Rama Rama Krishna Krishna
Rama Rama Krishna Krishna (Telugu: రామ రామ కృష్ణ కృష్ణ) is a 2010 Telugu language film that stars Ram, Priya Anand and Bindu Madhavi in the lead role, whilst prominent actors Arjun Sarja, Nassar, Brahmanandam and Gracy Singh play pivotal roles. This film, directed by Srivas (Lakshyam fame) and produced by noted producer, Dil Raju, released on May 12, 2010. The film got dubbed into Tamil later as Gandhipuram and released on December 24, 2010.
- Stars:Ram, Priya Anand, Bindhu Madhavi, Arjun, Gracy Singh, Banerji, Master Bharath, Brahmaji, Brahmanandam, Vajja Venkata Giridhar, Nasser, Pragathi, Pruthvi, Srinivas Reddy, Sayaji Shinde,
- Writer:M. Rathnam, Srivas (story & screenplay)
Rama Rama Krishna Krishna (Telugu: రామ రామ కృష్ణ కృష్ణ) is a 2010 Telugu language film that stars Ram, Priya Anand and Bindu Madhavi in the lead role, whilst prominent actors Arjun Sarja, Nassar, Brahmanandam and Gracy Singh play pivotal roles. This film, directed by Srivas (Lakshyam fame) and produced by noted producer, Dil Raju, released on May 12, 2010. The film got dubbed into Tamil later as Gandhipuram and released on December 24, 2010. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
Rama Rama Krishna Krishna torrent reviews
(us) wrote: Bad script . Poor direction and acting
(jp) wrote: So pretty much take The Blair Witch Project. Replace a witch you never see with giant trolls and replace three assholes arguing in the woods with some twenty-somethings having the time of their life. The fake documentary style has proved to be a great way for filmmakers to get their start and putting their mark on cinema. The film goes down the right paths, and follows a rather formulaic story-line, but with such a unique story leading the way, you're more than happy to take the voyage through troll territory and help put an end to their trolly shenanigans. The story starts off on one path and stays on it. they informed the viewer quite well about troll history and the different types. It was the type of love you hoped would be present here, and I can't help to feel thankful for such research and creative thinking. They way they combine modern science with old time folklore. Like for example trolls turning to stone in sunlight. You find out why. And the whole thing about being able to smell the blood of a Christian man which eventually turns into the question of if they could smell the blood of a Muslim. You have to imagine there was a lot of fun happening while making this. Overall, the actors and writing delivered a fine job as they juggled tongue-in-cheek overacting with some scenes of serious drama. Basically every area of the film delivered to how you would want, and I was totally content with how the fx and trolls all looked. The movie shows the beautiful mountain countryside Norway has to offer made me want to see it for myself. It's one of the best found footage films around. I hope a sequel get's made where they go and systematically hunt down and kill internet trolls. The worst kind.
(gb) wrote: It had the potential but the poor production values (which looks like it was shot on a cell phone) really ruin it. Some of it was funny, but it was really ruined because of how poorly shot it was.
(us) wrote: An attempt to prolong a film that should have ended after the second.
(us) wrote: This film is so original and unique, just the idea of it is so profound and absurd. It is about a man working for a kitchen appliance company, doing research on single men, and how they use the kitchen. It is set in the 50's I think, not so sure. Anyway, so the main character has to sit on a high-chair in the corner of the kitchen, and watch the man in the kitchen. He than draws a line on where he moves, and this goes for about a month or so. Sadly the man he is researching regrets his descision and makes it difficult for the researcher. An excellent romp of comedy and delves into lonelyness, which both men turn out to be, and become friends.
(mx) wrote: Okay, it's not REALLY a 4.5 movie. It's kind of a trash, but this movie is so funny, even if it's childish. And I still think Paul Giamatti did a good job.
(mx) wrote: This almost destroyed the first.
(es) wrote: I thought this was going to be a good Korean horror/ghost story and whilst there's a couple of scares it's wasn't what I expected. More drama than anything. Disappointed.
(ag) wrote: A fine and pleasant dramedy.
(ag) wrote: Sandra Bullock is one of my favourite actresses of today. I enjoyed this film and Gena Rowlands was wonderful as her mother. Harry Conick Jr, as the love interest, fills a pair of jeans rather well though his acting's nothing to write home about. It's a very sentimental story and doesn't really go anywhere, the kind of film that is out of fashion now. But it's touching, thoughtful and the female leads (directed by Forest Whitaker) are worth anyone's time. Just a simple story about love and loss but heartfelt and nicely observed.
(br) wrote: The original "Children of the Corn" tied its story up pretty well by the end of the film, but because someone sensed that there may be a profit hidden out there in those cornfields, we now get a very belated sequel subtitled "The Final Sacrifice". Much like the so-called "Final Chapter" of "Friday the 13th", that is pretty laughable considering how many more direct-to-video sequels would follow this, but it probably sounded cool on paper.Perhaps the one nice thing I can honestly say about this is that it does throw in a whole slew of mostly ridiculous plot devices in an attempt to further the story and mask the fact that this was made strictly for the sole purpose of making a quick buck. It throws in Native American folklore, a possible ecoterrorist idea about unleashing deadly tainted maize onto the population and even some ideas that Greenpeace might get behind about these kids striking back against their parents for ruining the Earth. Since a lot (OK, most) of those ideas are never really fleshed out or explored, it falls reliably back on the "religious fervor" aspect of the first film, with the kids following an unlikely, unholy deity known as He Who Walks Behind the Rows. It's as half-baked as any of the other ideas presented here, but at least it's one that we're familiar with. The film is poorly made, with some of the most unconvincing child actors I've ever seen.The special effects are quite dreadful, and the pacing is sluggish. "Children of the Corn 2" is so full of unrealized plot threads, it's one of the most incoherent films in recent memory.
(gb) wrote: Could be worth watching. Will find and devour with my eyes!
(ag) wrote: a decently entertaining political Sherlock Holmes whodunit
(ru) wrote: another love triangle classic, superb acting + great memorable songs... but why gopal has to die????
(fr) wrote: Would have been nice if they cut out all the gruesome bits
(de) wrote: 2017-03-25 watched for 2nd time, didn't really remember it from first time.
(us) wrote: I remember growing so tired of this movie cuz my brother was sooo in love with it he would rent it everytime he'd get the chance....now with jackson playing Sho'Nuff? Hmmm.....nah, I'll leave my opinions to myself, nevermind.