Ma Beta

Ma Beta

Dependent on his elder brother, Bishan, Ganga and his wife, Rameshwari, are abused and asked to leave...

Dependent on his elder brother, Bishan, Ganga and his wife, Rameshwari, are abused and asked to leave. They work hard, set up their own business, and soon become wealthy enough to even ... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki


Ma Beta torrent reviews

Larry B (jp) wrote: Great. Insight into Savannah folk lore!

Chris C (kr) wrote: Horrible. This is the type of movie that makes me rethink my love of zombies on film (or video). Where do I begin to recount the atrocities this "movie" as committed? How about right from the beginning where some random guy sort of stumbles into a zombie and rather than run away just sits there screaming as his flesh is eaten. Or the next scene where a couple listens to reports of chemical warfare occurring halfway across the globe (which naturally creates zombies in North America) being aired on the RADIO so of course we're treated to clips of TELEVISED news footage! How about random people that suddenly appear in the ever growing group of survivors when we cut to the next scene? This thing is chock full of actions that make no sense coupled with the faintest semblance of a plot brought to life by mediocre to bad actors with only the merest hint of direction. The best part of Zombie Night? The make-up effects were pretty good, and while it can be pretty forgivable in a movie like this for the zombies and gore to make up for any other shortcomings... the bad here outweighs the good by a few tons. Ugh, I can't say enough bad things about this movie and I've already said all the good I can. Don't watch this even for the joke factor... go watch House of the Dead instead. Yes, that's right, House of the Dead is better than this.

Nathan V (ag) wrote: This movie was bad, from the acting, graphics, to the storyline. Some of the most stupid character lines and decisions i've ever seen. News lady on a helicopter hovering over a Dinosaur on a rampage, "can you get us closer?... Closer...closer" They got so close that the Dinosaur was able to bite and grab a hold of the helicopter. LOL!!!

Ian W (nl) wrote: I can see why this went straight to DVD. It is not a patch on the original and I found is slow, devoid of any real excitement or narrative and downright boring. It pays no homage to the original either, except for name only and in these cases the end product is usually dire.One of the few films where I have not cared about the characters or plots and just wanted it to end so I can do something better.

Chris P (ag) wrote: An explanation to the past of Sam Axe. Turned out to be a pretty good movie. Hopefully we will be able to see into the past of Fe in the same type way.

Private U (ru) wrote: Absolute jizz. Gillian Shure is nice enough to look at, but even that won't carry this pile of shite.

Teresa A (ca) wrote: Very good movie! You have to watch it!

Ethan T (fr) wrote: this is from mel gibson,ha

Michal Z (mx) wrote: A bleak Boston tale in which primal, traditional values triumph over justice. Family and survival are deeply ingrained in the society which would rather sweep matters under the rug than to admit something is rotten. Eastwood drives multiple plotlines to a tense climax and incredibly thematically dense final scene. Sometimes too overt (I blame oldschool Eastwood) but ultimately very nihilistic and grounded depiction of the dynamics between old friends in the face of a gruesome murder.

Miguel R (fr) wrote: Boasting horrible animation with boring characters, Shark Tale delivers stupid laughs to accompany its dull script

Jake M (au) wrote: Criminally underrated comedy that features a hilarious turn from Eddie Murphy.I love Kelly Robinson!

Thomas P (ag) wrote: To watch this movie and appreciate it you need a profound understanding of Stonewall Jackson and the Civil War. To the common person it's a snore fest but to someone educated about the war it makes absolute sense and can be very emotional at times such as the scene where the opposing Irish brigades engage one another at Fredricksburg. Most reviews I've read on here talk about how Pro-Confederate it is and there are no "bad guys". First of all this isn't fiction it's historical fact! These were Americans against Americans, many of the generals on opposite sides new each other personally and were good men. Also most people don't understand that religion in those days was far more profound in society than it is today. Jackson himself was a religious fanatic. This film is also from a series of books. Gods and Generals is the book that tells it from the Confederate point of view hence why it concentrates on them. Killer Angels (Gettysburg) tells the story of both sides while The Last Full Measure is from the Union point of view. However the scenes with the saintly treatment of slaves by Confederates is definatley questionable and inaccurate as is the parts with the little girl. It also left out far too many key parts of the war such as Jackson's valley campaign, the Battle of Antietam and ran on far too long for a movie, you cant compress the entire beginning of the war into one film!. It should have been done the right way: historically accurate and in two parts. However this still is a great movie and highly recommended to anyone curious about the Civil War or who is a buff. The common person will most likely not find it to their liking or understanding. Personally if these so-called "Top Critics" and "super-reviewers" can't see how this is still a good film they need to seriously re-examine their "superior" methods and should do a little more research on the subject before writing a review.

Cherise C (de) wrote: You can really learn to love right when you're blessed with it instead of causing undue stress to the relationship or you can learn how to have really good sex in the kitchen from this movie

Chris C (ca) wrote: I haven't watched this movie since I saw it when it was first released on DVD some 15 years ago. It's still enjoyable enough but it feels very dated. Pretty well done for a $23 million budget, but admittedly it borrows a lot from those films that came before it.

stefn birgir s (fr) wrote: Dangerous Minds spoof fails to deliver.

hate e (br) wrote: OK, first off there may be a SPOILER here since i don't know what constitutes giving out too much information. My subject line says it all but surely people will want to know WHY it's so stupid. First off, this film follows a bunch of Yuppies as they go to a sports game in Chicago but wind up taking the wrong exit and winding up in the ghetto. Scary, huh? Well, first of all, Emilio is driving everyone in the world's most overblown RV/Winnebago, tricked out with satellite dishes and crap like that on it. So these guys are GOING to a sports game (i forget which, though likely the Bulls or the White Sox since they're near the oh-so-scary ghetto), yet they can't even make it down the freeway without having an onboard viewing command center that would put ESPN to shame. Yet they're smart enough to earn livings that would pay for the stuff, but are such sports fans that they don't even know which exit to get off at on their way to the game they so love. I gave up on the movie within a half hour after that, but the reasons were plentiful. They wind up IN THE GHETTO, yet their main danger to their existence is DENIS LEARY. A WHITE GUY. I'm no racist, but COME ON. In anything RESEMBLING reality - and this film WAS trying to be an urban nightmare - Denis Leary would not be trying to kill Emilio Estevez, he'd be hitching a ride to get the f*** out of Dodge himself!!! This is easily one of the dumbest movies ever created, although I'm not familiar with much of the rest of the world's cinema. If MST3K were still on, they surely would have devoted an episode to this one.

Jacob F (us) wrote: No, this isn't the "Garbage Day" movie. And if I had not seen the release date on this film I would have missed this horror gem. Made in '72 this may be one of the earliest of the maniacal killer returns home on anniversary of (insert holiday related trauma here) films. But this is not a slasher film. The story is quite complex, rooted more in 19th century short stories or Grand-Guignol theater than in a typical killer set-piece horror film that this film prefigures. Here, a simple, red-hearing-like, premise leads to the discovery of a dark and terrible family secret. Its aesthetic impulses rest somewhere in between the Corman Poe films and the gritty New York City productions of the early-mid 70's. The film is rare in its use of still images which create an uncanny and creepy atmosphere during its use of voice over narration (which is surprisingly effective, and also interesting in it predates the most famous use of voice over prologue in horror, in Texas Chain Saw), and there is an extended and gorgeously filmed sepia toned flashback scene which feels ghost-like (the deterioration of the print actually enhanced this). This is an able cast, essentially taken from Andy Warhol's collaborators, and one wonders how much input Jack Smith had on some of the scenes, plus John Carradine who plays a silent role yet still manages to steal every scene he's in, and a terrific score. What all of this adds up to is this is a horror masterpiece hardly anyone's seen and few know exists. It's creepy more than scary, tragic more than demented, and its low budget forces it to rely on collision montage suggestion rather than all out gore shock cuts, which is, in my opinion, far more effective, especially with a lower budget. All the more surprising is that this sometimes artful (accident, excess, or intention?) film was the production of soon to be exploitation figureheads; this is one of Lloyd Kaufman's first credits. This deserves a remaster, the print I saw was too dark to see some of the night exteriors, and was showing signs of some decay.

Jose Luis M (au) wrote: Buenas actuaciones . Arkin y Crenna hcaen buen papel como los villanos , especialmente Crenna en un papel ambiguo.

Don G (kr) wrote: This "slice of life", a la early 60s, small southern town USA, is touching, although a bit depressive. Steve McQueen is a narcissistic "hard head" singer-song writer with visions of fame but the deck is stacked against him. Lee Remick is the loving wife. Both characters are somewhat iconic. It is frustrating to see how close they come to happiness, yet it slips away. There may be no place like home, but there is a wicked witch, living in Norman Bate's house, in the form of Henry Thomas' (Steve McQueen) foster mother, who helps put the whammy on them, with help from the Mcqueen Character himself, who can't seem to "get it". His priorities are out of whack; he has no diplomacy; can't shrug anything off and lives by his dream to the expense of all else. The main character, Henry Thomas is interesting as we learn of his background and something of the forces pulling him apart. The graveyard scene is revealing and memorable. The acting is supurb and the black and white cinematography adds to the realism.

Xavier G (kr) wrote: Funny and silly(the good silly)