A prominent person from Delhi reach a palace,which is well known for its tradition and royalty to solve an issue. Consequently, instead of a solution, the issue becomes more and more complicated. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
Bhai Ji is a high-tech robber who changes his looks frequently. Disguised as jewelry experts, he and his team members hatch a plan to steal precious jewelry from a palace in Kerala.
You may also like
Mr. Fraud torrent reviews
Eric P (es) wrote: As far as my opinion on the show I have no opinion, when my little sister gets me to watch it with her, I'm facebooking on my phone. However as to the message of the doc, it's good. If you're into that stuff and it doesn't hurt anyone else then enjoy it, who am I to judge.
Marc B (kr) wrote: Pour un film qui fait un hommage au fin low budget des annes 80 y fait ben la job :D et le chinois est awesome !
Thibaut M (mx) wrote: long trop long...religion, condition des femmes, amours, mariage forces... et l'eau.
Nick T (jp) wrote: It's all about young people having a relationship with someone... and everyone with one small condition. NEVER LIE.At first, everything was a mess in the movie. you'd go like, what the fuck? "that's his girlfriend so why is she fcking brandon routh" but when you reach the middle of the film, you'd realize that it isn't all about playing the field. it talks of trust and being open with your partner. nomatter how much you consent that she sleep with another guy, if she's not meant for you then there's nothing you can do about it. my advice:IF YOU LOVE HER, AND SHE LOVES SOMEONE ELSE, LET HER GOIF SHE COMES BACK, ACCEPT HERIF SHE COMES BACK AND LOVES SOMEONE AGAIN ELSE, LET HER GO AGAIN.I know it doesn't make sense but what the fck, steven spielberg doesn't read my reviews anyways. i like the ending. Plus, even though there're a lot of unnecessary sex scenes, like when mason was humphing the couch to turn on sam, i mean for a guy watching the movie, that's like, SUPER GAY, but still, it made sense. you just cant' have them all.
Tetiana (nl) wrote: Quite good :O. Great story!
Malchijah B (ag) wrote: Definitely one of my favorite movies in the Star Wars Saga!!
Kyle S (de) wrote: One of my favorite movies! Rodney Dangerfield plays a shock TV host that makes Jerry Springer look like he belongs on Fox News
John R (de) wrote: 150508: I really can't say this film is all that bad. Yesterday I was questioning how films such as Ghost Rock (2004) get created. Well, here is George Takei (Doc Valentine) and Meg Foster (Stell Barr) from Cagney & Lacey fame (as well as Young Riders for you western fans). Some campy special effects and characters add to the simple entertainment held within this film. A hot Musetta Vander appears as Lash and the Adams Family's Carel Struycken as Gaunt. Now I'm thinking of seeking out Oblivion 2...as a matter of fact, I will seek it out.
Zaar D (au) wrote: HA HA HA HA HA HA...evil video games rule!
Paul D (fr) wrote: Certainly a rehash of several films using similar premises that have gone before. Perhaps its greatest asset is its very light-hearted nature which makes it fairly enjoyable.
Duncan R (ag) wrote: Call me a creep, but there's only one reason why I want to see this. Morgan Freeman playing a pimp.
Angie C (it) wrote: if your into terrible B movie this is good
Marcus W (ca) wrote: Imagine if Monty Python did Spinal Tap...
Mike J (au) wrote: Even with the horrible acting, I will always like this movie.
Kenneth L (us) wrote: This is one of Woody Allen's smaller, lesser-known films, and to be honest, I can see why. Made in between the similarly slight Alice and the more troubling Husbands and Wives, this is one of Allen's mannered homage films, which, while often interesting, usually don't end up as memorable as his more original movies. Interiors was his take on Ingmar Bergman; Stardust Memories was his Fellini movie; and this one is his tribute to German Expressionism and the writings of Kafka, and it particularly reminded me of Fritz Lang's M. While Allen certainly gets the visual aspect of the homage right, the actual content of this movie is often not especially distinctive.The movie begins promisingly enough, with a clerk named Kleinman (Allen) being woken in the middle of the night somewhere in 1920s or 1930s Eastern Europe by a posse of men out to catch a local serial killer. The idea of Allen hunting for a serial killer is pretty funny, and the movie does get some laughs whenever it focuses on his storyline, but unfortunately it spends a lot of time on a second, less interesting plot. Mia Farrow plays Irmy, a circus performer who runs away from her home after she finds her clown husband (John Malkovich) cheating on her with another performer (Madonna, oddly wasted in only one scene). She is taken in by a group of street-smart, down-to-earth prostitutes (including Lily Tomlin, Jodie Foster, and Kathy Bates), and unexpectedly finds herself mistaken for one by an eager young man (John Cusack). The cast all give decent performances, though many of them end up reduced to only a scene or two.When the movie focuses on Allen's character, it manages to get some easygoing, if predictable, laughs from the tension between Allen's neurotic persona and the supposedly high-stakes business of catching a serial killer. The ending, featuring the sorely under-used and under-appreciated comedic actor Kenneth Mars as a magician, is particularly kind of delightful. But the scenes focusing on Farrow's character are almost never funny, and don't really have much of a dramatic arc, either. They feel brought in from a different movie. While Allen effectively used the comedic and dramatic halves of his earlier Crimes and Misdemeanors to comment on each other, in this case the two strands of the plot just kind of sit next to each other without any very compelling reason to be together. While the Farrow storyline isn't terrible per se, it just doesn't feel like it needs to be in the same movie with the other material.Visually, the black-and-white movie makes its relationship to German Expressionism quite clear, almost to the point of overkill, actually. There really is quite an emphasis on shadows, but they're so omnipresent and so dark that for much of the movie you can't really see the actors' faces. While Allen is certainly capable of using black-and-white and shadow artfully (see: Manhattan), in this movie he overdoes it, and it's distracting just how dark everything is all the time. The set design is nicely evocative, but again, you can hardly see much of it. Overall, this isn't Allen's weakest movie (I would still say that would be You Will Meet a Tall Dark Stranger), but it never feels like it reaches its full potential. It's occasionally amusing and has a distinct visual identity, but the story ends up falling short of Allen's better movies.