Jhoom Barabar Jhoom

Jhoom Barabar Jhoom

No overview found.

  • Rating:
    4.00 out of 5
  • Length:0 minutes
  • Release:2007
  • Language:English,Hindi,Panjabi
  • Reference:Imdb
  • Keywords:dance,   dancer,   telescope,  

A man and a woman, engaged to marry different people, spend a couple of hours chatting together at a train station only to fall for each other. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki


Jhoom Barabar Jhoom torrent reviews

WS W (it) wrote: Another not so interesting by-product of DOWNTON ABBEY.

Kelly L (mx) wrote: Documents one of the shameful acts in our history, the rush to judgment of Mary Surratt in a rigged trial for all the wrong reasons. Fairly well acted but lacking the intensity such a film deserves. The execution was dramatic and almost worth watching the rest of the film. Interesting for the historical insights.

Stephanie R (kr) wrote: Higuchinsky has a vision but not the budget to accompany it. The production value looks a little less than uzumaki, but the story and imagination is there. I really wish somebody would give this guy a decent budget to work with, he is a genious being held back by low budget!

Ivan S (mx) wrote: this movie makes me a drummer

Nathan T (kr) wrote: Stupid elephant. I'd give this movie just two stars if it weren't for A) The big car pile-up near the end and B) "SWAMP FEVA!"

Michael M (es) wrote: I saw this in the mid-Seventies and it has been a favorite ever since. It held so much meaning for me at the time. I should watch it again. but I'm afraid to disturb the memory.

Stephen E (br) wrote: Sophia Loren and Marcello Mastroianni are wonderful together in "Marriage Italian Style" even when there's nothing but hate between them. Watching them interact with one another is almost reason enough to recommend "Marriage Italian Style," but there's more to it than just these two performers. The script is clever in how it continues to throw these two characters in and out of love with one another and in order for it to work it requires focused, cohesive direction, which Vittorio De Sica is willingly able to provide.

Ken S (kr) wrote: This American Version of the Japanese classic is pretty weak. I think Raymond Burr feels shoehorned in, as well as a character that just seems like a fly on the wall more often than not. His character takes the emotional punch completely out of the film. I personally would rather watch 98 minutes of subtitles than 80 minutes of bad dubbing and a guy constantly asking for a translation, only to take the sort of moral and point of the movie out of commission. Original Japanese versions for me from here on out.

Edith N (es) wrote: An Introduction to the Power of Marketing to Kids This is really just the three episodes of the Disney TV show patched together for a theatrical release. Now, my mother actually argued with me when I bought it; she insists that there were more than three episodes, because she remembers that it was huge. And indeed it was, but leaving aside that, as I said, I own the series on DVD, Walt is famously quoted as having said that, had he known how popular the thing would have been, he wouldn't have killed off his main character in three episodes. Which, you know, fair point for Walt. The success of the show, which was three episodes of [i]Walt Disney's Wonderful World of Color[/i], caught everyone by surprise and presumably led to Fess Parker's later casting as Daniel Boone. I've only seen an episode or two of that, but it was obviously written in the hopes of cashing in on the success of the fictionalized life of another figure of American folklore. So it turns out that Davy Crockett (Parker) was born on a mountaintop in Tennessee. (Sing along, if you know the words--and who doesn't know the words?) The story picks up considerably later than that, though. Specifically, while Davy and his best friend, George Russel (Buddy Ebsen), are fighting in the Creek Indian Wars. Andrew Jackson (Basil Ruysdael) dinks around, and Davy saves his butt. Then, Davy went off to Congress and served a spell. There, he runs afoul of Andrew Jackson some more. His wife, Polly (Helene Stanley), died while he was off fighting the Creeks, so the movie doesn't much need to talk about her. It can focus instead on missing most of what caused the conflict between the US and the Creeks, then Davy Crockett and Andrew Jackson. And because of that, we don't really understand why Davy's constituents vote him out--and we don't get his famous line about how, if they do so, they can go to Hell and he will go to Texas. But he does, indeed, go to Texas, and we all know what happened there. Actually, I read a book not all that long ago about the historical figure of David Crockett, and while Fess Parker wasn't much like him, neither was the character who appeared in David Crockett's autobiography. This version of the figure gets called racist, and of course it is at least somewhat. However, it's nothing compared to the racism we saw in the actual man's life. At least this Davy has a certain amount of respect for the Creeks; he doesn't ever seem to kill anyone out of any real personal animosity. And while Andrew Jackson is incompetent, he isn't a vicious, genocidal thug. Heck, it even permits an Indian to be among those nobly killed at the Alamo, and if it doesn't paint the Mexicans in too great a light, well, you kind of can't when it's a war against them which killed your hero. And while the movie doesn't go much into exactly why the Texians were seceding from Mexico, it's true that the historical David Crockett didn't care much about the slavery issue, either. Oh, I'm not sure how well this ages for a modern audience, but I don't think it deserves some of the criticism it gets. For one thing, you have to remember that this was made for TV initially. It was aired in theatres, but it was aired in theatres as part of Walt's desperate attempt to cash in on the fad he had so obviously failed to anticipate. Stores couldn't keep coonskin caps in stock, after all. "The Ballad of Davy Crockett" was top of the charts. (Losing its place to "Unchained Melody.") And if you ever get the chance, listen to the cover done perhaps fifteen years ago by Tim Curry. It is almost impossible to review this as a movie, because it is such a cultural phenomenon that it's like trying to review [i]How Green Was My Valley[/i] without discussing [i]Citizen Kane[/i]. You cannot separate the two, much though you may wish to and hard as you may try. Even I, born so long after the days when every little boy was dressed up as a cowboy, know that what I was watching had shaped my mother's generation. To be perfectly honest, I fell in love with Davy Crockett when I was a child. The Disney Channel used to play the episodes, and the pieced-together movies (the popularity of the show also caused Walt to create a prequel, [i]Davy Crockett and the River Pirates[/i]), all the time when I was little, and I looked forward to them with delight every time the ads for them played. This has since ebbed, though my fondness remains strong. The Davy Crockett in this is a simple, goodhearted man, and if as a child I was unbothered by how little it bothered me that he abandoned his wife and she died alone, well, as an adult I assume he's in love with Georgie and just can't admit it because it's the 1840s. No, he's not as interesting as the historical figure, but it's still not surprising to me that he caught the attention of all those little kids. My own mother, who would have been eleven at the time, was more into [i]Zorro[/i], however.

Nilufer R (es) wrote: It was a predictable cliche movie with no or very little interesting ideas or even conversations. It might just be inspiring to show that there is always hope for love, that's about it.

Hannah M (us) wrote: This was panned when it came out, partly because a lot of people were really upset with how bawdy it was. It does not deserve its terrible reputation. It is not one of Wilder's best but the first 40 minutes are thoroughly entertaining in a zany screwball comedy kind of way. This is also hands-down the best thing Dean Martin has ever done. He is hilarious here as a very unsubtle, sleazy parody of himself. It goes in too many directions at the end, but overall not at all the terrible film it's purported to be. I thoroughly enjoyed it.