Red Riding Hood

Raw meat...

The small village of Daggerhorn is an isolated one and for good reason: for 20 years it has been subject to attack from a werewolf during every full moon period. The village has a pact with the werewolf as they offer it live animals in hope that none of their people are harmed. This appears to change one day when the sister of Valerie (Amanda Seyfried) is killed by the beast. Coupled with issues of love and her future, Valerie is caught between two potential suitors and a frenzy hunt for the wolf.

Adapting the tale of Little Red Riding Hood was always going to be an interesting undertaking, but the result is a mixed bag. The narrative obviously expands past the scope of the original tale in order to create a cohesive context in which the story can unfold. The main problem with the story is the apparent lack of depth. Many possible themes arise including issues of sexuality, feminism and identity, but these go largely unexplored and mean little by the time the credits roll. The action that is presented is merely to mask a romance story which is pretty predictable by nature: the question is not who Valerie will end up with but rather when it will happen. It does not help that characters fall into the stock variety, such as Father Solomon (Gary Oldman) who ends up being quite cruel with his methods of helping the village. Characters also go underdeveloped: besides the small arc involving infidelity between two families, characters just seem to exist for the sake of it. Take into account that decisions that appear so obvious for characters are ignored just to build tension, then it is no wonder that the films length begins to feel artificially made. Add in come clichés and a mystery which resolves itself out of nowhere, and you have a narrative that is both lacking in cohesion and quality.

The range of actors is by no means impressive but it is definitely both intriguing and manageable. The younger cast are sadly quite wooden most of the time and considering they are the ones around which the love triangle revolves, the chemistry is just lacking. The love between Valerie, Peter (Shiloh Fernandez) and Henry (Max Irons) never rises above its Twilight roots. Seyfried can be given some credit since she does convey a larger set of emotions than everyone else in the cast. Sadly, the older cast do not exactly fair much better, but it is unfortunate that it is up to Oldman to lend acting experience to the film, and he definitely has presence in his scenes.

If there is a saving grace it is the overall atmosphere of the film. The opening scenery is testament to a film that is trying to create an overarching environment in which to position the village in isolation, but also to present the mystical feeling of a fairy tale. While not the most striking scenery, the woods look straight out of Twilight for example, the effects give a fantasy element that very much cements the film in its fairy tale origins. The CGI for the Werewolf is lacking but it is a minor issue in a film in which director Catherine Hardwiche is able to mesh both darkness with the odd scenes of gorgeous scenery fairly well.

Language features minimally throughout the film and nudity is nonexistent. Sex never really features though sensuality is present at times. Violence is quite apparent and besides a quick shot of the removal of a body part, violence is neither gory nor that bloody.

The angst of teenage love in dark fantasy is definitely a hot topic for cinema, but Red Riding Hood does not expand the idea in any meaningful way. The scenery is great, Gary Oldman is great, and Seyfried is adequate, but that is about all the film does right. Acting is generally weak and the story offers mild entertainment worth. With a superior script, Red Riding Hood could have offered a delightful retelling of its original material because the potential is there, but as it stands the film will not have many filmmakers green with envy.

5/10



Screen date: 25 March 2011
Release date: 18 March 2011

The King of Fighters

Ready? Not quite...

The King of Fighters tournament is one in which participating members are transported to an alternate dimension to engage in a fight. This is made possible due to three ancient artifacts that allow this dimension to exist. The members come under threat when Rugal (Ray Park), a previous member of the tournament, steals the artifacts and begins to manipulate the other dimension to his own liking so as to kill anyone who enters it. It is left to Mai (Maggie Q) and Iori (Will Yun Lee) must enlist the help of Kyo (Sean Farris) to defeat Rugal before too many lives are lost.

The film adaptation of The King of Fighters loosely follows that of the original King of Fighters '94, with some elements from '95, in which Rugal starts the tournament so as to get some excitement into his life. The most notable difference in the adaptation is that the tournament is already established and also that the fighters need to be in an alternate dimension in order to fight in a way which resemble the original game. The science fiction-esque twist on the narrative makes for an intriguing story but the films never really explores the concept. The story is fashioned in a linear manner, with the odd reference to past sequences to help explain certain information. Unfortunately, the plot is fairly thin: it presents opportunities for further development but these avenues are never fully explored.

The acting quality is not exactly great but this is somewhat understandable considering the cast. That said, no actor ever falls prey to evidently poor acting and with more depth to the script a better acting prowess could have been shown. Actors generally take their roles seriously: Park seems to enjoy the eccentric nature of being a villain while the likes of Maggie Q, Lee and Faris portray the motives of their respective characters adequately enough.

The overall filming quality suggests that the film-makers had a low budget to work with. The King of Fighters appears to be filmed more like a television show then an actual movie but that does not stop some fairly enjoyable action sequences, yet these only become common in the latter half. CG becomes present mainly towards the end and looks low-key but nonetheless workable.

Beyond the makings of a possible girl-on-girl scene, there is no nudity or sexual content present. Language is tame and infrequent while violence is frequent throughout the film without ever being gory or bloody.

There is no doubt that The King of Fighters is a missed opportunity. With some obvious reworking to the script and story, and a better budget, the film could easily have been a more commendable entry for videogame-to-cinema adaptations. What really needed to happen was the fleshing out of the characters and the overall narrative to create a more cohesive product. That said the story, actors, and some decent action scenes, are adequate enough to carry The King of Fighters to its conclusion and miss a definitive K.O.

5/10

Screen date: 13 August 2010
Release date: 13 August 2010

New Moon

Soulless ...

As her 18th birthday approaches, Bella (Kristen Stewart) is finding it difficult to live a life where she would eventually become old while Edward (Robert Pattinson) retains his youth. When Bella's small birthday affair at the Cullen household threatens Bella's life, Edward decides that it is best if he leaves her fearing that he is causing her unnecessary danger. This results in Bella falling into a deep depression which her friend, Jacob (Taylor Lautner), hopes to relieve her from.

Continuing the novel adaptation of the Twilight saga, New Moon is a misfit of sorts in the series thus far. Regardless of how accurately the novel is followed, the narrative appears to present little new or different from the story presented in Twilight. Bella is still a sad and pathetic person who needs the love of someone else to keep her going. Instead of Edward being her source of love, it is Jacob this time around. And like the first film, Bella's life is under threat from a handful of vampires, and these happen to contain the remainder of the original group from Twilight. In essence, New Moon is just Twilight wrapped up in new skin, arguably paler this time, and it will feel like this for a good chunk of the film until the introduction of the Volturi, the royalty of vampires. This small arc in the film definitely ramps up the narrative into more interesting territory outside the lifeless romance of before, and the characters this romance entailed. Though the story does have one thing going for it and that is humour, and the genuine kind to boot. The film is constantly comedic enough that you may even forget that it was meant to be a tragic romance of sorts akin to Romeo and Juliet, which the narrative blatantly tries to intertextualise with. Inevitably, the story has little substance and feels like a bridge between Twilight and the remaining sequels to come. This is because all the intriguing mythology added to the series in New Moon, such as the Volturi and werewolves, contribute nothing to the film but rather that they could be useful for the sequels.

The acting is largely a better affair in the Twilight sequel but this mostly comes in the form of the lesser characters. Of the lot the more noticeable supporting performances come from the charm of Ashley Greene, the acute coldness of Dakota Fanning, and that rather mysterious elegance of Michael Sheen as the Volturi leader Aro. Of the three protagonists, it is only Lautner who makes any commendable effort at acting: he starts off rather low-key but gets himself into a decent position. It is disastrously unfortunate that neither Stewart nor Pattinson become anything more than simply dull. Both their respective characters are meant to be pained at the loss of being separated from one another but they always appear somewhat bored when in scenes together and show little conviction in their emotions. On the other hand, Stewart's scenes with Lautner have more going for them even when Stewart loses her gaze to Lautner's abs.

Director Chris Wietz brings a commercial feel to New Moon which was lacking in Twilight, yet New Moon ultimately feels less unique than Catherine Hardwicke's efforts. This does not help the film in any way as it has less going for it than its predecessor did. Music is a love-hate affair: it feels way too forced in helping create a certain mood that at times the music feels oddly misplaced. The special effects are much improved and now look far from awkward. While the CG is never overly convincing, it is integrated well enough as to not be a distraction.

For a film based on vampire romance, New Moon is pretty sexless in appeal beyond Lautner being shirtless. There is the odd use of mild language and while violence is more abundant than in Twilight, it is never harrowing enough considering the vampire and werewolf mythology.

While somewhat enjoyable, New Moon lacks identity and this is solely based on the fact that it does little to enhance the Twilight formula. Richer mythology is added; the quality of acting has increased in the overall cast; and the special effects have undergone a needed retuning. But like Edward so blandly points about himself, the film lacks a soul. The brewing romance between Bella and Edward is lifeless with a general lack of development throughout all the characters. Likewise, the narrative never really seems to head in any viable direction and it is up to the lesser characters to get the film's blood pumping.

5/10

Screen date: 24 November 2009
Release date: 27 November 2009

The Countess

Ambling on ...

In the 17th Century, the Hungarian Countess Elizabeth Bathory (Julie Delpy) and her husband, General Ferenc Nadasdy (Jack Berglund), are regarded as one of the most powerful couples in Hungary. Soon after Nadasdy's death, Elizabeth begins a passionate relationship with Istvan Thurzo (Daniel Bruhl), who is nearly 20 years her junior. When Istvan leaves her, she believes it is because of her age. This ultimately leads to her believing that the blood of virgin girls can help her remain youthful, and Elizabeth starts a mysterious killing spree to satisfy her vanity.

The issue surrounding Elizabeth Bathory makes for an interesting narrative in the cinematic format. The story is told in a rather linear fashion, beginning with Elizabeth as a child and how politics deemed who she should marry in her older age. Politics is perhaps the best dealt with theme in the film: while not shown in a refreshing manner, politics still has an overriding importance into understanding how arranged marriages were so important for families in regards to gaining new ties and allies and, more importantly, how these marriages ultimately develop characters in order to enrich the story. Yet it is disappointing that nothing helps strengthen the plot: the life of Elizabeth Bathory is open to much speculation with there being a debate as to whether she really is the 'Blood Countess' or whether she was trapped in a political conspiracy. But none of this is even questioned until the very end of the story, but by then it is so incredibly obvious that the filmmakers have wanted to portray Elizabeth as a cold-hearted murderer, that the alternate paradigm briefly introduced serves little purpose. Another problem with the narrative is how the film's underlying philosophy, as emphasized by a voice over from Istvan at the very start of the film, is in conflict with the film's main story. Istvan believes that the true story of Elizabeth was never revealed but as shown from the films intention, it clearly is.

There is a reasonably strong cast in the film but it never shows. Both Delpy and Bruhl lack emotion and their portrayed relationship is not any better. In Delpy's defence it can be argued that her character lacked any real emotion but nevertheless, there is nothing really compelling about the performance. William Hurt features at points throughout the film but he rarely makes much of an impact. The best of the lot is Annamaria Marcina who feels more believable then her co-stars, and does a good job as a supporting actress.

Julie Delpy does shine in her role as director with the film being, for the most part, eloquently shot. There are some interesting scenes of symbolism with the heightened ominous atmosphere of the film starting off early and is carried along until the end. Considering the subject matter, the film is neither as gory or bloody as you would expect, but the acts of cruelness still have a haunting presence to them, and Delpy must be congratulated for this. Likewise the musical score appears to compliment the film though is forgettable by the end, and the costume design has a real sense of reality to them though they lack extravagance as shown in other similar period films.

Sex is implied with upper female nudity appearing at times in the first half of the narrative. Language is almost unheard of but violence is shown in various manners: there is some decapitation, and piercing of skin from sharp items. None of the violence is lingered upon but their buildup has a threatening quality to them; blood does appear throughout.

The Countess is a surprisingly average film with a good sense of technical techniques being weighed down by some weak showcases of acting and a confused directional narrative. The beginning attempts to setup the film as a mystery thriller, something to get audiences debating the accuracy of events, but ultimately the film is so conclusive with what it wants audiences to believe that the film gets muddled up in its own creative process. It is an interesting movie with an exciting subject at its helm, but it is nonetheless a flawed film that just never gets going.

5/10

Screen date: 29 July 2009
Release date: N/A (Durban International Film Festival 2009)

Chandni Chowk to China

Too Much Hustling in this Kung Fu...

When a Chinese village becomes fed up with the dictatorship of tyrant Hojo (Gordon Liu) they decide to free themselves by finding the reincarnation of a legendary Chinese warrior. Their search takes them to India where they stumble upon Sidhu (Akshay Kumar) who bears a similar resemblance to the warrior of old. Sidhu is looking for a way to turn around his poor luck but is tricked into going to China when Chopstick (Ranvir Shorey) purposely mistranslates what the Chinese have to say.

You wouldn't be wrong if you think Chandni Chowk to China is akin to Kung Fu Hustle. Both are about martial arts, and both are parody films that parody subject matter even outside that of martial arts. In fact Chandni Chowk mimics the story and various situations found in Kung Fu Hustle, but it is not quite as masterfully conceived. The story is a fairly standard affair of martial arts films where the protagonist needs to rise to the occasion, learn some killer moves and defeat the enemy. Luckily the scriptwriters did attempt to add some additional subplots to give the film some depth and, in this regard, it works but perhaps a little too well. Besides the journey which is undertaken by Sidhu there is a smaller plot regarding the character Chiang Kohung (Roger Yuan) who has been trying to bring down Hojo but met a sad fate in the process. Kohung's story is used to help Sidhu's along but by the film's end this subplot abundantly more interesting than the main plot. Sadly the characters lack the story's depth and are far more one dimensional except for, would you believe it, Kohung.

In fact Kohung would not be such an amazing character if it were not for the equally amazing acting by Roger Yuan. Not only does he act confidently but his martial arts talent is fluid and precise. It's difficult to imagine that he has landed so few roles in his career and hopefully Chandni Chowk gets him more exposed. Yuan's opposite, Gordon Liu shows off his abundant knowledge of the film industry with a performance that emphasizes his characters subdued evil. It becomes a strange occurrence indeed when these two Chinese actors have better performances in a Bollywood film than the two titles stars: Akshay Kumar and Deepika Padukone. Padukone has a double role as both Sakhi and Meow Meow but her screen time is surprisingly limited and it's obvious that she is eager to explode her roles into something more then she is allowed. And then there is Kumar, who does not perform badly for he is suited to his role, but he overacts far too much. Presumably to heighten the comedy, the problem Kumar faces by the films close is that he never has control of it. He is so busy trying to find ways to make people laugh that he forgets that he is playing what is possibly one of the most annoying characters ever to grace cinema.

That said, the humour is abundant, regardless of whether Kumar exaggerates his role or not. But this is not to say that the humour is of a high level throughout, for most of the time the humour is based on sheer stupidity. This is not exactly problematic but anyone expecting something akin to Kung Fu Hustle, which itself also had its share of stupidity for laughs, might be a little peeved at the little genuinely original comedy.

Though what doesn't help matters is the poor implementation of CG. From the introduction showcasing the Great Wall of China to the water effects used for a special move Sidhu learns, the CG is always out of place. The special effects tend to work better but are used sparingly.

On top of that the music selection for the film is very poor and the dance sequences themselves are not any better. Sure Deepkia Padukone can look incredibly sexy during these sequences but the music is only goes to make the worse then what it actually is. Coupled with the fact that music is used inappropriately in some scenes, such as in the final fight, the end result is a Bollywood film which should have gone against the norm.

Chandni Chowk is an all round family film with no sex, nudity or language. Violence is mostly in the form of martial arts and one character does have a weapon that he uses to slice the neck of some victims but this is quite tame.

Simply put, Chandni Chowk to China is a disappointing film especially when its taken into consideration that it was delayed from its original release in October/ November last year. It is difficult to tell if any additions were made because nothing really gels well for the film as a whole. The acting is passable, with the Chinese actors being the highlight; the story is decent but is overshadowed by a mere subplot; and the music selection is shocking. That said the film has some of the best action sequences in a Bollywood film with the martial arts being fun to watch and the film is comedic throughout. However it should be advised that one's enjoyment of the film depends merely on their temperament for stupidity.

5/10

Screen date: 18 January 2009

Release date: 16 January 2009

Twilight

Blood draining...

Moving to Forks, Washington to live with her father, Bella Swan (Kristen Stewart) becomes interested in the Cullen siblings. One sibling does catch her attention, Edward Cullen (Robert Pattinson), but his quick and apparent mood swings begin to annoy her. After much pushing for information, Bella learns that Edward is a vampire.

Being an adaptation from a novel which has become quite popular among teenagers, mostly female, one would expect the story's translation to hold true to its source material as best as possible. It's hard to believe that it does at all because the story contained in the film is ultimately bland. There is no depth, no complexity to the plot, no intriguing characterizations: just a simple love story which doesn't hold much in terms of credibility. And this is because character motivations are never fully established. While the love Edward and Bella have for one another is easily based on outwards attraction and grows into something meaningful, the haste at which both characters are able to confide in and accept one another is unreasonable. At one point Bella is attracted to Edward, just to have him act cruel to her, then to find out he's a vampire and still place her complete trust in him that he won't harm her. While their love is touching in a Romeo and Juliet sort of way, that does not stop it passing off as completely illogical and idiotic. Still there is a certain quickness to it all that does make for an interesting watch at times for the concept itself is a fascinating one.

The acting doesn't fare any better. Side characters are merely caricatures and the main characters are underdeveloped so it is no wonder that the level of acting is average. Kristen Stewart comes off as far too disinterested in absolutely everything. At first it seems acceptable when she doesn't which to be bothered much by people at school or her father, but when she is somehow madly in love with Edward her monotonic representation remains static. There are times where she attempts to put some life into her character but this is rare. Pattison fares better and seems to get the nervousness of Edward fairly well, and the same applies to when he is intent on saving Bella. But his constant exchanges at love for Bella are not entirely convincing. That is not to say that there is no chemistry between both Stewart and Pattison for there is. It is just not in the form you would expect but more like both are forced to be in love.

From a technical standpoint the direction of the film works at times but the music and special effects do not. Director Catherine Hardwicke has a very unique way in her vision of the novel. Her direction yields a simple naturalness to it, losing the classic constructed feel of most films. It does come across as appealing to watch at times but it does become a bit much by the films end. You'll either enjoy the direction to wish for a more natural feel. Regardless of preference neither would have made the film any better. The music is also another love-hate item. The music selection sounds far too forced, as if trying to capture a certain mood for the film's atmosphere which doesn't work. There's a classical element to it, as if yearning to have a connection to Bram Stoker's Dracula and is nice distraction from the angst feel of the film. Lastly there are the special effects which are noticeably unrealistic. There is a blur given to any vampire character that moves fast, but it looks more like blurred fast forwarding and thus rather unnatural looking.

No vampire film is really all complete without some sexual connotations and violence: both are included in low form. Language is also kept low and nudity is a no-go area considering the target audience.

Twilight is a vampire story which is caught in a midst of smoke. With its average story, average acting, average music but interesting direction, it has neither the cruel seductiveness of Dracula nor the morbid fascination of Interview with the Vampire. With its superficial layering Twilight presumes to be more valuable to modern day teen life then both but, simply put, is not.

5/10

Screen date: 19 December 2008

Release date: 19 December 2008

Max Payne

A painful re-telling...

Working the cold case unit, Max Payne (Mark Wallberg) has undergone a major character change after he was unable to protect his wife and child from being killed in a robbery gone wrong. After Max's former partner, Alex Balder (Donal Logue), finds some evidence off a killed woman leading to the killer of Max's family, Max begins his journey of revenge, assisted by the unlikely source of the murdered woman's sister, Mona Sax (Mila Kunis).

Max Payne is a simple, yet vastly altered, re-telling of a complex story which is one of the first of many problems for the film. There is a basic premise to which holds the film together but the very scenes which tell the story are often disjointed and unrelated to one another. In one scene, Mona is at her home/ office/ hideout place in civilian clothing, only to end up in the very building Max is in so she could save his life. She then promptly leaves. Another being how Max is in the cold case unit, but in the three years since his wife's death he never ever bothered trying to discover what her job entailed: imagine how the rest of the poor sods feel knowing their cases were probably tossed away due to laziness. Things like this occur in the film, and it's very difficult to understand character motivation for most of what's going on. The film goes as far as having a couple of scenes which serve no purpose to the film: they do not expand the story or characters; they do not provide any action; they do not provide any titillation. Simply put, Max Payne feels abstract like it is a part of whole, and it might be safe to assume that a lot got cut out of the film to get a PG-13 rating... in fact a lot should have been cut out or the director has honestly chosen the wrong vocation.

This also results in characters being awkwardly out of place. For starters there are way too many characters for what is meant to be occurring in the film. Characters will appear for an important story advancement moment, say a line or two just to never be seen or heard of again. Even the character of Mona Sax feels vastly underplayed, and could have easily been cut from the film with virtually no bearing on the story whatsoever. The only character with some purpose is Max himself, but that is to be expected. Nevertheless, Kunis brings an interesting seductiveness to Mona, but is never the femme fatale she should be, and Wahlberg gets the lone wolf mood right while never ever really able to capture the grief which haunts Max or the insightful nature of the character either. The former is more difficult when it takes so long for the story to present the death of his wife and child in its entirety. In the end, both are adequate enough to make their characters seem interesting in some fashion. The other main roles are all short lived and definitely not fleshed out enough to have them have a real impact to the film.

Another aspect of the video game original which did not translate well was the action sequences. First off, there is too little action in the film, and it's not a well-rounded affair. There are moments, such as the SWAT shoot off and the finale sequence, especially the start of it which is breathtaking. Sadly there a lack of the staple bullet-time, and even inappropriately used when one man throws himself to his death. One scene with uses the technique is ruined: while Max tries to shoot a man who is firing at him, the director made the terrible mistake of making it appear as if the assailant was blind: it is evident that the bullets being fired land no where near Max.

There is no nudity, though a woman without a top on can be seen from the back. Sex is hinted at but never show or even performed by any characters. Language is kept to a minimal and violence is not gory and hardly bloody.

From bad editing to lack of character development to an action film with little action: one can only wonder how a video game which could so easily be translated to the cinema medium went so wrong. And while it is an adaptation, the film bares little resemblance to the source material's complexity, even nullifying the staple slow motion scenes which was popularized in the Matrix trilogy. Still it is possible that an uncut release can be seen on DVD, and could possibly fill in the many problems of the theatrical run. Nevertheless, Max Payne is not entirely devoid of entertainment, with the actors at least trying to portray their respective characters and some fun action sequences, of the little there was. The post-credit scene hints at a sequel, which should include a new director, and hopefully the sequel will make up for the mishaps of this.

5/10

Screen date: 28 October 2008
Release date: 25 October 2008

Love Story 2050

A prime example of when potential is not even used...

Love Story 2050 centres around two opposites falling in love. On the one hand there is Karan (Harmen Baweja) who is very energetic and lives life on the edge. And on the other hand, there is Sana (Priyanka Chopra) who is a self-assured, yet rule-orientated individual. After an unlikely accident, Karan's only hope for saving Sana rests in the use of a time machine.

The story is one of many problems this film has. It's difficult to tell whether it was the complexity of a sci-fi film that got to the script writers, or their own idiocy, but Love Story 2050 does not even attempt to tell a viable story, let alone a love story. For the most part, the futuristic setting of the film, its major draw, does not even come into play until the interval has subsided. The story borrows heavily from various Hollywood films, most notably Time Machine, Back to the Future and Terminator, and there is very little which is unique. It also moves as a fairly slow pace, and the silly attempts at humour always fall short, and does not help the film's pacing. If director Harry Baweja had only tried to make a more serious film, it would have been less frivolous but most importantly, a better film.

But regardless of whether the story is taking place in the present or future, it is entirely predictable and illogical at times. One such example being when Karan is trying to catch-up with Sana, who is in a bus, and Karan comes to a stage where he jumps up onto an above crossing bridge, only to jump off it a second later. What is so vastly comical about all of this is that he is trying desperately to get to the bus, but instead of merely running through the facility he was in, he decided to take a few seconds from running to do some climbing and jumping. The musical segments do not fare any better, and are fairly weak. From terrible dance movements to poor music, except for perhaps Chopra's concert number in the future, the music never helps to aid the film from feeling as if it is being dragged along to its conclusion, which itself is quite bad.

The acting is sadly low-key. While Copra does seem suited for her characters, she is still quite offbeat from the whole affair never bringing any convincing characteristics to her character. However, it is Baweja that truly disappoints. As the lead, his acting is not particularly good and neither was his line delivery. Perhaps this can actually be credited to the poor dialogue and even poorer characters. Where Sana and Zeisha comes across as strong-willed females, they inevitably fall for Karan to the point where their lives need his existence for them to even be able to talk. And Karan is such a pathetic excuse for a man that I was really hoping he'd be killed before the interval, but alas he was not, and his overly sensitive and exaggerated need for love finds its way throughout the entire film: basically, there was no characterization whatsoever. There is no need in discussing the other actors as they are all average at best. In fact, the represented characters are utterly annoying. The teddy robot Boo, was a badly implemented distraction from the film, and Sana's younger siblings, Rahul and Thea, were unnecessary to the overall plot, while Dr. Yatinder (Boman Irani) as far too silly to even be considered as a credible scientist.

The usual sex appeal of a commercial film is present, and remains thus so. Violence is minimal and arguable so terribly choreographed that you really could not call it violence. However the language department did contain a few blasphemous terms, and a surprising number of scatological terms, though it was in moderation.

If there is any positive to the film, it would be in the CG department. While special effects are never great by any means, Mumbai in the future is rendered quite beautifully, but more so during the night than during the day. But even the CG is not fully realized as it comes across as something out of a video game instead of a high-budget film production.

I will admit that Bollywood films are not exactly my cup of tea, but I have enjoyed, to some degree, all of which I have seen, especially loving the recent Sakar Raj. But Love Story 2050 is such a mismatch, that it's impossible to even understand how the film ended up so badly. The acting is not good, though sympathy must be given to both Chopra and Baweja because they didn't have a decent script to work with, and the production design was clearly not well thought through. Love Story 2050 has so much potential to be a worthy attempt at standing toe-to-toe with Hollywood, but doesn't even begin to scratch at this potential. Instead of the futuristic sci-fi flick which was supposed to hit cinemas, what has shown its place is a Bollywood film that will have even Indians embarrassed, and that is saying a lot.

5/10

Screen date: 04 July 2008
Release date: 04 July 2008