Kumar, though of Indian origin, lives in Africa. He has recurring dreams of a Railway Station in India called "Viran Nagar". He decides to find for himself and travels to India along with his friend, Rocky. They are able to find Viran Nagar railway station, which is exactly as Kumar had dreamed of. When they go to find a ride, the locals shy away from them as behave as though they have seen a ghost. They find temporary accommodations and set out to discover the mystery behind Kumar's dreams. Then a young woman, Sapna, meets with Kumar, tells him that she has been awaiting his return, and now they can be together again. But Kumar has never been to this place before, and ends up even more confused. Then another local villager named Bansi tells them he had himself seen Kumar getting killed and buried in the nearby forest. Kumar and Rocky must now find out who was killed, and why the villagers believe that Kumar has returned from the grave.
Kumar, though of Indian origin, lives in Africa. He has recurring dreams of a Railway Station in India called "Viran Nagar". He decides to find for himself and travels to India along with ... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
Casey P (br) wrote: it was exactly what it was supposed to be and did it well
Wut S (kr) wrote: This Sokurov's feels a little like softcore gay porn disguising as a cinematic piece. Oddly, this very peculiarity enriches the film's distinctiveness.The delicate camera, sound designs, sets, and sepia tone are attractive. These sensuous (and symbolic) devices allow me to keep up a positive attitude without neglecting the film on its first sign of awkwardness.The film suggests, though never establishes, an incest between the father and his son (but are they biologically related?). Interpretations seem abundance. A Freudian could claim that the lack of mother leads to the displacement of infantile sexual energy; a war veteran might say that the father's post-war mentality is responsible for the occasional paternal reverse role and troubled look; a surrealist could argue, well, that the film is just an artistic non sequitur hidden underneath its downbeat, homoerotic exterior.While the film's capable of invoking such diverse interpretations, I find the film lacking, though I couldn't say why.
Hakan B (us) wrote: see.. how human is animal.. ha ha
Veronica B (gb) wrote: Movie about keeping the family together through some tough times. A bit sad.
Allan C (ru) wrote: 12 year old me thought this was the most hilarious movie of all time. 42 year old me was not as impressed. This time around, nostalgic 1980s elements littered throughout the film (half-shirts, cars begin driven on 2 wheels, Michael Winslow mouth noises, etc.) were the most entertaining thing about the film. It story is another popular 80s trope, snobs vs. slobs (i.e. "Back to School" "Up the Creek" "Revenge of the Nerds" "Meatballs" ). The set up is that in an attempt to diversify the police force, the mayor opens up the police academy to all comers, which sets up the very rigid and proper police trainers versus the antics of the wacky recruits. Rewatching this film, I knew it was not Molire, but I was curious if it would maybe have some of the lowbrown charms of other snobs vs. slobs films like "Caddyshack," which still holds up today, mostly thanks to Rodney Dangerfield. Sadly, Steve Guttenberg does not have the same comedic chops ad Dangerfield and Michael Winslow's mouth noises are not nearly as funny as I thought they were when I was a 12 year old. However, in the film's favor, George Gaynes is likable as the simple minded commandant of the academy, Kim Cattrall is super cute in an early role as the Guttenberg's love interest, and Bubba Smith is fun to see because I'd totally forgotten about him (he's kind of an 80s trope in and of himself). And the film's theme music is a very catchy one that I've always liked, so it gets an extra half a star for that. One interesting bit of trivia I read was that Bruce Willis auditioned for the part of Mahoney. He's probably would have done well in the part, though I think his career is probably better off that he got "Moonlighting" instead. God, "Moonlighting" was a good show. I think I need to get out my DVDs and start re-watching that show.
Anthony A (ca) wrote: I wish life was like this, but not bad like this movie!
Mike B (us) wrote: Very funny classic western.. I love James Garner. With dialogue like this, how can you lose? Jug:I'm supposed to pretend I'm Swifty Morgan? Goodbye!Latigo:They're willing to pay.Jug:How much?Latigo:One thousand dollars. We'll split it fifty-fifty. That means four hundred for you.Jug:That seems fair. But I think that...Latigo:No, no you don't. That's part of the deal. I do the thinking, you stand around and look tough.
Andrs C (ca) wrote: Costner ought to stick to Westerns; they suit both him and the genre.
Gail B (nl) wrote: Funny and strangely entertaining