Widowed by the sudden passing of his wife, Superintendent of Police, Choudhry, brings up his son, Rajesh, on his own, teaches him all known good values, and when he grows up sends him to College in Bombay, and remits money to him regularly. Choudhry would like to transfer to Bombay Police, so that he can be close to his son, and then one day out of the blue, his transfer is approved, and a delighted Choudhry writes to his son to pick him from the railway station. Upon arrival in Bombay, he does not find his son at the Railway Station, but when browsing through a newspaper he sees his son's photograph - wanted for the murder of a card-sharp. Shocked and dismayed, Choudhry attempts to piece his life together and attempts to find Rajesh before the City Police do - for he may well face the death sentence. Choudhry does find him, but only after Rajesh is accused of killing a woman named Kishori, and this time Choudhry is quite sure that there is no hope for Rajesh.
Widowed by the sudden passing of his wife, Superintendent of Police, Choudhry, brings up his son, Rajesh, on his own, teaches him all known good values, and when he grows up sends him to ... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
Diego Martn (us) wrote: Por ser Paraguaya,debo decir que la peli esta bastante buena, muy interesante 8/10
Viktor N (nl) wrote: Not a full worthy excessor to "Sister Act" but well on the way. Fat Amy is the is the glue that holds it together..
Jude P (br) wrote: Suffice to say the most realistic, down to earth spy movies ever seen. Nonetheless the best ever made, possibly.
Cameron M (br) wrote: Uh...this thing is like half porno
Dan N (jp) wrote: Worst.Film.Ever. Atrocious acting, shocking camera work. Cheap Cheap Cheap. You're still my Olympic hero Kurt!
jason g (mx) wrote: sucked. horrible spinal tap ripoff that tries to be an actual "documentary". plus, having seen Anvil attempt to perform live, its painfully obvious why they never made it. they have no talent!
Maxwell S (fr) wrote: As far as their "message", they didn't realize what it entailed. There are performers that just do their thing and caring about what other people think just isn't applicable, Patton Oswalt being one of these people, who was in this film, but he didn't really apply himself to a particular side of the argument because he knew that it's stupid to go as far as Kennedy did. Kennedy is famous because he is good at appealing to the stupid crowd, but he wants to take it to a universal thought, which is a very bad idea, and if he didn't have those kinds of ideas, NOBODY would have a reasonable right to complain as hastily as some do, that's all that he needs to do! Sort of like an argument between an Atheist and a Christian. Each are too much into their own trench to change any opinion they have. Though, Christian's believe in God for a comfort in everything and Atheists don't have a comfort, but rather knowledge, and they apply this knowledge to things, and their knowledge can extend far beyond a Christian. I compare Christians to the "bad performers" such as Jamie Kennedy, and critics to Atheists. There are some performers in here that I like, primarily because they're harmless and I just like what they do, and they don't drive this film, though. It's the untalented ones who do, and they provide a pointless argument, with support that they have comfort in their lives, rather than the critics, which isn't a good one. Though I found the "message" pointless, I did enjoy the movie. It was pure fun for the first part, but then it turned into something that tried to say something. I disagreed and agreed with a lot, it was simply fun to have my brain working in that way. I am a fucking funny person, but I COMPLETELY separate my funny and my "logicalities, but some people do intertwine them, which is okay to a certain extent, and that where this film rivals itself. I don't like to be hasty in criticizing things, or even reviewing things I don't like, but films like this one bring it upon itself.
Nick L (it) wrote: Cleverly, smart and sophisticated. Clever how the bad guy is actually the good guy. Sequel that actually turned out to be good.... Verdict: Trust me even you guys appreciate it....
Aruni N (de) wrote: Disappointing character development- doesn't hang together. Good acting, sex scenes, great visuals don't make up for it.
Jeff B (de) wrote: It was a decent comedy. Billy Bob Thornton is of course an outrageous character actor, and Patrick Swayze does a great dimwit character. However, sometimes this movie can be a little bit one-sided. We hardly seem to get a break between their fighting, and sometimes their jokes can lead on and go sour. It was still a decent watch.
Nathaniel B (au) wrote: The least favorite of all the Home Alone series I've seen so far. Apprently there's a 4th one. But I don't plan to see that anytime soon.
Jonny S (fr) wrote: One of the most underrated movies of all time!
CJ C (gb) wrote: A jumbled mess. The chocolate scene was sexy, but that was about it.
Christopher L (jp) wrote: The funniest movie I've seen so far this year - far better than the overrated "Forgetting Sarah Marshall." It's hilarious and surprisingly uplifting, dealing with acceptance and individuality with the least possible amount of ham-handed schmaltz. I loved it.
Adam W (br) wrote: Patrick Swayze and a Hulk hogan lookalike hack and slash their way through most of the cast until Hogan gets bumped off leaving Swayze to kill them all himself.Somewhere in the middle of it all is a morale which i couldnt find.