The film is based on street cricket played in India, focussing on various themes as friendship, love and rivalry in a suburban area. The film's title is derived from the pincode for ... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
Friendship, love, and rivalry spice up the game of street cricket in the suburb of Chennai whose zip code give this movie its name.
- Stars:Jacqueline Andere, Ricardo Blume, Manuel Bravo, Delia Peña Orta, Dolores Camarillo, Sergio Zuani, María Clara Zurita, Tito Novaro, Arsenio Campos, Shiva, Jai, Nitin Sathya, Premgi Amaren, Aravind Akash, Vijay Vasanth, Vijayalakshmi Agathiyan, Kristine Zedek, Sampath Raj, Prabhakar, Illavarasu,
You may also like
Chennai 600028 torrent reviews
Siddhant S (us) wrote: Awesome. Great Cinematography, Made me feel like I was at their shows again. The documentary also accurately condenses each of their characteristics and slightly exposes the cracks that formed during the One Last Tour. Must Watch for every EDM Fan.
Renita J (es) wrote: I felt that Think Like a man one was more based on the book than Think Like A Man Too. Think Like A Man Too was more funnier than one. If you like Comedian Kevin Hart you will love both movies because he showed out. I really enjoyed the movies you should look for it in red box or on Netflix trust me you will enjoy it like I did.
Private U (jp) wrote: Very interesting and worth watching! Who know's what to believe these days, but my concern is some of the negative reviews and comment this has received.. I also question, why no Top Critics have passed comment! I'm no conspiracy theorist, but Zeitgeist does make you question the world we live in today, right or wrong! For anyone to think we live in an ideal world are deluded, I think people should also take time, and read up on what the Zeitgeist movement actually represents especially before commenting.. To associate Conspiracy theorists to have a low IQ and some kind of social grievance, just highlights the naivety and blanketed life they live in! There has and always will be a hidden force pulling the strings, and just to put this down as theory, again highlights the the manipulated society we live in today!
Bruce B (es) wrote: This is a pretty wild film with subject matter all over the place. An early try at trying to make a bad film good by the use of a herpo who uses fireworks and dynamite to round up and defet the bad guys, South Koreas answer to Robin Hood. 2 Stars 4-1-12
Juli R (gb) wrote: This is not a Big, Fat, Greek wedding. But could be some feta for a night on the couch when you are maybe coming down with the flu and are trying to do a little work and just need some background noise?
Samuel C (gb) wrote: The film's general plot, which focused on the crowds collectively, was the most interesting part of the film. As for the characters, the only one I found worth following was Seattle's fictional mayor, wonderfully acted by Ray Liotta. The others are uninteresting people I could ultimately care less about, even with the great performances by Channing Tatum and Woody Harrelson, among others.
Harry W (it) wrote: Considering that Sniper 2 is a mere direct-to-DVD action film, it actually a pretty good one. I actually liked it a bit more than the first one and found that Tom Berenger kept a strong lead and made a cool duo with Bokeem Woodbine.
Jens S (us) wrote: When this film came out it may have looked unrealistic for terrorists to hijack a plane and use it as a weapon against the USA. As we know now that is a pretty terrifying and real scenario, one that even still makes parts of this film hard to stomach. This plot's attempts to stop the catastrophe are nail-biting suspenseful, with quite a few surprises when it comes to the death toll and likable yet unlikely heroes. It's also very cool that this film celebrates a civilian's (Kurt Russell) intelligence as much, if not more, than the strike team's killing skills. Once the survivors drive away into the snow to the sounds of an old tune you know you've seen one of the best Die Hard films without Bruce Willis.
Bradley W (mx) wrote: Funny at times, but the tv show was much better.
Sin P (br) wrote: Super series, fascinating, and also rather tragic.
Justin B (de) wrote: It's the original Mrs. Doubtfire only with less schmaltz. Far and ahead one of the greatest comedies ever made. Topical, even today with an intelligent script, lots of laughs and a brilliant performance from Hoffman.
David K (nl) wrote: I found this movie to be a very thought provoking film on the very nature of humanity: language. Communication and language often describes intelligence. However, is a scientific study that introduces human language to a gorilla ethical? It sure is neat to see a talking gorilla, but I can't say if it's right. And in a wonderful way, neither does the film. "Koko, a Talking Gorilla," is the story of a gorilla that can perform sign language and can therefore, communicate. The scientists even confide stories of Koko making up words for herself as well as lying. She has a definite and distinct personality; one that is uniquely hers. Unfortunately, the film is rather bogged down with extended shots of not much happening. Or rather, it felt like I was watching the same 10-15 minutes of footage for an hour, and then the film got quite interesting. But maybe that's the point isn't it? After all, this film is a profile on Koko. We are supposed to see how Koko lives her life. Maybe my boredom was her boredom. Penny Patterson, the lead scientist, not only needs to repeat herself several times to Koko, but is also rather scolding towards her. It's like watching a mother trying to get her 2 year old daughter to talk to her non-stop. It gets annoying. It gets old. It gets uncomfortable. If language is the nature of humanity - that is, if the reason humans are different from the animals is in our ability to communicate and relate to one another, then who are we to try to "humanize" an animal? On the other hand, Koko doesn't know any better. The camera convincingly shows her as an animal. She is not human. Any sense of humanization can't get past the fact that this is a gorilla. This animal will never be able to talk in order to truly express herself. She'll never know she doesn't act like a gorilla. Just like how she'll never know she doesn't act like a human. If she knew, she'd no longer be a gorilla. Like I said, this movie is beautifully unbiased. It's constructed to present both sides of the issue in equal light without favoring either. After watching, I was sympathetic for everyone and I was sympathetic for no one. It was exactly what the title said it was going to be. I got a profile of Koko, a talking gorilla.
Donna S (it) wrote: I was really disappointed with this Farrelly brothers film. Ben Stiller was good (as always) and it was crude and funny in places that had me laughing but i was expecting it 2 be so much funnier and felt like i had been let down. Definately not as good as 'Theres something about Mary'
Kay L (it) wrote: Whhhhhy did this get made?