to be an internet complainer, but I genuinely feel like we have lost our minds over these two films.

Firstly, this is a direct criticism of the directors' ability to make a meaningful film—not deep, thought-provoking stuff, but a simple, good mass film as they were intended to be. Instead, all I see is tasteless, poorly written violence. It is bland, baseless, and relies on some of the most over-the-top garbage just to invoke the audience's emotions. But for what, and at what cost?

Look at Paradise. Nani, who I once thought chose good scripts like Hi Nanna and Shyam Singha Roy, has genuinely disappointed me with this one. I mean, it opens with one of the most brutal and violent scenes from the director—the lady and the car battery. You literally have to be a psychopath to show that. It is not violence used to portray a villain effectively (RRR did a better job with simple dialogue and a hit); it is pure misogyny and some of the most chilling scenes imaginable, shown to a mass audience where it doesn't need to be there. It’s not a historic event or even a meaningful emotional turning point. I sincerely wish that director never makes another movie after creating a scene like this. It is cheap, filthy cinema. After Hit 3 and Paradise, I think Nani is trying to become a mass hero, but with this movie, he is going to lose fans like me.

It’s the exact same with Toxic. Geethu, ma'am, is simply a useless; simply put, the story is bad, and there is no emotional connection. Aside from guns, the message is terrible, and I left the theater with zero attachment to any character. All it shows are adult themes, and that’s it. Yash, whose role in KGF I once loved, is reduced here to just a macho man with guns and the sensibilities of an animal. Nothing he does makes sense. To consider that this film was written, directed, produced, and even shown to an audience shows the sheer audacity the director has to feed me this filth and expect a positive response.

I see this recurring trope of completely useless, violent movies. Yes, KGF was a spark. Yes, Vikram was a spark. Yes, RRR and Baahubali were hits—not because of simple eye candy, guns, or gratuitous violence, but because they had a story. Even Vikram's director, Lokesh, couldn’t recreate that magic again. I see the same problem in almost every movie I watch now: it’s always 10% okay, and the rest is complete bullshit. What happened to movies like Nayagan or Naan E, which were violent in their own way, but had a much deeper impact? All I see now is blandness. I could stare at a turned-off screen and enjoy it more than these useless pieces of shit.

Huff! And to top it all off, Sandeep Reddy Vanga can shove it. His movies are not even worth talking about; all he wants to do is sugarcoat his misogyny and angry-hero trope rather than making that trope meaningful. Look at Chiyan (Seethu)—you might learn a thing or two.

The same goes for Tamil directors like Siruthai Siva, who couldn't even make a good violent movie. Please retire; it’s so bad it feels like you're burning your own money and ours.

So officially, I am quitting Indian cinema. Aside from a few indie films, it’s a whole pile of garbage. It’s like for every 100 shit movies, there is one good one—better to just skip the whole lot. And until we as an audience develop better standards rather than falling for simple star fandom, we deserve this mediocre bullshit shoved in our faces. Every major star actor sucks, and there are tons of good new actors who could do a thousand times better job than so-called stars.

My hate is universal. It’s not language- or industry-specific. You have to come abroad and see how fucking stupid we look when people see these. Ignore the YouTube reaction channels—they only pander to Indians for views. We look like stupid fools with no taste whatsoever. and my anger is, people still run at the back of these actors, see, its a job, same with cricketers, its a job, they act, there is nothing special about them, your simple Govt/Civil Servant does more in a day that these contribute in their lifetimes, simply we as a society must get up and leave them.

Useless pricks, wasting my time and money. I genuinely feel I should sue the Paradise director for forcing such an image into my mind. I believe that instead of just standard film certificates, there should be explicit content warnings for violence so people can skip movies entirely.

This cinematic gem deserves a massive national spotlight.

People who have watched it - please give your thoughts on it without spoilers

Please note, this is a SPOILER REVIEW. So please avoid reading this if you haven't watched the movie yet. I watched the movie yesterday, so I thought I would share my review while everything is still fresh in my mind.

So, as a cinematic experience, I would say the movie was good. But when I look at it from a reality and believability point of view, I didn't like it that much. And I am not sure if I will sound biased here, but I personally loved the Malayalam version much more.

I can explain what I felt about both movies overall. This might get a little long, so sorry in advance!

For me, the Malayalam version felt much more realistic.

The biggest difference I felt was in Georgekutty's character. The incident happened almost 12 years ago. In the first part, he somehow managed to overcome an extremely difficult situation. In the second part, even after the skeleton was discovered years later, he still managed to stay one step ahead of the police with another plan.

But after going through all of that, how can a person remain that calculative forever?

At some point, there has to be exhaustion. There has to be fear, guilt and uncertainty. And that is exactly what I felt the Malayalam third part understood better.

We see a much more vulnerable Georgekutty. He carries the guilt of knowing that he was responsible for causing so much pain to Sam's parents. At the same time, he desperately wants to protect his own family and somehow get them out of this situation.

That progression made sense to me.

In the first part, we saw Georgekutty as an intelligent and observant person who used his knowledge of cinema and his presence of mind to protect his family.

In the second part, we saw a more defensive Georgekutty. He knew the police were watching him, so he started preparing himself accordingly.

But in the third part, we saw a much more emotional and vulnerable Georgekutty. He wasn't completely prepared for everything that was coming his way. And honestly, that felt natural to me because by this point, the police already knew how Georgekutty thinks.

Even the source of information for Georgekutty was much more limited, which made the situation feel more believable.

Think about how the police treated Georgekutty in the first film. They underestimated him because they thought he was just a fourth fail cable operator.

In the second film, they slowly realised that they were actually being watched and manipulated by Georgekutty.

So, if the third film again shows the police simply trying to outsmart him with another big plan, then what really changes between the second and third parts?

The Malayalam version, for me, understood that the real conflict was no longer just about whether Georgekutty could outsmart the police. It was about how much pressure one person could realistically take after carrying the same secret for so many years.

That is where I felt the Hindi version lost me in certain places.

The build up given to Jaideep Ahlawat's character was quite interesting, but then his investigation felt surprisingly careless.

Just based on the DNA theory, they decide to take on Vijay Salgaonkar. But before going after Vijay, shouldn't they have investigated some basic things?

For example, why was Vijay suddenly visiting the church regularly?

Why weren't his phone tapped?

Didn't they have access to the call he made to the person who created the fake skeleton?

These are basic things I think the police do to check before taking on someone they already consider a classic criminal.

And this is where I started feeling that the movie was written more for entertainment than realism.

The police officers involved were not ordinary people. Higher ranking officers were involved in the case. So obviously, they would have studied Vijay's behaviour, his daily routine and his previous actions before making such a big move against him.

But somehow, many of these basic things were simply ignored.

The same thing happened with Prakash Raj's character.

There was a lot of build up around his character, and I was genuinely curious to see where it would go. But eventually, the character felt almost like a Joker to me.

Take the courtroom scene.

He is supposed to be such a successful and experienced lawyer. So when the 23rd July voice recording comes into the picture, wouldn't he know how to ask the court for more time before presenting such an important piece of evidence?

There are cases that continue for years. And this is supposed to be one of the biggest and most sensitive case.

So I found it difficult to believe that the court would simply shut down the entire process after a few convincing statements.

And then there is the recording itself.

Didn't anyone else feel that the voice coming from the radio recorder sounded different from the voice of the actual person who was physically present at the location?

Maybe I am overthinking it, but these are the kinds of small things that pulled me out of the movie.

The film was definitely made for entertainment, but for me, it was very far from reality in several places.

Even from a filmmaking point of view, I didn't feel the Hindi version had the upper hand.

Some of the dialogue deliveries, especially the scenes involving the recordings, sounded extremely artificial to me.

Even some of the conversations between Vijay and his wife, and between Vijay and his children, didn't feel natural. I could feel the actors delivering the dialogue rather than the characters actually speaking.

There are two more scenes that really irritated me.

The first is the scene where the lawyer threatens the suspect by saying that he will put not only him but his entire family behind bars, especially with the media around.

I understand that the scene was meant to create intensity. But being such an experienced lawyer, would he really speak like that in such a public situation?

To me, it felt very cliched and unnecessary.

The second is Jaideep's character first entry into Vijay's house.

Yes, the scene was intense. But I had a problem with the way the character was written.

Sam's parents have every reason to be angry. They lost their son and have spent years trying to get justice for him. So I completely understand them taking extreme steps.

But why does Jaideep himself have to become so personally aggressive and cruel?

The same goes for the lawyers.

In the second part, Akshaye Khanna's character was also completely against Vijay. But we never felt that he personally wanted to hurt Vijay's family or destroy them. He was doing his job and was trying to solve the case.

That made the conflict much more interesting.

But in this film, both Jaideep's character and the lawyer seem to take the entire thing personally. Eventually, they start feeling like negative characters rather than people who are simply trying to solve a case.

Even Gaitonde had a reason for the way he behaved in the first part.

Here, I didn't really understand what made these characters become so personal about it.

And finally, one of the most interesting things for me was the lawyer defending Vijay and his family.

Even she doesn't know the complete truth.

But somehow, the lawyer who is going to fight against one of the most successful lawyers is still convinced that Vijay and his family are completely innocent.

That part genuinely made me laugh.

Even the members of Vijay's own family don't know the complete story of what exactly he did in the second part. Yet the lawyer who is supposed to be fighting against an extremely experienced lawyer, somehow seems completely convinced of their innocence.

That was another point where I felt the writing was prioritising the dramatic moment over realism.

So, overall, if I look at Drishyam 3 Hindi purely as an entertainment movie, I can understand why people might enjoy it. There are moments that work, the suspense is there.

But if I look at it from a realism and naturality point of view, I personally didn't like it as much.

And yes, I still prefer the Malayalam version.

I know I might be biased because I am a Malayalam speaker and I have grown up watching the original Drishyam universe. So maybe that naturally affects how I connect with the characters.

But even keeping that aside, I felt the Malayalam version handled the characters and their emotional exhaustion in a much more natural way.

The Malayalam version also has its flaws. I am not saying it is perfect.

But when I compare the two, the Malayalam version made me feel that these are real people dealing with an impossible situation.

The Hindi version sometimes made me feel that these are characters doing things because the screenplay needs them to happen.

And for a story like Drishyam, that difference matters a lot to me.