Tuesday Tamil/Telugu: Robot/Enthiran, What Am I Missing? Why Was This a Hit? Is It Just Rajnikanth?

I finally saw Robot!  I think it might be one of those movies that you miss out too much if you don’t watch it at the exact right moment.  Watching it now, just a few years later, the special effects seem dated, the song sequences not so great, and even Rajni Sir’s performance is not as good as it could be.  Remember, I am coming off of seeing him in Kabali, where he not only played his age, he played a layered real complicated version of himself.  I mean, this performance is great, the best part of the movie for sure, but I kept thinking “why are you doing this when I know you could do so much better?”

I have a complicated relationship with Shankar.  Jeans was the second Tamil film I saw (after Kandukonden Kandukonden).  And I found it very sweet.  Boys has maybe my 5th favorite Rahman soundtrack (Rang De Basanti, Bombay, Saathiya/Alai Payuthay, OK Kanmani, Boys).  But Indian brought up a lot of distaste in me.  This film I don’t like or hate (except for one part of it that I will get into in the SPOILERS), I am more just puzzled by it.  What was it that made it such a hit?

I think what bothers me about Shankar is the immaturity of the characters.  Or, alternatively, doesn’t bother me, depending on the script.  In Boys, the immaturity was the point.  It’s right there in the title, this is about “boys”.  They have a foolish idea of relationships, of life, of everything else.  And I thought Shankar was really smart in how he showed that, how our hero fell in love at first sight for no real reason, how our heroine indicated her interest by fighting with him and laughing at him, before finally giving in, also for no real reason.  But then I watched Indian, and this movie, and he seems to have a similar superficial idea of relationships in these films, where we are supposed to respect the characters as noble heroes, mature people, grown ups.  Watching this film in particular, with both Rajnikanth and Aishwarya being middle-aged actors (middle aged meaning over 35), and playing characters who are supposed to be middle-aged or only slightly younger (again, meaning over 35), the way they interacted with each other, it felt like watching a college professor suddenly switch to talking in baby talk.  It worked really well for the parts where the Robot was interacting with the world, because like the characters in Boys, he was supposed to be somewhat immature. But not when our real regular lead characters were acting the same way.

Relationships and characters are always my favorite part of movies, it is what interests me most.  But I can enjoy other parts of films as well, I love Singham partly for the strong female character, but mostly for the action scenes.  Same with Dabangg.  In this film, the relationship stuff takes up slightly more screen time than it would normally in an action movie.  But the moments when it is not onscreen have their own flaws.  Not related to the script, just the CGI.  I like all the ideas, they were all really smart.  But having missed it in theaters, and watching it after years of rapid CGI advances, the special effects just don’t excite me.

That’s not entirely the fault of technical advances.  There is also the intelligence of how special effects are used.  King Kong, for instance, the first one, is still exciting to watch.  Because it wasn’t about the technical advances, it was about the ambition of the story.  And I suspect Bahubali 1 and 2 will be the same, it’s not about if the CGI looks jumpy, or unfinished in a few half seconds, it’s about the pure imagination of it.

And now my imaginary Robot/Enthiran fan is saying “yes, but didn’t you see the imagination of the sequences in this film!  Who would have thought of thousands of Rajnikanth’s onscreen together?  Or building them together to make one massive weapon?  Or the earlier touches, the eyes projecting answers onto the page of a test?”  And this is where you get into personal taste.  To me, those scenes felt like going with the first idea that occurred to him, instead of working harder and finding something that would resonate with the characters, would have a deeper meaning beyond pure spectacle.  To compare it with Bahubali, all the animals in that film are CGI.  But there is a reason that the introduction animal for Rana’s character is a massive bull, versus an elephant for Prabhas’ character.  He didn’t just say “big CGI animal to look impressive and make the audience gasp”, he said “big CGI animal here, but now I have to spend two months figuring out exactly the right kind of animal to use so that it isn’t just spectacle for spectacle.”

Again, tell me if I am wrong!  I have a deep faith that popular films are popular for a reason, that the mass of the audience does have a reason for their choices.  Sometimes I disagree with that reason, but I always want to try to find it.  And honestly, in this film, I’m just not seeing it!  Rajnikanth is wonderful, Rahman is wonderful, the CGI is amazing, but all of that together, to me, does not add up to record smashing box office.  Just to really really good box office.  So, what am I missing?

(I know there’s got to be more reasons it was popular than just the songs)

Here, I’ll write out the whole film as I saw it, and you can tell me what deeper level I am not seeing.

 

SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

We start with a terrible work life balance.  Rajnikanth is in his lab, ignoring phone calls from Aish while he works on his robot.  He finally manages to make the romance start to work, and then goes to meet Aish who is ready to break their relationship, until he plays a game of “if I have to return everything, then you will have to take back all the kisses I have given you”, and she kisses him.

Here’s my problem.  Both in the lab and in the romance, everything just feels so childish.  Not childlike, like in Eega, where it is a simple idea simply presented.  But actually childish, annoying, immature.  I don’t like that his struggles in the lab are shown by a robot humorously falling apart, and I don’t like that his romance is resolved just by tricking Aish into kissing him.  And it doesn’t feel like this is a game they are both in on, it feels like he is actually tricking her!  A grown woman!  So stupid that she falls for this argument, and so weak that merely sharing a kiss with the man she had made a reasoned decision to leave will convince her to stay.  I don’t necessarily have a solution or a better way for either of these two scenes.  I just know that they felt too over the top for me.

(Although the love song afterwards is lovely)

Everything feels too over the top.  Rajnikanth takes his robot to meet with the government and they “test” it by asking it a series of questions, like this is some kind of entrance exam.  Rajnikanth has to teach the robot to understand humanity, and the robot finally does after assisting in a birth.  And most of all, Aishwarya has to study for an exam, so Rajnikanth lends her the robot!!!!

I guess it’s the probably of too big and too small at the same time.  We are told that this robot has near infinite powers.  Oh, and also he can help you cheat on an exam.  In Ra.One, our robot was primarily controlled by a little boy.  Same is true in ET, The Iron Giant, the Netflix series Stranger Things, plenty of other films with a similar plot.  It allows for these kinds of fun shenanigans, where the audience is kind of in on the joke, that this silly kid doesn’t even consider the near infinite power of their new friend, because they are just a kid.  But in this case, they aren’t children!  Rajnikanth, more than anyone else, should understand the power he controls in his robot.  But he still treats the robot as his own small helper.

Maybe it’s the short-sightedness that bothers me?  In multiple ways.  I don’t like that our hero and heroine use the robot for their own selfish ends without seeming to feel any awareness that this is a selfish use of power.  And I don’t like it that, in the second half, the robot is destroyed because he declares affection for Aishwarya.  His destruction is shortsighted in two ways, both as an amazing scientific advance, and as an overreaction to an expression of affection towards “his” girl.

Oh, and I almost forgot the biggest example of shortsightedness!  The Robot rushes into a burning building to save a young woman who is in the bath.  She is naked, he brings her outside, so of course she runs into traffic and kills herself.  And the Robot is blamed for this???????  To my mind, considering her momentary embarrassment of appearing without clothes is the shortsighted view, saving her life is the bigger goal.  And this gets into all kinds of questions about a woman’s body being seen as a public possession, rather than hers alone.  If it is her body, than it does not matter if it is seen or not, it is still hers.  No one can take that away from her.

I said in my Indian post that I have a real hard time with the way it handles the scene of female freedom fighters being stripped, and then all committing mass suicide.  This is the same thing, but worse.  The last one had an implied message that it is “good” to kill yourself rather than live with dishonor.  But it was only implied.  This film makes it explicit, says that the Robot did wrong by saving her life, he should have let her die.  And more than that, it is Rajnikanth’s right to make that decision on her behalf.  What if, for instance, I am a woman in a place with no female doctor?  Should I die rather than have a male examination?  And should someone else have the right to make that decision for me?

Most of all what bothers me is that this is not a theoretical situation being shown here.  The rest of the film, sure, I’m not going to dig too seriously into all the many many many gender issues with Aishwarya’s character, because it is clearly just a movie and her character is not meant to be “real”.  In 2002, at a school in Mecca, 15 young girls died because the police did not let them leave and rescue workers were not allowed in, because the girls were not dressed “modestly” enough.  There is a difference in degrees between the situation in this film and that one, but it is only a difference in degrees, the argument and situation are the same.  And in both cases, the answer apparently is “let her die rather than affront our sense of modesty.  And we, the male public, get to make that decision on her behalf.”

That scene is part of general issues when the movie tries to dig into the meaning of humanity and science and so on.  The essential ideas of the script in those ways are interesting, a robot who does not follow Asimov’s 3 laws because he was made for war.  But therefore must learn a higher level of consciousness, similar to a human, in order to make decisions for himself.  But the presentation just does not work for me, the insights into humanity are too superficial, and the scenes where we see the robot’s powers aren’t interesting enough.  Well, except for the scene when he has an argument with a mosquito, that I loved!  That is the kind of just plain clever use of CGI that I was talking about.  And it also works as a kind of meta statement on the whole first half, there are all kinds of sayings about using an axe to kill a bug kind of thing.  And that’s what they are doing, using this massively powerful robot to do all these silly little things.  But mostly I found the first half not quite deep enough to justify the ideas it is trying to present.

The second half, when deeper ideas are thrown out the window entirely, that was a lot more fun!  But also a lot more CGI-full.  And started off with the idea that just because the robot declares his affection for Aishwarya, suddenly Rajnikanth hates him.  Is it such a sin to love the woman he loves?  Is Aishwarya his possession?  Is desiring her somehow an attack on Rajnikanth, or indeed anything to do with Rajnikanth?  NO!  Okay, that part I don’t like.

 

But I love it when the plot just gets insanely over the top and the evil Robot kidnaps Aishwarya, builds his own robot army and robot palace, and generally loses his mind.  I don’t like it that they came up with a pseudo-science way for the robot to rape Aishwarya, because that just seemed needlessly titillating, like the audience would somehow get off (either in righteous anger or in slightly ashamed arousal) at the thought of rape.  Similar to how, in both this and Indian, the idea of a naked woman was treated as both something to be righteously angry about, and also to go “he-he-he-he-he, naked ladies!”  Okay, that part bugs me.  But building a Robot army and then having them all join together to become enormous guns or drills or whatever else, that is cool!

And the very ending, that is cool too.  I read some complaints somewhere that the Robot turns “good” out of nowhere.  But it is the same ending as Khalnayak and dozens of other films.  In their own way, the Robot and Rajnikanth are brothers, the good brother and the bad brother.  And as is often the case, we end with a court trial where the bad brother feels responsible for the problems of the good brother and has a last minute change of heart.  And we end with a slight sorrow at the fate of the “bad” brother, who has to be sacrificed so the “good” brother can live.  After all of the CGI and futuristic science in this film, we return in the end to a traditional Indian film court scene.

Advertisements

28 thoughts on “Tuesday Tamil/Telugu: Robot/Enthiran, What Am I Missing? Why Was This a Hit? Is It Just Rajnikanth?

  1. OK, I didn’t finish reading the review (I will do so), but I had to stop reading to address your complaints about the scene with the woman being rescued from the burning building. Ever since you mentioned that you were going to watch Enthiran, I was very curious to how you would react to that scene. I think you have read it completely wrong. Unfortunately, it is the same wrong way in which every western woman has reacted to that scene. I really think there is a great deal of preconception influencing your (and others’) reaction.

    The most important point about that scene is that the woman DID NOT commit suicide, and certainly not because she was naked in public. Please go and watch that scene again, in detail. It is made very clear that she was happy to be rescued. But when the robot sets her on the ground outside, in her naked state, a bunch of reporters immediately rush in on her, and start snapping her photos in a very voyeuristic way. She is so shocked and flummoxed by this unexpected attention that she just runs in any which way trying to escape them, and thus runs into the oncoming traffic and is killed. The entire scene was a massive condemnation of the kind of media exploitation that has become very rampant and common in India, certainly at that time. (I don’t know if it’s become any better since.) There were real life incidents like this, where, when a woman is caught in an embarrassing situation, instead of helping her (as would have been done in previous generations), the media immediately try to exploit her and her situation, and become extremely intrusive.

    So I think all your passionate argument and analysis is uncalled for, and is actually irrelevant, because what you describe is not what happened in the film. As I said, please watch it again. I must say I am disappointed that you, too, fell into this trap of going with preconceived ideas.

    Like

    • I was waiting to respond until I was able to re-watch the sequence. Which now I have (thank you Netflix!).

      The initial sequence is unclear about if it was suicide or not. But she is not happy to be rescued. She is calling for help, but as soon as the robot appears, she begs the robot not to come near her because she is unclothed, he ignores her and saves her life anyway, over her protests. She is kicking and unhappy in his arms the whole time, begging him to leave her behind since she is unclothed. She objects not to the presence of the media, but to “everyone” in general looking at her. Rajnikanth gives her his jacket. Her mother is calling for her to come to her. She seems confused, disoriented, upset, and runs into traffic, while her mother chases behind and tells her to come.

      It could be an accident driven by media, or a suicide. I am leaning suicide based on what we see onscreen, only because her mother is right there behind her calling for her (and the filmmaker makes sure we see that), she could easily have gone to her mother instead of into the street, so it appears that she chose to go into the street. But it could be interpreted the other way as well.

      However, the real reason I think it is suicide is because the film says it is suicide. In the next scene, Danny Danzongpa says she committed “Khudkusi”, which the subtitles say is suicide. Maybe it is differently worded in the Telugu version, or maybe there is a variation on the meaning of the Hindi “Khudkusi” which allows for an interpretation of accidental death.

      The thing I know I am not misunderstanding is that right before Danny says “suicide”, Rajnikanth is criticizing the robot for not understanding “Izzat”. Not an issue of confusion based on media attention, but personal honor. Which puts it squarely back on the “better she would have died in the fire than come outside without clothing” side of things, a matter of honor not a regrettable accident.

      Anyway, the sequence is exactly one hour and 3 minutes in if you want to watch it. I may have missed something in the translations.

      On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 4:04 PM, dontcallitbollywood wrote:

      >

      Like

      • I will get back to you on this. I, too, want to rewatch the sequence in question, but that can’t happen till next week.

        But I wouldn’t take Danny’s word on anything. 🙂 After all, here he is a man with a definite agenda, to discredit Rajni’s work in any way possible.

        Like

  2. Well, I first saw Enthiran when I was about 12 years old and I loved it. I mainly loved Chitti the robot and all of the cool things he could do. I really wished back then that I had my own robot that could do all my chores and homework for me 🙂 I actually ended up thinking that Evil Chitti was kind of cool too because of his finger gun.

    Another thing was that the songs were a rage at the time. Almost every single song was a chartbuster at the time.

    This is just my own guess but Enthiran came out a year after Magadheera. So maybe for the Telugu audience they were excited to see another movie with with a similar grandness?

    Like

    • The Magadheera connection is an interesting thought. And I could see being really into the robot stuff as a kid. But there just didn’t seem to be as much there for grown-ups to dig into. Like, with Bahubali, we’ve all talked and written and so on for thousands and thousands of words. Can’t really see doing that for Robot.

      On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 5:55 PM, dontcallitbollywood wrote:

      >

      Like

      • Not all movies of Rajinikanth are great. Some of them are really stupid and cater to lower classes, auto drivers and labourers. They showcase him like an invinsible superman. Sometimes we need to suppress our intellectual and then watch Rajinikanth’s movie to really enjoy them, movies like Yejaman.

        Like

        • I think I was just too spoiled by Kabali. It had the crowd-pleasing whistle moments, but also a real social message. Even Baasha had a bit more of a message.

          Like

      • I was looking at Rajinikanth’s filmography and it looks like his previous movie was Kuselan, the Tamil version on Billu, which came out in 2008 and it didn’t do well. So basically, his last full-fledged role was three years prior in Sivaji. Enthiran was the second movie in the combination of Rajinikanth and Shankar; their previous movie together, Sivaji, was a blockbuster. The expectations of this combination plus the movie being a sci-fi visual wonder must have lead to a lot of hype. This is just my speculation though.

        Also I’ve read somewhere that a lot of people liked Enthiran because Rajinikanth was returning to his roots and playing a negative character again after a long time.

        Like

        • I love it that you are all doing this research for me in solving this puzzle I have set you!

          and now I am trying to draw a line between Moodru Mudichi with the sensitive black and white and this movie. In both films he plays an obsessed lover rapist. He falls in love with someone who is in love with his “father”. And he is redeemed at the end. Yes! It all fits! Except for all the other ways in which they are completely different.

          Like

        • The Original version of Kuselan and Billu called Kadha Parayumpol was good and did really well at the box office. But both Kuseland and Billu was just avg and bombed, billu had lots of unwanted songs.

          Like

          • Billu was very confusing!

            On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 1:11 AM, dontcallitbollywood wrote:

            >

            Like

  3. Even I was around 11 when I watched it, and I remember loving it very much back then. I used to play the songs on loop and I watched the movie around 5-6 times on DVD.
    Maybe the reason for it being such a big hit (apart from Rajini and Rahman) was that it was a movie in which there was an actual scientific reason behind Rajini’s superpowers, unlike his usual films where he is powerful just because he’s….well….Rajini. And together with the CGI it must have given fans so many whistle-worthy moments.
    I probably liked it because at that age, it was just cool to see a robot doing everything for you.

    Like

  4. I think I mentioned this in your Indian Post. The scene where the robot saves the woman was the only one I caught while it was being telecast on TV and decided that this movie and the kind of morality it trying to project is not for me.

    Like

    • It’s such an odd scene. They could have gotten the plot point they wanted any one of a number of ways, why choose that one?

      On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 10:09 AM, dontcallitbollywood wrote:

      >

      Like

      • Exactly! Humanity and morality is complicated and Artificial Intelligence no matter how advanced it is, might not be capable of processing all nuances. That’s such an interesting idea. But nope! They had to show that in the absolute worst way.
        Margaret, do you want to do a speculative post on how to fix this movie sometime? Because if done right, it could have been such an enjoyable ride.

        Like

        • I don’t know, I think fixing it might even be beyond me. I’d want to kind of scrap the whole thing and start fresh. And then it’s just Ra.One.

          On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 11:36 PM, dontcallitbollywood wrote:

          >

          Like

  5. Pingback: Bahubali 1 and 2 Theme Post: The Significance of Fire and Water, or Why Prabhas 1 Has Fluffy Hair and Prabhas 2 Has Wet Hair – dontcallitbollywood

  6. Ugh, Robot. I know you said you weren’t going to get into Aish’s character, but I’m certain that that was responsible for a solid 90% of my lack of enjoyment of this movie. Because in a brainless way, the rest of it is pretty fun! (With the exception of the girl who kills herself that you mention above, which is just awful.) First of all, since she’s supposed to be in med school, and since med school starts at age 18 in India and goes on for 5 years, she’s likely 22-23 at the oldest, and possibly that’s why she’s meant to be so very immature? That said, that makes her relationship with clearly older and calling the shots in their relationship Scientist Rajni a little creepier. That said, I at least appreciate that she has a nominal career – but couldn’t stand how she was clearly shown to lack any competence at her job, to the point she blows off studying for her exams to play around with her boyfriend and the robot, and then has absolutely no shame about using the robot to cheat! Twice! (OK, part of this might have been because I was also in school at that time and annoyed that I very much lacked a robot to pass me answers, but still.) And finally, her career/skills really never get mentioned again, except for the robot using her textbooks for the birth. It’s particularly vexing to me, because I can see so many ways they could have used her better! Have her be an established OB and therefore more mature/more confident, make the conflict between her association with the natural creation of life vs. the robot/Scientist Rajni’s artificial intelligence more explicit by having her be the one arguing against the ethics of it, or heck, have her and Scientist Rajni be friends/old flames, so that there is actually some possibility she might choose the robot over Scientist Rani, making the love triangle is more the Phantom of the Opera retelling they appear to be going for.

    Like

    • Ra.One is obviously a Robot ripoff, but also kind of a second draft that fixes a lot of the problems. Makes the robot the hero, which is what we all want, and gives us someone else to play the villain. And fixes the heroine!!!! Kareena is mature and intelligent and has a complex relationship with both Shahrukh’s.

      On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 6:43 PM, dontcallitbollywood wrote:

      >

      Like

  7. I wrote a reply earlier which was lost somewhere describing Shankar, and his nature of work. But it is lost somewhere. So, margaret, if you see it please publish it.

    Better forget the Mosquito and few other stupid things, which I don’t find interesting at all.

    The whole central point of the movie was revolving around Neural Schema. The Neural Schema is what separates a simple machine of a biological organism, to a complex organism just short of complete consciousness. It hangs somewhere between a complete living being and pure machine. When there is such a thing in this world, like that of less educated people, less intelligent people, especially those that can’t think too deep about a subject beyond basic needs or complex matters regarding situations, they can be innocent at heart. They can be used for good, they are very good in the hands of good people. But, when their limits are enhanced at the hands of wrong people, not by giving super powers but by giving false string of ideas and manipulating the brain, they can do things, terrible things. They start to ‘think’, that isn’t natural to them. They end up being the culprit being innocent at heart at the same time. Their thoughts of evil aren’t intentional, but are deliberative accidents by manipulative people. Chitti, carries with him this innocence through out the movie from the beginning. Even when he is killing a lot of people we still feel sympathy for how he is being manipulated into ‘false’ thinking. Those kind of humans exist, where they aren’t explicitly smart, but enough to make them think the wrong way. The Best example, are the present day Jihadists and sleeper cells. Also the sublte difference between proper Education and ‘thinking’.

    In the end scene when a child asks why was chitti dismantled, he replies ” I started to think”.

    Like

  8. I wrote a reply earlier which was lost somewhere describing Shankar, and his nature of work. But it is lost somewhere. So, margaret, if you see it please publish it.

    Better forget the Mosquito and few other stupid things, which I don’t find interesting at all.

    The whole central point of the movie was revolving around Neural Schema. The Neural Schema is what separates a simple machine of a biological organism, to a complex organism just short of complete consciousness. It hangs somewhere between a complete living being and pure machine. When there is such a thing in this world, like that of less educated people, less intelligent people, especially those that can’t think too deep about a subject beyond basic needs or complex matters regarding situations, they can be innocent at heart. They can be used for good, they are very good in the hands of good people. But, when their limits are enhanced at the hands of wrong people, not by giving super powers but by giving false string of ideas and manipulating the brain, they can do things, terrible things. They start to ‘think’, that isn’t natural to them. They end up being the culprit being innocent at heart at the same time. Their thoughts of evil aren’t intentional, but are deliberative accidents by manipulative people. Chitti, carries with him this innocence through out the movie from the beginning. Even when he is killing a lot of people we still feel sympathy for how he is being manipulated into ‘false’ thinking. Those kind of humans exist, where they aren’t explicitly smart, but enough to make them think the wrong way. The Best example, are the present day Jihadists and sleeper cells. Also the sublte difference between proper Education and ‘thinking’.

    In the end scene when a child asks why was chitti dismantled, he replies ” I started to think”.

    Like

    • I wanted to expand on this, but somehow the browser won’t let me post long comments. Another point to add is that, such people can be anywhere. The best examples are children. Rajini states it right in the beginning of the movie that his Robot is like a child new to the world. Children don’t have too complicated or romantic feelings. When they grow of age they develop feelings naturally, which are now induced by our protagonist into our test subject : Robot. Does that impede judgement, make him self-conscious, No way. But, does that make him think in crazy ways, much like a teenager, yes it does.

      Like

    • Wow, this is a lot to think about!

      I really like your description of the innocent who is given ideas but not taught to really think. My first thought was people who watch TV news or read editorials, but never pause to think whether or not they agree with the information being given, or with how it is being discussed, just repeat the talking points and feel like they are intelligent because they have talking points to use. Also, the massive gap in progressive versus regressive voters related to whether they received a college education which taught them critical thinking.

      On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 7:43 AM, dontcallitbollywood wrote:

      >

      Like

      • Critical thinking comes with ‘proper education’ where you are exposed to both head and tail of a coin. Else it simply is a propaganda. Religion is an extreme of such a propaganda.
        We call it brain washing but we never pause to think, if terrorists are so clever to infiltrate something or destroy something, why can’t they simply think if they are doing right. It is like saying, you know science if you know it’s principles and can apply it. You understand science when you do it I.e. the scientific method. That’s the basic difference that I wanted to point out as the theme of the movie.

        As I wanted to say in earlier posts, Shankar’s movies are filled with complex plot points and very less emotions. You need to figure out everything yourself. Everyone he tried to make you too emotional, he failed. I will look at your posts on ‘Indian’ movie if you can give me a link to it and let me see what you missed out. Did I miss it in the post, please mention it.

        Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s