Aalwar

Aalwar

Aalwar is a traditional priest. He is devoted to his mother and sister. But the villainous elements Lal, Vincent Asokan, kill the sister and mother. Aalwar, with revenge ringing in his mind, ends up as Shiva the killer, even while working as a ward boy in a hospital. Shiva is out to make a statement against the venal forces. He sees himself as some kind of avatar — in fact, he bumps off the baddies under the get-up's of Lord Rama and Lord Krishna. In climax, Shiva turns up as Lord Narasimha and bumps off the last villain by placing him on his thighs and ripping apart his bowels and chest with his sharp claws.

. You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki

LinksNameQualitySeedersLeechers

Aalwar torrent reviews

Adrian Z (mx) wrote: Woody Harrelson puts in a remarkably effective performance as a well meaning, traumatized dullard, who in his delusional attempts to fight crime as a costumed vigilante, ends up running afoul of a mobster. Well written comedy/drama, is actually light on the comedy, but delivers solidly on drama, courtesy of several moments of genuine poignancy, and gritty realism. Hampered somewhat by a slow, if repetitive, mid section.

Kieran K (gb) wrote: Based loosely on the life and murder cases of Barbara Hoffman, this movie however failed to capture the supposed bizarre and sensational twists of events leading up to the murders.I tried to watch this movie not once but three times. I fell asleep on two occasions and only the third time did I force myself to keep awake.The film for some reason keep me very removed from the characters, from the dialogue to the set, to the look of the film. It was too cold and and too distant, which all became kind of nothing in the end. In the end, that was how I felt watching the movie: totally disconnected.If you looked at the real Barbara Hoffman, there's something quite disturbing about her silent and removed disposition. Birch's performance, while it was commendable, seemed to be more bored and disinterested.

Savda T (kr) wrote: tomb par hasard sur ce film sur arte en VO, j'ai regard jusqu' la fin ...

Christine D (es) wrote: Great action packed movie of how a town was scared of one rich man. Val put him in his place.

Theron P (br) wrote: the yo mama jokes in the beginning are amazing and have nothing to do with the rest of the film. most of the money used to make this movie was spent on food, because at least half of this movie is people eating. awful film and sound quality aside, this is trash. looking at the camera and giggling when scared. confusing. this is a better movie than pocket ninjas but a worse movie than skateboard kid and intercessor: another rock n roll nightmare.

Felipe F (ca) wrote: The screenplay isn't so deep on the drama or funny enough on its comic side but Meryl Streep's typically mesmerizing performance carries the movie on its own.

Julianna I (us) wrote: The transformation of civilization into savagery falls rather flat when the characters you choose are already savages. Stick with the black and white version, or better yet, read the book.

Alejandro E (fr) wrote: Passional,remarkable real-live episode of art history.

Jay A (jp) wrote: A fun 80s legal thriller, despite its predictability, boasting good performances from character veterans like Loggia and Dehner.

Kyle M (gb) wrote: This is a good film about an endearing friendship. The captain and Dersu are both likable, and the film hosts some impressive visuals. All in all, good Kurosawa. I would put this on the high side of the 4 rating. It's a film that I think may gain even more affection upon rewatches.

Matthew Z (ru) wrote: Does SPLENDOR IN THE GRASS really take place in the Twenties? It doesn't. Everything looks like the Twenties. There's no booze. Decadence has overrun the town. The people are indulgent, waiting for the next big paycheck. They have oil. Its pumping. Pumping. Pumping. Pumping. Pumping... Problem is -- so are the kids. The opening shot of Warren Beatty and Natalie Wood getting hot in the car right next to the waterfall is trademark Kazan. Sometimes the kissing is interrupted by a shot of the giant swell of water falling off the cliff. It is a metaphor for their passion, if you didn't take the hint. Not only is the water pumping, but the oil, too. It is a part of the story. The adults are obsessed with pumping oil (it's a sexual relationship), and making money (which harnesses obvious sexual power). Natalie Wood goes crazy from jealousy. Understandable. She is an infatuated young girl. Will virginity make you crazy? Is that what Kazan is saying? No. But she is deprived of a primal physical need by her parents. This repression cultivates hatred and impatience in every area of the brain. Her parents are telling her to reserve her untamable desires for marriage. Apparently this isn't possible in Wood, and she goes bananas. She can't stack up to the wealth of her family and her family will not allow her to have sex with Bud. The older generation traps her into madness. It is their fault. With Bud, in a thrilling and exact performance from Warren Beatty, we see some of the same thing, but met with a strength able to overcome the foolishness of his elders. Here lies the genius of Kazan. The story is set in 1929ish. He distances himself from the present. However, the ideas are burning with contemporary relevance. Baby Boomers start asking questions in their teens. They start looking around for some sex. Their parents try to stop the behavior. They fail. Revolution is born. The youth revolution comes from this. It begins at the home, rejecting the merit of parental guidance. In fact, I assert that Elia Kazan's films, specifically, embody the shift from Code to Rating. He might be the crux. He makes movies without fear, encourages wild, uninhibited behavior, and domestic violence that may one day turn into the knife that sinks into Marion Crane. His energy revitalizes an otherwise bland 50's cinema. But it is important to remember that Kazan isn't commenting on the 1920's. He's commenting on the 1960's. THIS is where the youth movement begins. In these attitudes. Some brilliant qualities of the film are in its' sound and composition. The sound is aggravating at times. It buzzes during silence. It makes noise. But it acts as the prototype for a stye Altman would eventually use regularly. Background noise played an integral part in the narrative. We heard gossip. We heard secrets. No one was safe from discovery. It was a fascinating way to create dramatic irony and suspense. As far as composition goes, SPLENDOR was perhaps the best of all Kazan's efforts. His primal and animalistic acting style was contained. The spaces were beautiful. The sets were full and bright. They were right without attracting attention. Inside of these neat spaces, Kazan's animal acting created controlled and precise pandemonium. No space is safe. Hospitals, schools, hallways, everything becomes an insane asylum. Here, we see the madness in human behavior. Kazan shows us how primitive we are. How love is such a private and animalistic game. Really, it creates a SPLENDOR IN THE GRASS. A brilliant and wild film. It's sloppy, it's gritty, and it's great. It demands multiple viewings. It may be the apex of a magnificent career. 96.7

Sue P (mx) wrote: typical duo film, was an ok one, but once u seen 1 u seen them all

Braden C (nl) wrote: A great musical comedy for the entire family! Allan Jone's character and songs are a bit of a bore, but when Judy starts to sing it will make you totally forget the boring parts! Billie Burke and Fanny Brice add to the enjoyment with their comical characters! This is just an overall fabulous movie!

Cory T (fr) wrote: Alan Moore could probably lay claim that 'Darkman' thusly plunders the seriocomic origin story of his brainchild 'Swamp Thing' with the trope of an ingenious scientist being scorched by thugs in one of his own experiments and being revived as a freakish hybrid. On the other hand though, Sam Raimi doesn't squander the property on a shoestring budget ala Wes Craven's chintzy adaptation and Raimi is a certifiable maestro of gallows humor (ex. Liam Neeson shrieking about his "fucking" pink elephant prize while his malleable facial prosthetic is melting away). Honestly, the ebullient albeit derivative 'Darkman' is Raimi's audition for his 'Spider-Man' gig and it trounces that trilogy by leaps and bounds. He doesn't mock the material (he even rationalizes why the formula is only efficacious at night) and before he was an AARP action hero, Neeson is a superb fit for the disfigured crusader. Creatively the cinematography during the stuntwork are unparalleled with Neeson's head being smashed continually through glass cabinets during Durant's raid on his lab. The carnival of action scenes is absolutely crackerjack and thrilling with the helicopter-dangling denouement as a centerpiece (Westlake's Road Runner feet atop a truck is a hilarious use of speed ramping). One drawback is Danny Elfman's operatic score is too reminiscent of his other Tim Burton opuses.

Carlos M (jp) wrote: A profoundly affecting family drama in which everything conspires for something so perfect that you must be dead if you are not moved, and it relies on a beautiful script that refuses to take sides and on exceptional performances by Dustin Hoffman, Meryl Streep and Justin Henry.

Jonathan B (br) wrote: A solid production with good performances from the cast help to bring the story of the fight for equal voting rights for black people in the late 1960s. David Oyelowo portrays the charismatic Martin Luther King Jnr who, together with his supporters protested and marched in the face of violent opposition in the Alabama town of Selma and forced US President Johnson to change the law. It seems unbelievable to us now, looking back, that people were treated so appallingly and brutally for merely trying to exercise their civil right to register to vote. It is also strange that this is one of the first times that Dr. King has been portrayed in a drama on the big screen. Selma makes a compelling statement about justice and civil freedom and as a story of human determination in the face of wrong, it is a worthy story.

Corey B (ca) wrote: Low budget sequel is a lot of fun even though the direction is pretty terrible (why so many close ups?) and the performances aren't that great. But the tongue in cheek script (that puts Deth in the confusing position of having two wives), fun adherence to continuity (pretty much everyone is back in one form or another), and fast pace keep it entertaining.