Thoda Pyaar Thoda Magic

Thoda Pyaar Thoda Magic

One day they pray to God for help and he does help them. He sends his most mischievous, childlike, lovable angel to the rescue, with a mission to bring Ranbeer and the kids together. Geeta (Rani Mukerji) comes bicycling down a rainbow… and bursts into Ranbeer's house as the selfproclaimed new nanny. And then starts the roller coaster ride of fun, emotions, magic and love.

God sends a rambunctious angel to help a businessman and the four orphans, whose parents he killed, become a family. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki

LinksNameQualitySeedersLeechersSize
Download   Thoda Pyaar Thoda Magic 2008 Hindi 720p HDRip x264 AC3...Hon3yHDTV50403 GB
Download   Thoda Pyaar Thoda Magic 2008 1CD DVDRip BMBDVDRip3927698.58 MB
Download   Thoda Pyaar Thoda Magic PreDVDRip XviDDVDRip3141742.56 MB
Download   Thoda Pyaar Thoda Magic DVDRip Xvid Team DUSDVDRip2837700.28 MB
Download   Thoda Pyaar Thoda Magic.2008.DVDRip.Xvid.AC3.DRsDVDRip29321.5 GB
Download   thoda pyar thoda magic kashan12Other4640700.28 MB

Thoda Pyaar Thoda Magic torrent reviews

TJ (ru) wrote: Actually pretty funny! Creative writing

Sean C (ca) wrote: Tony Kaye's Detachment is like his feature film debut American History X in its bleak depiction of America's youth, trapped within the bureaucracy of public education, an institution that which they lack an understanding of, causing them to lash out in acts of cruelty and malice systemic of the failures of government sanctioned institutionalization, knowledge and empathy replaced by ignorance and competition. Indicative of Kaye's characteristic dissatisfaction for the culturally degenerative firmament of America in the twenty-first century, Detachment examines the failures of public education in America, depicting the role of the teacher as more warden and jailor than educator and counselor, Kaye's chosen subjects down trodden civil servants held back by the anger of their students and the economic strictures of the nation's poorest and most racially volatile residential districts. In Adrian Brody's Henry Barthes, the viewer is afforded a veritable reincarnation of Kaye's previous protagonist, Edward Norton's Neo-Nazi turned social activist Derek Vinyard, Barthes' internalized rage quelled by a poetic soul, erupting in fits of isolated panic when provoked by the very worst of society's machinations of arbitrary law and order. Like American History X, Detachment is nearly suffocating in its dark dramatic tone, the dour halls of Kaye's public high school lending an impenetrability to the characters within, the torch of enlightenment unattended, leaving a whole generation of children scrabbling in the dark, capitalistic antagonism affording only the meager light of a single lit match. Where Kaye's feature film debut found him investigating racial prejudice and violence in Southern California at the dawn of the twenty-first century, his fourth film finds him interrogating the survivors of his prior social apocalypse, his public educators tied down by the ego of discontentment engendered by the detachment of racism that has continued to course through the American subconscious in the proceeding ten years.As a successor to what is possibly the greatest social drama of our time, Detachment is comparatively engaged in a discussion largely pre-determined, Kaye's rhetorical flourishes on the importance of an ever diminishing liberal education heavy handed, but restrained by the subtleties afforded in Carl Lund's script and through the deft performances of its exceptional cast. If Kaye is a director's director, than his oeuvre is perhaps most marked by its unrelenting authorial style, Kaye's films less about interpretation than they are about elicited reaction, his films provocative in their engagement with topics already laden with a socially pre-conditioned response. And Detachment is no exception, decidedly brutal and effectively moving, Kaye's dissatisfaction echoing our own resentment towards an ingrained cultural disengagement, America in the twenty-first century remarkably insincere and prone to satire, but without the knowledge of where that insincerity and ridicule stems from, causing further division and turmoil within the culture. While some might find Kaye's stubborn cynicism exhausting, and American History X is nothing if not unmistakably critical, Detachment possesses an empathy for its characters that proves optimistic, even if the battles waged don't always culminate in success. While the film's conclusion leaves its characters in much the same quandary in which it finds them, Kaye's direction imbues a familiarity with his characters that proves empathetic and diagnostic of the lack of concern in public education in America at large, the solution dependent on our response to the film's comprehensively informed satire.In Henry Barthes, Kaye has seemingly distilled the spirit of Derek Vinyard to his bare essentials, the anger of an upbringing found lacking in proper emotional support and economic stability fostering an adult lacking in social stability, the torments of his past informing his impersonally detached nature in the present. While Henry undoubtedly cares deeply for his fellow teachers and students, his status as a substitute teacher enables him to leave before becoming too emotionally attached to any one school district, classroom, or location, constant motion and change negating the effects of what is a meager and hard earned existence. Like his students, Henry feels the undercurrents of oppression surging forth as anger, a socially propagated affliction of a culture in a state of arrested development engendered by the very lack of education that Henry is actively engaged in instilling into a stagnant national intellect. When Henry says that he understands that his students are angry, or when he takes in a young prostitute off the street out of sheer charity, his own intelligence is temporarily lent to an American youth emotionally and mentally abandoned, the public schools little more than police states, the children put under their care abused, neglected, and ignored. In Kaye's film, all of his characters are dissimilarly detached, their very inability to connect with one another ironically communal, if only they could reach out and see each other in order to transcend the culturally regressive traits that have kept them deaf, dumb, and blind.Perhaps the most pervasive aspect of Detachment comes in its ability to articulate the incoherence of teenage angst as a symptom of an ephemeral maturity, proffered as a possibility, but with no clear social avenues by which to reach it. If Henry Barthes serves as any indication, adulthood carries the baggage of adolescence around with it, our formative years spent in the American public education system alternatively deleterious or transformative to our own intellectual and emotional growth, our nation's teachers the first line of defense against the violence of racism and social prejudice, so long as we give them the freedom of authority to educate. Without the knowledge of good and evil, right and wrong, pure and corrupt, Kaye's film provides the evidence to make it unmistakably clear that the civil turmoil depicted in his American History X will continue, anger the physical manifestation of psychological neglect. It's impossible to come away from any film directed by Tony Kaye in an apathetic manner, his film's provocations immediately familiar in their sources of criticism and indictment, his dissatisfaction echoing our own subconsciously felt grievances, and informing our consciously held complaints. As a social activist, there is no director currently making films quiet as effective in eliciting a volatile response from the tacitly disengaged masses, and Detachment, the spiritual successor to his masterful American History X, is perhaps his greatest achievement yet, diagnostic of the social ills of a lack of a proper public education, else we remain in a culture divided by the color of our skin and the size of our respective bank accounts.

Simone D (br) wrote: Great documentary about antisemitism. Does it really exists?

Thomas W (it) wrote: A few years ago the cinematic world was treated to a rare film find that leaves its viewers pleased and delighted simply because there had been absolutely no expectations for that particular film. This film is the late Adrienne Shelly's, Waitress. Shelly wrote, directed, and co-starred in this fun little film which starred Keri Russell (Felecity), Nathan Fillion (Firefly, Serenity, Castle) and Cheryl Hines (Curb Your Enthusiasm) which is best remembered for Russell's fine performance, wonderful dialogue and her pie-baking abilities. It was cute and sweet. After Shelly passed, her friend Hines must have taken up this screenplay and decided to direct it herself as a token of respect for her passed friend. I wish she hadn't because Shelly deserved better. I am not sure what makes this film so disasterously bad -- the screenplay is poor (it surely would have been tweaked by Shelly had she tried to get it produced) and the directing isn't anything special. It is actually cringe-inducing and uncomfortable to watch. And it is oh-so-unfunny. Meg Ryan drives home to the an upstate farmhouse only to find that her husband, Timothy Hutton, has strewn the place with roses. It is very romantic until she realizes it was intended for someone else (Kristen Bell). Angry, feeling betrayed, frustrated -- and JUST PLAIN CRAZY -- she hits him over the head with a potted plant and duct tapes him to a chair ... and then she does it AGAIN and duct tapes him to a toilet. She does all of this to make him realize he loves her (because it isn't supposed to make him realize that she is ACTUALLY crazy). As it goes on it becomes more implausible and ridiculous. It strangely becomes rather formulaic (except for the burglary) and predictable which is sad because it shouldn't have ended like this. In what country is this behavior valid and fine? Hutton looks at Ryan in one scene (when he's taped to a toilet) and says "I'm so embarrassed for you." Me too ... but it goes for the both of 'em.

H Paul M (it) wrote: Stylistically straight out of the '70s. Awkward pointless interviews, twangy EZ listening score, and unintelligent environmentalist cliches. Par for the course as a boomer-porn IMAX film, and decidedly worse than early masterpieces in the format like "Beavers."

James H (fr) wrote: Quite decent horror film, it shows what you can do without much of a budget. The acting is fine and it is imaginatively written and not the routine predictable horror movie. It held my interest throughout.

Helen F (es) wrote: Pelcula que tiene contenido violento, esta basada en la rivalidad que existe entre los hindues y los musulmanes.

Vince N (fr) wrote: Barriers, Barriers, what Barriers? If there's such thing as a "break through," this portrays it. The rev the coaching staff and a cute gal, can't faze a united squad?!

Stacey O (mx) wrote: Fabulous and moving film.

Nora S (ru) wrote: This movie is laughably bad and the predictable ending screams and yells at you from a mile away. However, because it makes me laugh, it's entertaining. So it gets 3.5 stars.

James C (ag) wrote: This movie has been highly under-rated, but this lack of positive reception is more likely due to the disturbing psychological themes explored than any inherent flaws of the film. On the surface, it is a horror film about boy who's afraid of his cannibalistic parents. But beneath this facade, lie the deeper psychological themes of the Oedipal complex, sex and mortality, corporeal existence and predation-- all slyly presented within the framework of the plastic, over-sanitised Nifty Fifties. An unusual, stylish, and quite excellent film.

Archibald T (fr) wrote: What a bizarre little movie. Camping films seem to have permeated the film masses in the 80s. Something about summer camp was meant to be entertaining. It can be. Take 'Meatballs' for example, but by the late 80s these camp movies kind of went off the cliff. This film is one such example of the genre.A sadist guides a small group of campers that consist of mainly four boys on a wilderness hike. He bullies the youngest, Alan, who is from the city. His mission is to teach these boys lessons in the wild. Funny thing happens. He goes berserk and aggressively tries to force the boys to accept his ideology. Then he gets his leg broken and has to rely on the boys for survival. Also there's some white water rafting scenes and a mountain climbing scene that was well photographed. John Alcott who was the cinematographer died before the films release and to give this film any kind of credit whatsoever it'd have to go to Alcott. The cinematography is just beautiful. The story does have a few elements of interest in terms of two opposing forces that are in some way alike can't come to a certain understanding of one another when it comes to teaching moral lessons in the wild. Alan and Vic are these two opposing forces with different ideals. The way Kevin Bacon and Sean Astin play off each other is one part of the film that is worth looking at, but the whole meaning of the film is subjective in the end since we, the audience, can't find one point of entry that makes this film worth your time.Splicing together new footage of Sean Astin "explaining" the story as the story is being told is just pointless. It contributes nothing to the enterprise. Also the abrupt ending will make you groan, but also make you think in terms of the genre. If there was ever a camping movie to end all camping movies, it'd be White Water Summer.

Ruhan R (au) wrote: I loved this movie. At first it seemed like just another fun comedy with a n interesting concept but it changed into something much larger. The hotel room scene was fantastic, I loved the things God was saying, especially about everyone being his children. A good plot with strong acting, worth watching.

Miguel A (de) wrote: Todo o discurso altamente patritico e pr-militar de "Sergeant York" (C) desculpvel (e compreensvel, em plena Segunda Guerra Mundial), quando o filme em si oferece cinema de primeira qualidade e um banquete de "food for thought" relacionado como uma questo to interessante quanto intemporal: como pode um soldado manter a sua integridade moral perante Deus, quando a guerra o obriga a tudo o que possa contrariar isso? Questo essa que se torna ainda mais complexa quando o dom do soldado (uma pontaria certeira) parece ser uma ddiva de Deus. Gary Cooper personifica esse conflito com um papel merecedor de todos os pr (C)mios possveis e capaz de conduzir o filme sem grande necessidade de recorrer aos actores secundrios (igualmente excelentes). Al (C)m disso, "Sergeant York" (C) uma master-class de Howard Hawks em termos de como pode um filme ser dividido em trs actos sem que nenhum desses prejudique o equilbrio do todo (ainda que os primeiros 30 minutos paream demasiado hesitantes). Aqui temos portanto um filme de 1941 que pode muito bem ter sido a inspirao para o sniper que citava a Bblia antes de disparar, no "Soldado Ryan", ou para o desertor em auto-interrogatrio da conscincia, na "Barreira Invisvel". A sua influncia pode ir ainda mais longe e chegar aos versos dos National, quando se ouve: "I gave my heart to the army / The only sentimental thing I could think of". mesmo isso. At (C) porque o "Sergeant York" (C) um doce de pessoa obrigado a prestar servio a um "Lemonworld". 4,5/5

Peter P (ca) wrote: Charming with a nice performance from Gary Cooper, and way better then the gaudy remake.

Alberto C (us) wrote: Way better than the first carrie, the ending just as it supposed to be 1/4?

Neil G (mx) wrote: I love it even though it's a rubbish film

Shawn S (ca) wrote: This is a decent slasher and mystery with a pretty good cast.

Lee M (jp) wrote: A successful film not just because of the marriage of the right actor in the appropriate genre, but also the timely infusion of challenging questions about a nation at war.