2. Even though this was a commercial failure, you were impressed by the technical excellence of the movie. Nobody could have made a better action movie than ROHIT SHETTY. He had some good scenes, but the story was boring. Why wasnt he forced to act in a Telugu movie with a better plot? Why wasnt he given a comedy to play? You didn't say anything about the good effort he put into the production. You just praised the acting and cinematography. I still do believe that you are a biased reviewer. I hope that this review is a one-off. But i am really worried about the next one. Why dont you make fun of the director and his storytelling abilities in a better way than what you did here.
I have a feeling that you are being influenced by the statement you have made in the article. I am sure that the technical and the acting were the best things in this movie. I am glad you included the technical stuff, since you did not list it in your BRIEF MENTION of the movie. I am sure you are aware of how much crap that you have tried to portray the movie and SRK as. You have called this movie a Hamlet; as if Sri SRK was trying to play Hamlet. But at no point in the movie do you give more importance to the plot than the technical aspects. If you had, it would have made for a far better review. I also doubt if your script is as popular as you make it sound. In all fairness, you did give most of your words to the technical aspects of the movie. Otherwise you would have come up with some other rubbish like how the songs were over the top. You didnt even have the guts to criticize SRKs acting as you did in the trailer. 3d9ccd7d82