Bardaasht

Bardaasht

Bardhaasht is a Bollywood drama and thriller film released in 2004. The director is E. Niwas. It is based on the screenplay written by Vikram Bhatt. The main cast of the movie is Bobby Deol, Lara Dutta and Rahul Dev. Bardaasht is noted for its gritty and brutal portrayal of police force and triumph of human will and justice in the form of Major Aditya Shrivastava portrayed by Bobby Deol.

Aditya Shrivastav is a deserted army officer. He has a brother, Anuj. Anuj gets angry at Aditya one day and runs away. ACP Yashwant Thakur helps Aditya in finding Anuj, and later tells him ... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki

LinksNameQualitySeedersLeechers

Bardaasht torrent reviews

open 7 (it) wrote: Wow the koreans are getting pretty good at making films. This was compelling through and through with a great story line about the power of love of siblings. I loved the unassuming character of Nam Yi and his survival through the odds. There was some shoddy wire work in the impossible leap section, but otherwise it wasnt too noticeable.

Sandra A (gb) wrote: An excellent gangster movie with one of my favorite actors, Jean Reno.The main character is almost immortal and has a rigid moral code : to family and friends everything, to his enemies one bullet in the head and other in the heart...An action packed thriller.

Michael G (mx) wrote: Disturbing. Very disturbing. It's about Mr. Hands. Enough said.

Millo T (us) wrote: As it happened in the first part, this movie is important by the value of its historical events. The interpretation of Benicio del Toro continues being interesting. The main problem, compared to the first part, is that there are less interesting events to talk about. Anyway, the final moment is critical, as you may suppose. Between 2.5 and 3.

Paul F (de) wrote: Close to flawless in my humble opinion

Phil H (ca) wrote: Right lets get down to it then, this is basically the Bottom movie end of story, yeah sure there are the odd changes and snips around the edges but its quite simply Bottom on the big screen. Rik and Ade have played the same type of characters for their entire careers undoubtedly but these two fellas are clearly 'Richie' and 'Eddie' of Hammersmith, I think all the fans can agree on that despite what the guys say.This works for and against the movie in my opinion. Basically we see the many of the same gags, pratfalls and violent slapstick from the TV show...and when I say the same I mean pretty much identical. The only difference is of course its been fleshed out on the silver screen with a better budget so everything looks slicker. Again this is not a problem essentially, I am very happy to see Rik and Ade knock seven shades of shit out of each other with the use of bigger and better effects...to a degree. But at times during the film I did find myself thinking they are rehashing too many old classic sight gags, verbal gags and violent gags and somehow it doesn't actually look as good!How is this possible you might ask, well personally I think its down to the fact the TV show was actually more adult than the film and much more grittier. The constraints of the TV show elevate the material because it feels more anarchic and wild yet at the same time restricted, the stunts and effects are slapped together and seem really dangerous and realistic, plus the lack of any swearing somehow made it feel even ruder and filthier which I can't workout, the tempting hints I guess. In this film everything just seems a bit slow and tired, the guys are obviously not as young anymore but the fights and pratfalls just feel weaker and less inventive. 'Pheeb...One boiled egg.'The sets in the film are nice and have that classic typically dated British seaside B&B visual atmosphere and vibe going on. Watching carefully I loved all the old set decorations strewn around the hotel like the old paintings and historic furniture. The kind of stuff your gran had when you were a kid back in the day, or even your parents back in the late 70's and 80's (if you're around my age). I also really liked all the little nooks, crannies and secret passage ways throughout the hotel which are used by Richie to spy on people and pinch things. It all adds more scope and depth to the setting plus adds inventive ways to create more laughs...which it does nicely in one sequence.So the films visuals around the hotel do look good n grimy as you'd expect, certain props are used disgustingly well used for various painful moments and the sets are well designed reflecting that classic Bottom feel from the Hammersmith flat. The extra cast members are a solid oddball bunch that back at the time were relatively unknown but have now gone on to bigger things, most notably Bill Nighy and Simon Pegg. Neither of the pair actually have massive parts in the film of course as it all revolves around Richie and Eddie, but they add a much needed boost to the overall quality. Nighy probably gets the best of it with his face-off against Mayall in some classic Fawlty Towers-esque scenes at breakfast. Never really liked the character or performance from Cassel as it just felt way out of place really, other than that I still don't get why they didn't cast all their old school mates from previous shows, we get 'Spudgun' so what about the rest?'Mmm Lady Diana Princess of Wales...slap me up you bitch'Despite some great looking bits n pieces and some decent scenes of Mayall madness and campness, at the end of the day I couldn't help but feel slightly underwhelmed by the whole thing. I think like most folk I went into this with really really seriously high expectations from the pairs glittering TV career and basically the film could never live up to that. Don't get me wrong the guys have a bloody good go and the movie definitely delivers what you want from the duo in terms of crude crass vomit inducing toilet humour. I just really think this should of been a much stronger blend of their live stage show and the TV show, it should of been an all out adult comedy really. They try their best but it really feels like the laughs are being forced out after a bad spell of comical constipation. Was never too sure on that film title either.

Paul D (es) wrote: I've never been the biggest fan of the Western genre, but there is always room for an exception when Clint Eastwood is involved! It runs a bit long, but is pretty enjoyable nonetheless. Yee-Haw!

Mike B (us) wrote: Cool for atmosphere, so-so for plot & character. (That pretty much describes the whole Blind Dead series.) The "publicity stunt" plot device written to get all the characters out on the ocean made no sense. It was so lazy that I was convinced I missed something and hit rewind to make sure. The best scenes are the ones where the blind dead attack, but you don't care about any of the characters.

Tor M (ru) wrote: The same story in new clothing. A villain (or two) against Gotham but first of all Batman. The total story and the rage of the villains is pretty vague, and I never get the big need for the drama and conflict this time.The Joker was cool and slick, The Penguin was well excecuted - both of them well acted by great actors. This time, the normally solid actor Jones are more anoying than most things. Laughing and screaming, non-cool apperance, few cool tricks. The only thing more anoying in him must be The Riddler, done by one of the most anoying actors in the world - Jim Carrey. He does the same role as he does everytime, and there is nothing impressive and cool about him. The walking stick is super stupid.The entire plot is a mess actually, as it shifts and takes turns and swirls around the clock at all times. The story is messy and never smart, witty or interesting. The girl is the least interesting of the three ladies, and I found Kim Basinger quite awful as Catwoman. Kidman is just a big tease, a very uninteresting one. Even Batman seem flat and never suits Val Kilmer. Robin is actually kind of a breath of fresh air, but I never like his entrence and he seem a bit unplaced. He is not too much involved though. That's nice. Gotham looks stuipider too. Not as dark or atmospheric, more like a wasteland of flashy lights. What's up with that clothes washing scene with Robin. Super bad and out of context.More impressive effects this time - visually speaking, but they seem pointless. Horrible finale scene. From the battleship-scene to the credits there's sillyness all over. Not a total flop. Big names, some entertainment value and a huge budget helps out a bit.I doubt I'll see "Batman and Robin" for quite some time, but maybe I'll give it a go just to see if it's even worse than this one.3.5 out of 10 riddles.

Zachary C (ca) wrote: I saw Billy Madison for the first time about a month ago. I used to think that I would never find anything with Adam Sandler in it that was funny. I stand corrected. The idea of a man going through all twelve grades again seemed like something worth watching. The parts where Chirs Farley was on the screen were amazing: For instance: "NO YELLING ON THE BUS!" And my favorite part when Sandler was on the screen was when he was speaking gibberish or chasing the penguin. There's not much else to really say about Billy Madison though. And the most I can say is that it's enjoyable even for the people like me because I hate Adam Sandler and I still hate Adam Sandler even after this movie was over. And for the die hard Sandler fans... well you know who you are.

Anthony L (ag) wrote: Most I've cried over a movie.

Sharon W (jp) wrote: if your over 50 you will like it, if your under 50 you wont like it. I am over 50 and l really liked it but the end almost made me fall down laughing. did wards of the state really live in an prison like place back then. I don't think so

David L (au) wrote: First time i have ever been inspired to write movie review in my life. I wouldn't want anyone to waste the 1hr30min of their limited time on this planet watching this film. One of the worst films I have ever seen.