Thakur Suraj Singh lives a wealthy lifestyle with his wife; three sons - Kishore, his wife Laxmi & two children Pappu and Laali; Vijaykamal, & Mohan; and an unmarried daughter, Radha. Kishore looks after the family business, while Vijaykamal is a renowned poet, and Mohan is studying law in the city. Vijaykamal is in love with lovely Sapna, but she is forced to marry Bihari, and kills herself on the night of the marriage. Vijaykamal witnesses her death and loses his mind. The family decide to keep him under lock and key on the terrace of their house. Unable to admit Vijaykamal to a mental asylum, Suraj brings home a young courtesan, Chand, who he hopes will cure Vijaykamal, and she does succeed considerably, but is traumatized, sexually assaulted by Vijaykamal, and abused by the rest of the family.
Writer:Agha Jani Kashmiri (dialogue), Gulshan Nanda (screenplay), Gulshan Nanda (story)
Thakur Suraj Singh lives a wealthy lifestyle with his wife; three sons - Kishore, his wife Laxmi & two children Pappu and Laali; Vijaykamal, & Mohan; and an unmarried daughter, Radha. ... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
Steven L (us) wrote: Here is another history film where we learn things never touched upon in our history classes. The story telling is tense and suspenseful, and the audience is given only information they need at the moment. This is definitely worth a watch.
Philip R (nl) wrote: Great movie! Not for everyone. I felt so weird inside knowing that a seemingly regular man can be so twisted inside. This film is very well acted and put together and just affected me in an unsettling way. Beautiful locations and photography. I want to know more about this film but I can't find much about it.
Chad L (au) wrote: Full of heart and thoughtful life lessons that will resonate with anyone young and old. It is a gem not to be missed and shows that simple yet effective storytelling can be just as compelling and powerful. Disarmingly charming, this is a film that truly transcends language and culture and will touch your heart while tickling your funny bone!
Drew S (ca) wrote: Throw this one in the "great concept, flimsy execution" pile. If Isabel Coixet had pulled this off, it would have been an absolute knockout: one part Lost in Translation, one part Leon the Professional, one part The Conversation. I couldn't imagine a more charged mixture. Unfortunately, the challenge existent in realistically representing all of her ideas overcame her, as I imagine it would many other filmmakers. The greatest hurdle was convincingly portraying a romance between a Japanese fish-gutter/assassin and a Spanish wine seller whose only common language is English. Her choice in acting talent is strong, but Rinko Kikuchi doesn't quite have the range of expression or grasp on linguistic nuance that allowed Maggie Cheung to pull off a similar stunt in Clean. Sergi Lopez, meanwhile, is stranded by the utter vacuity of the character - after an hour and a half with him, the only defining trait he left me with was a propensity for really bad Depeche Mode karaoke. The chemistry between these two characters is understandable in theory (much like the rest of the film), but watching them stumble around their lines is borderline painful to behold. I also felt that, for the film's apparent interest in sound, the sound design itself isn't anything special. With such an evocative title, I couldn't help but imagine a film defined by its ambient noise, drawn out in sonic vectors, with each setting's atmosphere especially important to what's happening on screen. Not so. Map of the Sounds of Tokyo isn't a complete failure. The movie is gorgeous, but carries with it an intriguing sterility, sort of like a bloodstained perfume commercial. It has a dark, mysterious core that stays with you for a bit after the film's over; you're likely to look back on it favorably, even if the process of watching it isn't very satisfying. Some of Coixet's setpieces are very imaginative and might have really popped in a movie with a little more life. This is not that movie.
Jesse A (au) wrote: this movie is brilliant i was so drawn into every aspect of it
Tasha J (ag) wrote: who hasnt seent this movie
Nicki M (ag) wrote: Decided to watch this one as I was looking through the collection for something I hadn't seen yet, and seemed fitting, what with the recent sad news of Corey's death. I really wish I could say nice things about this movie, but it is pretty much a shocker. The first one wasn't up to a whole lot either, but this is even worse. I think without Corey, I would actually have rated this a one star movie. I don't think I could even have sat through it otherwise. I could not even begin to try to explain the plot, it is that stupid.
Georgia M (kr) wrote: Quite controversial when it ran. Wonderful acting, thought provoking.
Grace D (de) wrote: for a war movie, it wasn't as bad as expected.
Jeff Z (it) wrote: Charlie Chan movies are like comfort food. And this one is one of the better ones despite the absence of number one son. There's some funny business with bowing between Chan and the Egyptian police chief ("His excellency!") a lot of good atmosphere (enhanced when you consider this was shot not 15 years after the discovery of King Tut's tomb) and a decent mystery. Because of Stepin Fetchit this film is now doubly poltically incorect and no longer gets any air play.
Nicole C (es) wrote: Good Film, Man In It Is Fit, Until He Is Killed ='(
Allan C (es) wrote: Early Hammer horror about a radioactive mud creature that terrorizes a small Scottish village. The film does take itself more seriously than most 1950s sci-fi/horror films, even if the premiss is awfully silly. Still, it's a well made low-budget film that is well worth watching for fans of these sorts of films.
Alex B (mx) wrote: Starts off well, then just becomes crap when the big twist happens. The twist doesn't make sense, it's not profound and it completely destroys the movie. The issue is that it's the sort of philosophical revelation you'd come to expect from a pot head trying to do a gore horror picture. "I mean we can't have it just be nearly 100 minutes of women getting beaten up, we need a reason for them to do it. How about we do something about seeing god in pain, like killing someone without killing them, you know that kind of deepness."
Emily T (gb) wrote: This movie was long. I really liked it though. I didn't think I would really like the race scenes that much. It kept reminding me of Talledega Nights. I really wonder if they were making fun of this movie in TN. This was shown at Cinema La Placita. Because it was so long it didn't end until 11 pm and there weren't many people left when it was over.