Konchem Ishtam Konchem Kashtam

Konchem Ishtam Konchem Kashtam

The story is set in the backdrop of a village where Geeta (Tamanna Bhatia) grows under the shade of her doting father Subramaniam (Nasser) who takes care of everything for her and she is equally attached to him. She comes to Hyderabad for her further studies and stays at her uncle Gachibowli Diwakar's (Brahmanandam) house. There, her cousin Swathi(Karuna) has a group of friends and one among them is the happy and playful Siddharth, or Siddhu (Siddarth Narayan). Siddhu is a big Casanova among girls and though he always has a smile on his face, there is a sad past as his mother Rajyalakshmi (Ramya Krishna) is living separately from his father Prakash (Prakash Raj).

The story is set in the backdrop of a village where Geeta (Tamanna Bhatia) grows under the shade of her doting father Subramaniam (Nasser) who takes care of everything for her and she is equally attached to him. She comes to Hyderabad for her further studies and stays at her uncle Gachibowli Diwakar's (Brahmanandam) house. There, her cousin Swathi(Karuna) has a group of friends and one among them is the happy and playful Siddharth, or Siddhu (Siddarth Narayan). Siddhu is a big Casanova among girls and though he always has a smile on his face, there is a sad past as his mother Rajyalakshmi (Ramya Krishna) is living separately from his father Prakash (Prakash Raj). . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki


Konchem Ishtam Konchem Kashtam torrent reviews

Mari M (it) wrote: I believe Josh Boone's "Stuck in Love" is well put together but, can get messy with the different characters. However, the plots for all of the characters do make up for the mild disorganization. The soundtrack is all together beautiful. This is a movie I can always have on in the background and never get sick of.

Alex W (fr) wrote: A very long an thorough doc on George harrison. You almost don't need to see any other doc about the beatles after this is so complete. George seems the most down to earth and the lest of a character as the rest of the group. If you are into being a hippie or spirituality you will love this.

James H (us) wrote: I liked the twists in the script. The acting was bad and you don't get scared by this horror. Not a movie i would want to watch again.

Kevin D (au) wrote: Scored as a half because zero would not register as a rating. Bereft of humour, acting skills or anything remotely entertaining. As painful as watching your genitals whither away to syphilis. Sickening.

Harry W (ru) wrote: With Bernardo Bertolucci directing, I felt like Stealing Beauty would be a good chance to gather a sense of what he he is all about as a director.There isn't really a direct narrative in Stealing Beauty. The story in Stealing Beauty is about a young teenage girl named Lucy Harmon arriving in Tuscan countryside as part of getting over the death of her mother and in pursuit of love. While the latter is one of the major themes in the film, the former is little more than a gimmick which is barely touched upon for the film. Stealing Beauty could have been about a lot more, but it ends up a lot more about style than about substance. The intentions of Stealing Beauty seem to largely be about coming of age, but the entire film is so bereft of depth or general meaning that it ends up as a well meaning but shallow and pretentious piece. It is short on character with the only one maintaining any real meaning being protagonist Lucy Harmon, and yet even then viewers only get a half-assed rendition of what she is truly feeling. Audiences know little about her beyond that the is at an age where she is questioning love and sexuality, hoping to find someone to lose her virginity to her. But the fact is that she is also the daughter of a famous poet who commited suicide. The actual relevance that this plot element has to the story is absent which made me wonder why Bernardo Bertolucci and Susan Minot bothered to write it in at all if they couldn't be bothered to do anything with it. Stealing Beauty is not the coming of age film that it could have been or the complex story of sexuality that Bernardo Bertolucci wanted it to be, meaning that it is an ambitious but largely thoughtless film, benefitting more from the director than from the writer. There isn't much at all you can take away from Stealing Beauty aside from a more recent sense of Bernardo Bertolucci's style as a director which really is of serious benefit to the film, because without him taking on that role I would be confident in saying that it would become more of a dull and pretentious bore than it already is. I watched Stealing Beauty on the basis of it being a Bernardo Bertolucci film, and in that regard I got what I was expecting. From a narrative perspective there was nothing to boast about, but surely enough the director did his job to ensure that it was much better than it could have been. The italian setting for Stealing Beauty is just wonderful. The scenery is so bibrant and colourful yet incredibly gentle and serene. It gives the film a wonderful sense of visual energy. The second it enters the screen, the viewer is caught by its hypnotic gaze of life. The scenery for the film is so beautiful that it gives the spirit to the feature and passes it on to the audience. The scenery is thoroughly beautiful without being tampered with, so Bernardo Bertolucci is succesfully able to emphasise the beautiful Tuscan landscape and bring life into the film. The theme of beauty is one that the film tries to explore, and the way that it is explored through its characters seems to be mirrored in the way it is explored through the landscape. While it is hardly deep, there is a lot of aesthetic beauty in the film due to the fact that Bernardo Bertolucci is able to emphasise the beauty in both the scenery and all of his cast members. Visually, Stealing Beauty is a magnificent film which keeps things watchable throughout all of the lacklustre storytelling and thin writing. It isn't enough to really make the film good, but it is enough to make the experience worthwhile, and so I certainly would not consider Stealing Beauty a terrible film. I'd just call it an underdeveloped film. Style wise, it doesn't falter much at all.The sountrack to the film is nice because it occasionally reminds viewers of what the lives of characters are like back home with contemporary music pieces ranging from Stevie Wonder to John Lee Hooker. When the music is not lightly atmospheric, it is timely and nostalgic, creating an interesting contrast to the Tuscan setting of the film at some times and give a sense of atmosphere to it during others. Either way, the soundtrack in Stealing Beauty always finds a way to work.And the cast in Stealing Beauty contribute a strong effort.Liv Tyler's leading performance in Stealing Beauty is brilliant. While the role is not that deep, she fits the part perfectly ebcause of how she conveys a sense of youthful charm and innocence in the role. There are many scenes where she is simply silent, not having anything to say but rather many things to think. Although what they are prove ambigious due to the lack of depth in the film, Liv Tyler really establishes the idea that she is playing a meaningful character. In terms of establishing a sense of sympathy, Liv Tyler plays out her role with a sense of natural spirit and subtlety by reaching out to audiences to ensure that they understand her uncertainties in life. She is able to establish a lot of implications through her natural subtle charm, delivering a restrained performance of welcome proportions. Liv Tyler makes a name for herself with a firm leading effort in Stealing Beauty, and she works under the direction of Bernardo Bertolucci excellently well.Jeremy Irons is also a welcome presence. While the film uses only a few of his best skills as an actor, the one that it does capitalises on is his sense of wisdom in line delivery. Jeremy Irons' supporting role has him talking about some interesting views on love and life for a small amount of time, and it stands out as memorable because his simple effort is one that has him delivering sophisticated dialect with natural charisma. His energy is restrained, but his charm is all there and he shares a strong chemistry with Liv Tyler.Rachel Weisz also makes a welcome supporting presence.So Stealing Beauty boasts a talented cast and impressively stylish directorial work from Bernado Bertolucci, but the underdeveloped story, lack of depth and inability to ask many questions or even answer what few existing ones there are render it ineffective, dull and boring.

Chris M (nl) wrote: Despite some stylish visuals and a reasonable amount of slow-burning tension that builds through the film, this is pretty tedious, derivative stuff. It borrows from every Horror trope going (silent, brooding ghost kids, dodgy wiring, hidden weirdness inside a creepy house, and an AWFUL lot of rain). But even when it does that (occasionally) correctly, it's so full of plot-holes and nonsensical elements (even for a supernatural thriller) I gave up caring. The dialogue between supposed family members is stilted, the performances are pretty ropey (Anna Paquin aside), and I simply didn;t like either of the parents, not because they were part of the wider theme of adults being nasty to children, but because they were horrible and stupid. It's set in Spain but I barely heard a word of Spanish in the entire film. The reasons given for the father's instability are terrible. And the ending. What a crock of sh*te. It tries to set up the dread and imminent doom for mankind, but falls apart, seemingly not knowing if there's an eclipse or not, or whether it's supposed to be day or night, or... well, everything. And then, just as you're expecting All Hell to Break Loose, nothing happens. It's 1'40" long but felt like a lifetime. The main 'Darkness' was my eyelids closing...

Sean C (kr) wrote: The perfect way to understand the 1980s and really how far we have not come circa 2015.

Andr D (jp) wrote: Una bazofia post-apocaliptica protagonizada por Chuck Wagner (a quienes algunos de ustedes recuerdan por la serie "Automan"). Aqui sigue igual de acartonado. Viendo esta pelicula, uno termina deseando el fin del mundo y sin sobrevivientes.

Joe O (fr) wrote: Loved this movie, great if you're a believer. Even my friend who's not a strong believer liked it. If you only serve Satan and are blind you'll give it 15% like rotten tomatoes does.

Jamie C (mx) wrote: Love this film it's what we all think of as the worse case scenario when meeting the parents only in the film the worse case is much worse in this very funny and sometimes cringe worthy comedy with a strong cast that work very well together.

Blake P (jp) wrote: As of 2013, Steven Spielberg is a legend. Meaning, he is first and foremost, the most well-known, most trusted, most bankable director in Hollywood, because he can do anything, and he can do it well. But in 1974, Spielberg didn't have that kind of status. He was a then unknown with talent still growing. "The Sugarland Express", his feature film debut, may not be as established as many of his films (even though "Jaws" was made only a year later), but it still is a great deal better than most debuts, let alone most movies in general. But yet again, could you expect less from a filmmaking genius? The story follows Lou Ann (Goldie Hawn) and Clovis Poplin (William Atherton), a young couple who lose their baby to the authorities when Clovis lands himself in jail. Lou Ann isn't an idiot, and doesn't plan on being labeled an "unfit mother". So she helps Clovis escape from jail, and they hitch a ride to Sugarland, where their baby's adoptive family resides. Their "hitched ride" doesn't go smoothly, as the driver is pulled over. When that happens, Lou Ann, in desperation, steals it, and so begins a high-speed chase that eventually leads to the Poplin's kidnapping a young police officer (Michael Sacks) who gets in their way at the perfect time. The action lasts for days - and of course, it doesn't end smoothly. Easily, "The Sugarland Express" could have a "Gun Crazy" feel: with an attractive couple in their mid-twenties who just so happen to have a dirty past, it would be easy to love to hate them. But Spielberg somehow directs with a very light touch, turning in popcorn fare that he later perfected. The car chases, the shoot outs, the clever dialogue, the rural setting, etc., lead to B-movie gold, but everything is filmed with such knowingness that it isn't a cheap adventure in an exploitation theater. The scenes often times are forced to balance both action and drama, and there's a realness in its midst that makes even the nuttiest events feel as though they are really happening. It's a very fun romp, and much of that fun is great contributed to by its actors. Hawn gives one of the her best performances as the determined Lou Jean, who is reckless, dangerous, but sweet and well-meaning. Her on-screen husband, Clovis, played by Atherton, seems much more nave, and the fact that he is in jail, rather than Lou Jean, is a bit shocking. They aren't a fun-seeking couple, a la "Bonnie and Clyde". They simply are so desperate to get their baby back that they would do anything, even risk their own lives. They are young, in love, and inexperienced in life: that's what makes them all the more likable. By the end, Spielberg reminds us that even the most entertaining stories, even with the most entertaining characters, don't always end with a rinky-dink happiness that we hope for. "The Sugarland Express" may be bittersweet, but it's a dramedy that gives us an idea of how early on Spielberg was a force to be reckoned with.

Matt G (ru) wrote: "Life can only be understood backwards, but must be lived forward." This is one of the more unique films I've seen in quite a while. Experimenter takes a relatively basic psychology experiment and makes it a high moral drama, with surprising amounts of filmic style. The way it portrays his experiments as damning to the natural morality of "good" people is haunting and completely engaging. Sarsgaard for the win.