Amaravathi

Amaravathi

Amaravathi (Tamil: அமராவதி) is a 1993 Tamil film directed by Selva. The film featured debutants Ajith Kumar and Sanghavi in the lead role, and released in May 1993 to a positive response at the box office

. You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki

LinksNameQualitySeedersLeechersSize
Download   Amaravathi (2009) @Other3443398.96 MB

Amaravathi torrent reviews

Dave J (ru) wrote: Friday, February 14, 2014 (2012) Picture Day DRAMA Written and directed by Kate Miles Melville making yet another pointless coming-of-age story centering onto yet another misunderstood teenage girl in this case it's Claire (Tatiana Maslany) who does nothing except sleep around, drink booze with people who don't really care about her, particularly the struggling rock musician. But ironically, the only person who does care about her is the young teenage guy she used to babysit with. I mean, like whoopee... Now, while I appreciate the 'raw' looking environment background, it's unable to make it's characters engaging, since each one of them are just as self-absorbed and one-note as the next, as we continue to see them doing things we ourselves can't see ourselves doing. Obviously, inspired by one of Mike Leigh's improvised movies perhaps "Naked" as well as "semi-documentaries such as "Kids" and "Bully". This movie is boring and doesn't add up to nothing. 2 out of 4 stars

Anna B (es) wrote: Madeley is really good, and the writing isn't bad. The direction is so terrible though; artless, clunky, sub-TV quality, frequently unintentionally funny, and it telegraphed the betrayal a mile off, so the protagonist just seemed like an idiot. I enjoy Sarah Waters's stuff, it's just that the adaptations are so ugly. Fingersmith had pretty much the same problems. Also the rental company I got this from said it was two hours long, so the abrupt ending came as quite a shock.

stefn birgir s (ca) wrote: Not as funny as expected.

Ben L (fr) wrote: This movie is a strange mixed bag of heart-warming drama, comedy masterpiece, and frustrating look behind the scenes of life with a rock-and-roll band. I really love the background we see on the character of William, and how he gets hooked in with Stillwater. He is our surrogate in the story, and I like how it eases us into this world of sex, drugs, and rock-and-roll. Kate Hudson is also charming as the girl who swears she's not a groupie, that grows too attached to one guy. I have heard that this is loosely based on some real events that Cameron Crowe went through himself, which makes sense because everything feels so genuine, and you can also sense the passion he has for the music that is sprinkled throughout the film. I think where I have difficulty connecting the dots in movies like this is when they make it clear that William is forming an emotional attachment to the band. It doesn't feel like there is any basis for his affection for these guys as they continue to distrust and mistreat him. Yet his character qualities of extreme loyalty and trustworthiness make him a standout anyways. I thought the cast was easily the highlight of the film, because they all fit perfectly, and sold the story. The biggest highlights were Frances McDormand and Philip Seymour Hoffman who served as different kinds of advisers/protectors to William. I can easily see why this film is greatly admired by so many people. I think it lacks a little something to fully engage my personal interest (possibly because I'm not a big fan of rock-and-roll) but that doesn't mean it isn't well-made and entertaining throughout.

Michael A (de) wrote: niece grew up watching it I learned to love it

alex r (us) wrote: it's monty python say no more

Jesse O (ru) wrote: This review talks about the American version of the film.Try as one may might, you cannot view a movie over 50 years old with the same eyes as they were viewed when first released. It's impossible...we are all a product of our times and you can't expect someone to view a film as old as this with the same sensibilities as they had in the 60s in 2014. With that said, I think some films definitely stand the test of time better than others. 2001: A Space Odyssey is still an incredible film. As is Taxi Driver, the first two Godfather films. There's many examples of this throughout the history of film. But, and this isn't meant as an insult to this film, this hasn't aged as well as it could've. And another problem is the fact that the print that Netflix has available is the American version of the film and not Mario Bava's original cut it. The American version is pretty much nerfed from everything that I've read. Entire subplots were removed, the order of the shorts, the musical score, and the film is shorter. Apparently the Italian cut of the film more violent than it was in the American version and that really disappoints me. If you've followed Mario Bava's trajectory, and this is my first review of one of his films on here, but I obviously know about the man, then you know he's one of the grandfather of what is known today as the slasher genre. This genre really came into prominence in the late 70s and early 80s with movies like Halloween, Nightmare on Elm Street, Friday the 13th. Not to say Bava was the only Italian doing these types of films, Dario Argento, for one, has probably achieved more fame than Bava himself, but Bava is pretty instrumental in the whole genre existing in its current form. So to see such an influential filmmaker's cut being done away with because of American conservatism at the time is just really disappointing. I can understand why they did it, but if the original cut is available then why not go with that instead. As much as I thought the first short, Drop of Water was actually the 'worst' one, I'd still want to see the film how it was meant to be seen by Mario Bava. Maybe one day. That's part of the reason the film gets the rating it did, because I wouldn't ever sacrifice want the quality of the film and that's what this cut did. With that said, I thought that the film ended up at its high note, with the Wurdulak short. The problem with this, as I mentioned, is the fact that several subplots are removed...mostly from The Telephone. The original short had a lesbian subplot, Rosy was a prostitute, and Frank was actually her pimp. The American version turns this segment into a nonsensical ghost story. While A Drop of Water was my least favorite short of the film, The Telephone actually has it worst. It's changed entirely. Unacceptable. The Wurdulaks was also a pretty good segment. Some funny moments in Sdenka leaving her entire family behind to be consumed by the Wurdulak to escape with a man she just met the day prior. Her family haunts her and they then turn her into a Wurdulak. Wurdulak is essentially another word for vampire, but these ones only consume the blood of those they love. The film, while completely different from the original film, still is fairly watchable even to this day. I can imagine that I'd give this film a higher rating if I had seen the original cut. If I can ever find a copy then I'll definitely come back here and do this review again. I can imagine that it'd be much better in its original form.

Jason P (us) wrote: definitely not as good as the book but made for a good show