Mute Shankar slogs day and night to satisfy the lust of wealthy businessman Raja Saab who has underworld contact. Raja Saab would like to marry the young and street-wise, Gauri, however Gauri would like to see a picture of her would be husband but is instead shown Shankar's picture, she immediately falls in love with him and agrees to marry but at the wedding altar, Gauri gets a shock when she sees Raja Saab, refuses to continue with the rituals of the marriage and is locked forever in a room. Circumstances forced Shankar and Gauri to elope but both is caught by Raja and his men, who beats Shankar and throw him to his death and Gauri is taken back to Raja Saab mansion and must undergo preparations to get married to him.
Mute Shankar slogs day and night to satisfy the lust of wealthy businessman Raja Saab who has underworld contact. Raja Saab would like to marry the young and street-wise, Gauri, however ... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
Alan M (br) wrote: Ok for kids, but that's about it.
David S (ru) wrote: An Irish "Shallow Grave", this is a rather clever and tight little thriller with a few twists and turns to keep your interest. However, it's low budget shows and the plot itself isn't very spectacular, but its still effective and efficient.
Mario E (es) wrote: Federico Fellini is one of the greatest directors and screenwriters the world has ever seen...and that must be the biggest understatement of the century. He had the ability to take simple, real elements and transform them into a surreal, enchanting experience that speaks for itself without the aid of a complicated plot or a multi-million dollar production design (although that's not to say his films aren't visually breath-taking). Even though it's not one of his greatest masterpieces, "Ginger e Fred" is one such film that demonstrates his never-ending talent. The main plot is as simple as it gets. Amelia and Pippo (Giulietta Masina and Marcello Mastroianni) are old friends who haven't seen each other for years, and in their youth, they were reasonably famous for their imitation of Ginger Rogers and Fred Astaire, doing their classic tap dancing and glamorous choreographies. Now, they're very old, but they're being invited by a big (and sleazy) TV station to perform in their epic Christmas program reinacting their age-old act. The film is about these two old people, seeing each other after so many years, and remembering those golden years when they were celebrated, important, and had the spark of love and friendship alive for each other. They're not the only ones invited to the show, though. A huge cast of quirky and colourful characters also make their appearance, each one trying to grab their share of the spotlight performing sometimes interesting, sometimes plain stupid, acts and/or abilities and "amazing" stories. We see an (obviously) Fellini-esque array of supporting freaks- the priest who renounced his vows to marry his lover, the monk who levitates, the singing slovenly dwarfs, Swedish townsfolk with their fifteen-tit cow, a transsexual who services an entire prison row and is being processed for it, a medium who listens to ghosts through a tape recorder...the list is endless. They all have odious, over-familiar dialogue which makes us relate to the grotesque things we think well of in life. Our heroes, Amelia and Pippo, are thrown in with this collection of freaks, and find themselves both hating and liking the situation they've accepted. The images the film presents are as unusual and as surreal as we have come to experience through other Fellini films. The dialogue sounds casual and witty, but is continually spiked with longing, electricity, loathing and disenchantment. Our main characters speak and travel this (seemingly) alternate world they've entered and find it horrifyingly equal to that they live in. The way they all try to hog the spotlight, their unnatural addiction to TV and celebrities, the way they're all brainwashed through the televised images...Fellini makes a point on all of these. He also continually presents TV commercials about pork and meat, each comercial bearing a scantly-clad woman with a gruesome piece of meat and proclaiming it to be utterly delicious. The people believe it. We also see various posters and written advertisements with strange and slighty disturbing images for a variety of products that don't work, and proclaiming nothing but lies. People believe them. We see two main characters, Amelia and Pippo, being likeable characters trying to relive their friendship, trying to regain their previous vitality and trying to fit in with a series of "freaks" (in every sense of the word) in a world where greed, money, fame and awful manners have been allowed to run rampant. We see our main characters trying to quit their association with this distasteful universe only to be drawn in over and over again by a faint memory of fame, by an interlude with someone famous, by the expectations their friends have of them. We, as the audience, feel happy to relate to these old friends who have met once again, and feel their angst. We also feel a certain repugnant hate for the rest of the characters, unfeeling beasts who (to our surprise and chagrin) also seem, each in their own way, very similar to us and the people that surround us. And what is all the more interesting is the way Fellini never even delves into the personalities of these characters (with the exception of Amelia and Pippo) but indirectly spends every second of the film injecting meaning and objection into them. The images, of course, speak for themselves. Masina and Mastroianni are perfect in their roles, the music is both catchy and nostalgic, the costumes are...well, out of this world and the screenplay is both earthbound and ethereal. I couldn't understand the emotional implications of the ending, but I suppose that must be Fellini's point, to leave the audience thinking. And, believe me, this movie does get you thinking! And though it's definitely not one of Fellini's greatest, it still is entertaining and amusing to analyze. Rating: 3 stars and a half out of 4!
Adam T (de) wrote: - Wonderfully exotic escapist movie about a convict in the French penal system who makes a pact with another inmate to escape only to be caught and dealt a harsher sentence each time. The title character is not honest and therefore it is difficult to sympathise with him but his ongoing escape attempts in spite of the possible consequences, say much about the resilience of the human spirit. Whether you care or not about him escaping, his unmitigated desire to escape is the point to his existence.
Cameron S (gb) wrote: Heralded as one of the first in a strain of sadomasochistic films to come from Japan, 'Gate of Flesh' (1964) is renowned director Seijun Suzuki's strange cross-breed of exploitation and art-house. The story follows a group of prostitutes living in a burnt out house in post World War II Tokyo. This merciless group operate on a simple set of rules: no free sex (which is synonymous with love) and anyone who breaks this rule is to be tortured and left for dead, no exceptions. When an ex-corporal called Shintaro Ibuki (Jo Shishido) arrives however the group is sent into disarray as they become more and more enamoured with him. Affected most by this arrival is nineteen-year-old emotionally dead Maya (Yumiko Nogawa), who falls in love with Ibuki and begins to see him as the brother she lost in the war.Gate of Flesh is a film about carnal desires and the inter-changeability of pleasure and pain, the films title itself is used multiple times in the script to represent passing through the realm of sex for money and achieving something you're willing to die for, love. This is not to say however that the film is empowering towards the idea of love, if anything the harpy like group of protagonists see it as a sign weakness, punishing those who give in. It is in this sense that 'Gate of Flesh' makes its most interesting comments about the way in which men use women and the price of living "are we eating to sell our bodies or are we selling our bodies to eat? - and either way, what are we living for?"In a cinematography sense the film is very surrealistic, superimposed faces appear and disappear and at one point the face of a red demon (a representation of Maya's longing for pain) is seen sprouting from the top of Ibuki's head. One of the most notable instances of said surrealism however is when the film briefly cuts away from the back alleys of Tokyo and each of the four prostitutes appear against a background that matches their colour coded dresses, saying a sentence about the way they're feeling, it's as equally bizarre as it is beautiful. The film is clearly anti-American and Suzuki has no hesitation when he comes to showing the negative effects of the occupation of Japan and the subsequent democracy. In many ways Gate of Flesh is about transformation, much like the traditional Geisha-style O-Machi is strung up and destroyed, so to is the old vision of Japan by America.Verdict: Extremely shocking for it's time and equally as challenging, Gate of Flesh is a must see for those interested in Japanese cinema.
Jon A (mx) wrote: Early and very tentative attempt to show the Indians and something other than the bad guys. Unfortunately it never gets past the potrayal of the noble savage whose way of life is overtaken by the white man's more civilised, and therefore better, ways.
Leinad A (au) wrote: What a surprisingly great combination of sci fi, suspense, humor, and a dose of teenage reality. Alien storyline was original to say the least. Loved it!
Rangan R (kr) wrote: Right from the beginning events of the scenes are poorly intensified.It was a one sided narration, that is really a very bad for this kind of sensitive theme. But the prime intention was to bring the Guantanamo Bay detention camp's atrocity on the detainees by the US military. Well, it actually avoids those strong cruelties, and focuses the unusual relationship between a detainee and a woman guard.Limited cast, shot mostly in a single location with the budget of just one million USD, and an ordinary opening, but ended strong. I assumed a lot of things likely to happen while I was watching. Like Amy Cole (Kristen Stewart) was in undercover, to make detainees talk and collect the information. Because she was the only woman around, but as usual like most of the time I was wrong. It was so plain and filled with human emotions.I was strong and confident that they were just torturing the terrorists who deserved it. If you see it from the human perspective that was slightly a over-limit, only if you exclude their crimes. I just felt it was a propaganda to show US in a bad light. That is the reason it will not show terror strikes in the movie that committed by any of the detainee characters, but only the consequences they face.A Hollywood movie specially made to make feel good for the terrorists and those who support it. Okay, I agree, some were innocents. While fishing, a few other marine animals also gets trapped in the net as well, for that I feel sorry what happened to them. But 95% of them were heartless monsters. Everyone will have their own opinion on this film based on their religion, nationality or sympathetic for simply being a human, and everything are fair.6/10
Will S (nl) wrote: Pam Grier at her best!
Robert H (nl) wrote: A cinematic masterpiece. An epic western that spans years that is filmed beautifully and has astonishing sequences.