J21 Tube

Watch Raazi 2018 Full Hindi Movie Free Online

Director: Meghna Gulzar

Starring: Alia Bhatt, Vicky Kaushal, Jaideep Ahlawat, Amruta Khanvilkar

Genre: Action, Crime, Thriller

Released on: 11 May 2018

Writer: Harinder S. Sikka (based on the book ‘Calling Sehmat’ by), Meghna Gulzar (screenplay), Bhavani Iyer (screenplay), Meghna Gulzar (dialogue)

IMDB Rating: N/A/10 (N/A Votes)

Duration: 138 min

Synopsis: Raazi is a 2018 period-thriller film directed by Meghna Gulzar, starring Alia Bhatt and Vicky Kaushal in lead roles. The story revolves around an Indian spy married to a Pakistani man during the Indo-Pakistan War of 1971.
War, espionage and covert operations often inspire action-pa ..

This ‘recalibration’ extends to how she dresses, eve ..
Oh the talking, yes of course (laughs). I had to... because  ..

he actual person who lived this tossed around existe ..
book on which Alia Bhatt-starrer Raazi is based, is all set for a mega re-launch in the national capital. After the film crossed the Rs 100-crore mark in India, the book also witnessed a widespread interest.

Written by Harinder Sikka, Calling Sehmat will be released by Chief of Naval staff, Admiral Sunil Lanba, on June 14 this year.

The launch will be organised at the official residence of Navy Chief at the Rajaji Marg in New Delhi. Formal invitations are being distributed for a private gathering.

The book is based on the life of a Kashmiri girl, who decides to marry into a Pakistani Army family to source information ahead of the 1971 Indo-Pakistan War.

The attempts by the girl provide India with significant information about a planned attack. The book details a dangerous expedition and a personally overwhelming journey of a young and brave patriot.

Sehmat, the book claims, extracted information about Pakistan planning an attack on Indian Naval ships. Her information saved India an impending strike on INS Vikrant, the only aircraft carrier.

At a recently-held meeting, author Harinder Sikka had gifted the book to the Naval Chief at the headquarters.

The event is expected to witness a host of dignitaries from the Armed Forces.

The recent edition of Calling Sehmat is published by Penguin Books. The first edition of the book was released in 2008, but turned into a bestseller after the release of Raazi.

There is no confirmation yet if the event would also reveal photographs of real Sehmat Khan, the Indian spy Sikka mentions in his book, as was initially claimed by the author.
In 1999, I had gone to Kargil. I had retired from the Indian Navy as a lieutenant commander six years earlier, in 1993. I was then working with the Piramal group in a senior position.

I went to Kargil as I was contributing to The Pioneer newspaper as a freelance journalist.

During my interaction with officials of India's intelligence agencies, I asked them angrily, 'How did the enemy come and sit on our head?'

I was blaming them for the intelligence failure (that led to Kargil).

It is at that time that a young military officer stood up and said that every person was not a traitor.

I told him to name one person who was honest and that young army officer said, 'My mother was not a traitor.'


When I returned to New Delhi, his words haunted me. I started digging up that officer's background. I wanted to know what he had meant.

I had this illusion that I was very brave because I had the courage to return to the battle theatre even after hanging up my military boots.

As I delved into this young officer's life, I realised my bravery was nowhere close to a Kashmiri Muslim woman, the officer's mother.

As I dug into the story, I had tears in my eyes.

Hidayat (not his real name), a Kashmiri businessman, sent his only child to enemy territory (Pakistan) as a bride to get information from the enemy.

He had an established business with the Pakistanis. Pakistani generals imported liquor illegally from India then. Possibly, they still do.

With his contacts, Hidayat married off his daughter in a Pakistani general's home.

The man who she married was a captain in the Pakistan army.

As his last wish, Hidayat told his daughter to listen to and observe the Pakistani generals and whenever possible send the information back to India.

The code name given to her was 'Sehmat'.In the 1970s, when any father on the death bed said something to his children, it was considered an order, which the children rarely refused to follow.

This young married woman readily agreed to spy for India in Pakistan, an assignment for which she was not professionally trained.

When my manuscript was read by former Jammu and Kashmir chief minister Dr Farooq Abdullah, he asked me to change some names in the book.

He knew Sehmat's family.

Dr Abdullah told me there are thousands of Sehmats in Kashmir willing to do anything for Hindustan.

After the Kargil war ended, I traced Sehmat to Malerkotla, Punjab.

She was a quiet and saintly person.

She was not willing to talk (about her past), but I was adamant.

After great difficulty, I managed to make her speak.

I asked her why she was staying in Punjab when she had a palatial house in Kashmir.

She told me she was staying in Punjab because Abdul (played by Arif Zakaria in Raazi) had lived there.

Abdul was the Syeds' servant.

The Syeds were Sehmat's in-laws in Pakistan.

On further prodding, she told me Abdul had died.

How?

I crushed him under the truck, she said.

I saw a lot of pain in her eyes when she spoke about the truck incident and refused to say anything further.

    Review: Raazi is a rarity

When I left, I wondered what kind of bravery I had been displaying in my life.

Would I ever be able to send my only child to the battlefield?

And the answer is no.

She told Abdul before killing him, 'I am sorry Abdul, but I love my country more.'

And this line came from a Kashmiri Muslim woman.

We Indians consider Muslims, especially Kashmiri Muslims, as not patriotic. We use these words so harshly about them.

In my numerous visits to her home, she rarely encouraged me to sit for more than two minutes.

The maximum I sat with her was for five minutes.

I discovered how she taught the grandchildren of Pakistan's top generals in school.    After the book was finished, I left the manuscript with her.

She returned the manuscript without reading it and asked me, 'What did you want to say by writing a book on my life?'

I told her I wanted to make a film on her life and I wanted to tell the world, 'Kashmiris are not traitors.'

She told me, 'Make a film on Guru Nanak.'

This coming from a Kashmiri Muslim woman to a Sikh like me was very difficult to digest.

I had never followed my religious duties and after her statement, I researched Guru Nanak's life.

I discovered that Guru Nanak travelled 30,000 km across the globe in the company of Bhai Mardana, a Muslim peer.

Sehmat had far more knowledge on Sikhism than me.

When she came back to India from Pakistan, she was in depression.

A saintly person cured her of depression.

I made a film, Nanak Shah Fakir, by spending Rs 40 crore.

The film won three National Awards including the Nargis Dutt Award for Best Feature Film on National Integration.

I knew this film could not have been made by an ordinary person like me without her blessings.

My book Calling Sehmat took eight years to research. I began my research in 2000.

The book was launched in 2008 on the INS Vikrant by the then naval chief, Admiral Sureesh Mehta. What better tribute to Sehmat!

The first copy of the book was received by T K A Nair, then principal secretary and advisor to then prime minister Dr Manmohan Singh.

The book was checked for many facts and after that, the book was received by Dr Manmohan Singh, in person.

I went back to Sehmat and told her I wanted to make a film on her life as I had fulfilled her wish by making a movie on Nanak Shah Fakir.

She did not respond.

Her non-response was a signal to me, that it was okay for me to go ahead and the movie could be made.

Calling Sehmat, which will be released by Penguin Random House, will be an eyeopener and remove many misconceptions about our brothers and sisters in Kashmir.



Server 1 – Estream

Watch Full Movie

Server 2 – Vidto

Watch Full Movie

Watch Omerta 2017 Full Hindi Movie Free Online

Director: Hansal Mehta

Starring: Rajkummar Rao, Rajesh Tailang, Blake Allan, Keval Arora

Genre: Action, Biography, Crime

Released on: 04 May 2018

Writer: Mukul Dev (story), Hansal Mehta

IMDB Rating: 7.3/10 (260 Votes)

Duration: 96 min

Synopsis: A recounting of the story of infamous British-born terrorist Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh, who kidnapped and murdered Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl in 2002.
 Rajkummar Rao ('Newton') plays the cold-blooded British terrorist Omar Sheikh, famed for kidnappings, financing 9/11 and the murder of American journalist Daniel Pearl, in Hansal Mehta’s thriller.

Why do the best-crafted portraits of evil miscreants never get to the crux of what led them to become terrorists, murderers and serial killers? What one wants to know most is why British-born, well-educated Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh, who is currently serving a lifetime prison sentence in Pakistan, left the comfort of the middle class for the darkness of terrorism. Hansel Mehta’s biopic of the dangerous sociopath, Omerta, closed the Jio Mami Mumbai Film Festival with a bang. It's a gripping thriller about a brilliant career assassin, but leaves the audience no more enlightened about the protagonist’s motives than a TV newscast.

While the film may not reveal much about what goes on in a terrorist's mind, it is ably made and pushes all the right thriller buttons to keep the audience glued. In addition, Sheikh's connection to Osama Bin Laden and the 9/11 attacks, and his conviction for the murder of journalist Daniel Pearl a few months later, give the story a compelling hook for international audiences.

Michael Winterbottom’s 2007 A Mighty Heart, which centered on a memorable Angelina Jolie as Daniel Pearl’s widow, is probably Sheikh’s most well-known cinematic outing up to now, though he does appear as a character in Mehta’s own 2012 Shahid. Here, he is shown rising through native intelligence and sangfroid to kingpin status in terrorist organizations like the Kashmiri Harkat-ul-Ansar and al-Qaeda. This may give him more credit than is his due, as doubts have arisen about his real role in the attacks linked to his name.

Mehta’s regular star Rajkummar Rao plays the cool-headed, multilingual terrorist as a sinister boy-next-door. Bristling with chillingly amorality, Rao is unrecognizable as the same actor who portrayed the high-principled vote collector in Newton, India’s foreign-language film Oscar submission this year. The intro scenes fly by, briefly suggesting his privileged, preppy life in England beside a concerned but ineffectual father. He claims to have been radicalized on a trip to Bosnia during the war (not shown), when he was exposed to atrocities against his Muslim brothers.

Leaving England for his first test mission in India, he picks up three British backpackers in New Delhi and entices them back to his place for a chess game, adding an American woman for good measure. Once they’re inside, the tourists are dismayed to find themselves hostages with guns pointed at them and their fear, pitiful to watch, makes it a very effective scene.

As insidious and highly persuasive as Omar is, he’s not a very skillful kidnapper, and the police soon turn up to free the prisoners. He’s shot trying to escape. His first stint in jail, where he is tortured, doesn’t seem to faze him in the slightest; in fact, it brings out the mafia don in him — an icy, violent quality that makes others fear and respect him. He gets released in an exchange for the hostages on a skyjacked Air India flight and is soon back in action.

Aditya Warrior’s editing jumps around to follow his progress as he works his way up the ranks. Omar is tight with the Pakistan secret service and becomes an agent for them; later he’s seen recruiting young men to fight for Islam. He appears bearded and sporting gold-rimmed glasses In an Afghan training camp out of hell, where recruits show their fervor by jumping off mountains to their death as the survivors applaud. His hair-trigger temper is more prominent now, along with a streak of uncontrollable violence.

By 2000 he's a leader in Karachi and married to a trophy wife. The British link him to a money transfer to Mohamed Atta, the 9/11 hijacker. Then comes the kidnapping of Pearl, the Wall Street Journal reporter. Played by Timothy Ryan Hickernell as noble but naïve, he walks into a trap that stinks to high heaven. The film’s key scene is his murder, in which Omar appears as a blood-thirsty madman who wields the fatal sword himself. Like other major moments in the film, the tension is heightened by Ishaan Chhabra’s thrilling, portentous score.

The Italian word omerta, used mainly in connection with the mafia, refers to the attitude of ordinary people who look the other way and don’t betray the criminals. It’s a bit of a stretch to connect it to this story, except insofar as Omar appears to be part of a vast international terrorist network that protects its own. Ironically, though promised high-level military protection in Pakistan, he was tried and sentenced to death for Pearl’s murder, which was commuted to life imprisonment. But even from jail he managed to wreak havoc, making two hoax calls on a smuggled cellphone that almost brought India and Pakistan to war.

Production companies: Swiss Entertainment
Cast: Rajkummar Rao, Rajesh Tailang, Blake Allan, Keval Arora, Nisha Geoege, Asif Gillani, Timothy Ryan Hickernell, Ravi Khanna
Director-screenwriter: Hansal Mehta
Producers: Nahid Khan, Shailesh Singh
Executive producer: Jai Mehta, Shanaab Alam
Director of photography: Anuj Rakesh Dhawan
Production designers: Indranil Chowdhury, Payal Ghose
Editor: Aditya Warrior
Music: Ishaan Chhabra
Casting: Rachita Kapoor
Venue: Mumbai Film Festival (closing film)
World sales: Filmkaravan

Hansal Mehta’s latest feature dramatizes the life of Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh, a notorious real-life terrorist long behind bars — which hasn’t stopped him from being involved in various attacks, purportedly including 9/11. The compelling “Omertà,” whose title is an Italian term for a criminal code of honor that encompasses absolute non-cooperation with legal authorities, cobbles together speculation with what is known about the many-alias’d Saeed, a 43-year-old British national of Pakistani heritage who has been at the forefront of fundamentalist Islamic terror for nearly a quarter-century.

At the end of this slickly mounted film, there’s no lack of questions still dangling nor hoped-for insights that fail to arrive. Nonetheless, while you’re watching it, Mehta’s freely imagined biopic provides a fascinating Rorschach of a figure who is, unfortunately, truly a man for our times.

Scrambling chronology, Mehta and co-scenarist Mukul Dev lead off with an incident sure to grab Western viewers’ attention: In 1994, the young but already fervently committed Saeed utilizes his considerable skills as a multi-linguist and sociopathic actor to ingratiate himself with three British men and one American woman, all tourists in New Delhi. They find themselves held captive, their lives threatened if the Indian government fails to release 10 militants imprisoned in the fight for Kashmir independence. Perhaps because the hostages survive unharmed (though one perp and two policemen died in a shootout), this is one of the few crimes Saeed has actually confessed to.
The London-born terrorist — played with steely conviction by Hindi thesp Rajkummar Rao — is also glimpsed in a series of globe-trotting episodes detailing actions he hasn’t necessarily copped to in real life. (He’s been imprisoned in Pakistan for years, yet continues to be linked to various criminal plots, presumably given an excess of communicative liberty by Pakistani authorities.) The most notorious event in which Saeed was purportedly involved was the 2002 kidnapping and murder of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl, played here by Timothy Ryan Hickernell. Mehta and Dev portray a particular version of this much-debated incident that fully involves Saeed, yet absolves him of the worst speculated abuses.

The earliest flashbacks from the protagonist’s young-adult days show an apparent political fervency, yet offer little insight into how he got that way. Repetitive scenes involving his appalled bourgeoise father certainly provide no clue. Saeed is married off to a trophy wife by the Pakistan government for services rendered, but the relationship is drawn in sketchy, remote terms. We get it: He’s a cold fish. Nonetheless, “Omertà” doesn’t penetrate deep enough to provide a resonant portrait of sociopathy. Nor does it spell out the specifics of Saeed’s political or (particularly) religious convictions.

Yet the film is taut throughout, an expertly staged thriller about a baffling paradox of a real-world man. Ishaan Chhabra’s original score tries to thrust conventional genre suspense beats on a convoluted story that shrugs them off yet fascinates anyway. In all other tech/design departments, this is an Indian feature unusually attuned to Western tastes.

Toronto Film Review: 'Omertà'

Reviewed at Toronto Film Festival (Special Presentation), Sept. 12, 2017. Running time: 96 MIN.

Production: (India) A Swiss Entertainment and Karma Features production. (International sales: Filmkaravan, Cupertino, Calif.) Producers: Nahid Khan, Shailesh Singh. Executive producers: Jai Mehta, Shanaab Alam.

Crew: Director: Hansal Mehta. Screenplay: Mehta, Mukul Dev. Camera (color, HD): Anuj Rakesh Dhawan. Editor: Aditya Warrior. Music: Ishaan Chhabra.

With: Rajkummar Rao, Kewal Arora, Timothy Ryan Hickernell, Rupinder Nagra, Rajesh Tailang. (Hindi, English, Urdu dialogue.)
Omerta Story: A biographical drama on Omar Saeed Sheikh – a British-born terrorist of Pakistani origin, who was responsible for the kidnapping of foreign tourists in India, including the abduction and execution of American journalist Daniel Pearl.

Omerta Review: Filmmaker Hansal Mehta, who is known for making films with emotional depth like 'Shahid', 'City Lights' and 'Aligarh', has undoubtedly found an interesting subject that can make for a compelling story. Mehta keeps ‘Omerta’ realistic by including documentary-style footage, but the scope of the film is relegated to just that – watching bone-chilling crimes without much of an emotional connection. His latest is like a three-act play; each act elaborates upon one of Omar’s terrorist missions to accomplish his nefarious goals. The film is gripping, not because of the narrative, but because you are keen to know more about its protagonist.

Then there’s Rajkummar Rao, who nails the part as the dreaded terrorist Omar Sheikh. From switching his stiff British upper lipped enunciations to a desi accent, or wearing a nonchalant smile while being arrested – Rajkummar has given a nuanced performance catching every beat of Omar’s chilling demeanour. Although there is not much scope for other actors to shine beside him, Timothy Ryan Hickernell as Daniel Pearl matches Rajkummar’s intensity in a few scenes.

The one sequence that stands out in 'Omerta' is the cold-blooded execution of Daniel Pearl. For the rest of Omar’s actions, the fear and dread are conveyed through high-decibel sound effects. This film had the potential to shake you to your core with the thought that people like Omar exist in the world. Instead, Hansal Mehta focuses on just the ideological aspects of the character, choosing not to delve into what makes him tick. The director has not invested much screentime into how Omar plans his complex actions or what drove him to such abhorrence. So while Mehta gets the mood right, and Rajkummar works wonders with his limited material, 'Omerta' fails to stir you emotionally.
Omerta: (among the Mafia) A code of silence about criminal activity and a refusal to give evidence to the police.

Hansal Mehta’s Omerta is not about the Italian mafia, or any code of silence. Its name, perhaps, is a play on the name of its central character, British terrorist of Pakistani origin Omar Saeed Shaikh. He is not the hero, he can never be. One of the most dreaded terrorists whose name is inextricably linked to IC-814 hijacking and the murder of journalist Daniel Pearl, he is no hero. He remains, however, Omerta’s lone focus with every other shot capturing him. With the film, director Hansal Mehta attempts to peek inside the mind of a terrorist, a murderer, without humanising him, with Rajkummar Rao bravely playing a man who continues to be linked to multiple crimes against humanity.

Mehta follows his subject as he begins his career of crime. A scene right in the beginning establishes Omar’s cruel mind and a pitiless heart. With censors deeming the scene too grotesque for Indian audience, what we see is a black screen and urgent, helpless cries.

From there on, Omerta moves back and forth in time, giving us glimpses of Omar’s training in Pakistan and Afghanistan, his first meeting with an ISI officer, a top Al qaida leader, apart from his time in Tihar jail in India. The movie delves into some of his crimes and just touches upon others -- the failed kidnapping of tourists in Kashmir, his involvement in 9/11, the the Taj terror attack and journalist Daniel Pearl’s murder.

Mehta bravely reiterates the religious fanaticism that leads to such radicalism. He also places a Muslim cleric, an ISI officer and the Pakistani government deftly as the propagators of terror.

The biggest challenge while making a film on a negative character is to not get vacuumed into the criminal mind. The danger of justifying criminal acts while trying to make sense of them is always there. Omerta does not fall into the trap - mainly because Mehta and Rao conscious decision not to do so, but also because the film fails to go beyond the three major incidents in Omar’s life.
Who is Omar Saeed Sheikh, the terrorist Rajkummar Rao plays in Omerta?

That is also where the movie disappoints. It never shows why an educated man drops out of London School of Economics to take up the violent path of ‘Jihad’. We never get a portrait of Omar’s mind with the director focusing more on events rather than intentions and ideology.

With ample use of real, news footage from these incidents, Hansal gives a documentary feel to the film. At no point does the film try to dig deep into the terrorist’s psyche or his surroundings.

Perhaps, the fact that little is known about Omar Shaikh Saeed in the public space is the reason behind this approach.

There are, of course, a few mentions of how the system, police and even the public have certain religion-based perceptions. For example, when Omar tells a cop his name is Rohit Verma, the police officer stares at him suspiciously and says, “Mulla lag raha hai.” The cop even goes on to say, “Kyu, bura laga? Biwi Muslim hai kya?”

You can’t justify what Omar does, says Rajkummar Rao on Omerta

Omar’s handlers and trainers often remind him (and, the audience) that their ‘cause’ needs a well-educated man like him. One person even goes on to tell him, “Jihad ko tumhare jaise padhe likhe logo ki zarurat hai. Anpadh ganwar Jihadiyon ki koi izzat nahi karta. Lekin jab logo ko pata chalega ki tumhare jaisa foreign-educated insaan humare saath hai, tum hero ban jaoge.”

With crisp editing and a runtime of 97 minutes, the film never lets you lose attention and the gripping narrative style ensures you are on the edge throughout. Rao proves his mettle once again as he smoothly gets into his cold character who can switch accents and personalities with equal ease – and does it all for the sole purpose of serving the ‘holy war’. The actor makes us believe he is the terrorist who turns into a meek guide for tourists, drinks milk as they chug beer and aims a gun at them in just the next moment. The silences and close-ups that Omerta uses to showcase Omar’s cold character and flinty stares establish his chops as an actor.

As the film does not delve much into the particular subject’s personal life, it becomes more of a larger comment on communal hatred and the futility of religion when it is used to propagate violence and evil purposes.





Server 1 – Estream

Watch Full Movie

Server 2 – Vidto

Watch Full Movie

Watch Brij Mohan Amar Rahe 2018 Full Hindi Movie Free Online

Also Known As: Long Live Brij Mohan

Director: Nikhil Bhat

Starring: Nidhi Singh, Arjun Mathur, Manav Vij, Yogendra Tikku

Genre: Comedy, Crime, Drama

Released on: 03 Aug 2018

Writer: Nikhil Bhat (screenplay), Nikhil Bhat (story), Kuldeep Ruhil (dialogue), Gaurav Sharma (concept), Gaurav Sharma (story)

IMDB Rating: N/A/10 (N/A Votes)

Duration: 100 min

Synopsis: Brijmohan fakes his own death to escape his humdrum life. He gets the money and the girl until the inevitable hand of Karma gets him sentenced to death for his own murder.
Rating - 1/5

One department in which most bad movies display unrelenting laziness is how they depict cities. Spike Lee’s New York movies will make you feel the sweat of the streets, but a bad one will yell ‘Fuggetaboutit’ at your face. Guy Ritchie’s London movies will evoke the damp anger of the British capital, while the worst ones will hire an American to do a bad Cockney accent. Similarly, the new Netflix original film, Brij Mohan Amar Rahe, believes the essence of New Delhi is saying the word ‘bh*****d’ a million times, and then educating the viewer as to why the word is such a vital part of Delhi vocabulary.

It’s not often that we get to discuss a film’s poor depiction of New Delhi - usually, it’s Mumbai that must bear the burden of stereotypes. It must constantly remind everyone that it’s populated by people other than just bhais and mamus and taporis and Patel log. Very few movies get Delhi right, perhaps because very few people from Delhi are making those movies. Recently, only films such as Titli, Gurgaon (close enough), Vicky Donor, BA Pass and, the greatest of them all, Khosla Ka Ghosla have truly understood the wicked passion of this city.

And as a lifelong Delhiite, I can assure you that Brij Mohan Amar Rahe’s idea of the capital is just as misguided as the rest of the film. For example, no one says ‘paaji’ at the end of every sentence, and even if they did, they’d be extremely conscious of whom they were addressing as such. But Brij Mohan doesn’t know this, because despite operating a ‘bra shop’ in what appears to be Fatehpuri, he makes the rookie mistake of calling everyone, and I mean everyone - from bank employees to loan sharks to fellow underwear salesmen - ‘paaji’.The reason his path crosses with such a wide lineup of characters is because Brij Mohan is in over his head. His business isn’t going anywhere, his wife is obsessed with losing weight (and forgetting that she’s supposed to be doing a Sarojini accent that the actor probably learnt from one of those iDiva videos), he’s in debt, and he can’t really handle his very young girlfriend. So to escape his problems and his life, he changes his appearance, pretends he’s dead, and takes on the identity of another dead man.

But Brij Mohan soon learns that one can’t simply run away from one’s difficulties, and he’s caught in a web of his own lies.In fairness, Brij Mohan Amar Rahe aims for a tone that has stumped the best of them. It begins as a crime-comedy, turns into a satire and finishes as a farce. That’s a delicate high wire to tread, and Brij Mohan Amar Rahe tumbles to its demise basically five minutes into the film. Not every movie can achieve the lightning-in-a-bottle quality of Jaane Bhi Do Yaaron, perhaps the greatest of all satires about common Indian men being overwhelmed by their country and its people.

But beyond being a poorly written and very confusingly acted film - every performance, for some reason, is childishly loud, as if delivered by five-year-olds made to look like adults - Brij Mohan (for no fault of its own really) impacts the Netflix brand. So far, their Indian lineup has been rather impressive - Brahman Naman, Love Per Square Foot, Lust Stories and Sacred Games were all enjoyable in their own way. This one isn’t. Netflix’s Brij Mohan Amar Rahe is a con drama that doesn’t really work. Despite its credible actors, the movie fails to live up to the expectations of the trailer that looked promising.

The film’s main plot revolves around a man in his mid-thirties called Brij Mohan, who owns a lingerie shop. Brij (Arjun Mathur) is an unhappy man who cheats on his wife Sweety (played by digital star Nidhi Singh) with a 24-year-old called Simi, who likes shopping and sex. Brij dreams of leaving his annoying wife and settling down with Simi one day, but things go haywire as he attempts to fulfill this one wish. In order to attain that goal, he plans to do away with his own identity, and assume a fresh one, that of Amar Sethi. From here on, confusion and chaos ensue.

At only 1 hour and 40 minutes, Brij Mohan Amar Rahe is not a long film, but 20 minutes into the movie, it starts feeling like a drag. You wonder whether the scriptwriter wrote the entire film in the vein of an anecdote because the movie does give you that impression. There is this constant nagging feeling at the back of your head while you are watching the movie, that the entire build-up of this film will have no pay-off, and you are proven right.

Yes, the play on the the dual identities of the primary character in the movie title is smart, and Arjun Mathur plays his part convincingly, so does the rest of the cast. Nidhi Singh is perfect as the bothersome and loud Punjabi wife who only cares for money and losing weight. Yogendra Tikku as the corrupt Judge Sinha is entertaining and ‘real.’Brij Mohan Amar Rahe’s last 15 minutes is packed in neatly and you are curious about the end. The end should have been a surprise, but the impact is just not there. The film attempts to make a commentary on the vicious nexus of judiciary, politics and society, but it has nothing new to offer.

The main villain of this film is its screenplay that meddles with a number of themes and story arcs and leaves them hanging, tying them up only towards the end in the most haphazard fashion. After the watchable Love Per Square Foot and the delicious Lust Stories, director Nikhil Bhat’s Brij Mohan Amar Rahe is a disappointment. As the third original Netflix Indian film, the movie had raised some hopes and expectations in the hearts of film buffs, which it fails to live up to.In Brij Mohan Amar Rahe, the titular character, played by Arjun Mathur, is a total jerk. He is a small-time businessman who cheats on his wife (Nidhi Singh), fakes his own death, kills two people (accidentally), and is generally just an annoyingly incompetent person. He is still the most likeable character in a film teeming with people – from the wife to the cop to the judge – that are shamelessly amoral. The setting is lower middle class Delhi, and the women are sexually bold. This is great, on paper, for they subvert the traditions of Hindi mainstream cinema; no righteous heroism bordering-on-sexist business here, no demure wife, and this isn’t one of those glossed-over urban romances led by star-kids. Therefore, it’s doubly frustrating that Nikhil Bhat’s film – which had a straight-to-Netflix release last Friday – is hard to sit through.

Everything, from the abuses and the violence, to the songs and the sex, seem to be for effect. The fact that Brij Mohan runs a lingerie store in Lajpat Nagar should have a bearing on his character – at one point, someone taunts him as a “bra panty waala” – but is just used as a prop to up the sex-quotient of the film; other irrelevant things include Brij Mohan giving us the stats for the percentage of women in India who have sex fully naked. Brij Mohan… goes out of its way to come across as ‘quirky’ – which is most evident in its repeated, ironic usage of 80s-90s Bollywood songs in the soundtrack.


The result feels like a film that was made not because the director had an irresistible itch to tell the story but because crime capers based in North India, filled with sex and swear words, are supposed to be cool and saleable.
Brij Mohan Amar Rahe a film that reflects so many stark realities of the society we live in and the life we often choose for ourselves

    An unhealthy setup of unsecured loans which is like a dark pit of heightened gravitywherein once sucked in, there’s no way out…
    A man who is always looked upon as an ATM Machine whether he is a husband or a boyfriend.
    A wife who loves her husband only because he left behind an insurance policy of 25 lakhs (2.5 million).
    A girlfriend who is only after sex and money in the relationship apart from a promise of a foreign trip and is an expert in playing the emotional game on the man.
    Lawyers who are ready to suck blood (read money) at the slightest chance.
    A corrupt police force which itself abets crime when it suits their motives and conveniences.
    A judge and a legal system which not only turns a blind eye to the misgivings of the system but is also an active participant in it.
    A close friend who will backstab you if you approach them in times of adversity.
    A bunch of unrelated people who do not care about what’s right or wrong and truth but only to realize their selfish means.
    The allegorical and metaphorical relevance of death in today’s life.

And not to forget, the relevance of the title with the plot and storyline is simply put, well-thought, apt, catchy and relevant.

All in all, brilliant story telling reflecting today’s times, engaging screenplay to narrate the simultaneous scenes, brisk direction and fearless production. Again it’s Netflix to tell us how fearless and relevant cinema can be.

When will we have more and more fearless producers in India?

0

Server 1 – Estream

Watch Full Movie

Server 2 – Vidto

Watch Full Movie

Watch The Whistleblower 2010 Dubbed In Hindi Full Movie Free Online

Director: Larysa Kondracki

Starring: Rachel Weisz, Vanessa Redgrave, Monica Bellucci, David Strathairn

Genre: Action, Biography, Crime

Released on: 27 Oct 2011

Writer: Larysa Kondracki, Eilis Kirwan

IMDB Rating: 7.2/10 (28,156 Votes)

Duration: 112 min

Synopsis: Inspired by true events, Kathy (Rachel Weisz) is an American police officer who takes a job working as a peacekeeper in post-war Bosnia. Her expectations of helping to rebuild a devastated country are dashed when she uncovers a dangerous reality of corruption, cover-up and intrigue amid a world of private contractors and multinational diplomatic doubletalk.

Here is a film to fill you with rage. It is based on the true story of Kathryn Bolkovac, a police officer from Lincoln, Neb., who accepted an offer to join the U.N. peacekeeping mission in Bosnia. While there, she uncovered direct evidence that underage girls were being held captive and bought and sold in a profitable sex trafficking operation. When she presented her evidence to her superiors, it was ignored. When she persisted, she was fired.

There is more. The American private security firm, DynCorp International, whose operatives committed these crimes and tried to cover them up, is still employed by the U.S. government in Iraq and Afghanistan, and was used in Louisiana after Katrina. Although its activities were at the center of Bolkovac's report, she found that local police and U.N. peacekeepers themselves were also deeply involved.

Although "The Whistleblower" is a fictional film, these facts were supported by a British labor tribunal that investigated her claim against DynCorp, finding the corporation's defense "completely unbelievable." That high officials in the U.N. Human Rights Commission also were aware of the sex trafficking is unbelievable to me.

The movie, constructed as a relentless and frightening thriller, stars Rachel Weisz in one of her best performances, portraying Bolkovac as a quiet, intense woman who has heroism thrust upon her by the evidence of her own eyes. Investigating complaints of rape and forced prostitution, she visits private clubs where underage girls are exhibited and fondled, held captive, threatened with death and actually sold to individuals to take and do with what they desired.

These young women were lured to Bosnia under false pretenses. Their passports were taken so they could not escape across borders. Because of the curfews in effect in the area at the time, local citizens could not leave their homes at night, and so the customers at the clubs were, by definition, law-enforcement personnel not under curfew.

In her almost singlehanded investigation, Bolkovac is often seen in scary nighttime situations; walking down a street or entering her apartment seems risky. The movie is not above employing images of female vulnerability to manipulate us, and it succeeds. What makes it so effective is that Weisz doesn't play her character as any species of action heroine, but simply as a competent, dutiful cop who is naive enough to believe her job should be performed by the book. After she comes to know some of the victims personally, after they trust her, the job becomes more of a mission.

David Strathairn co-stars as Peter Ward, one of Bolkovac's few colleagues who seems trustworthy. Vanessa Redgrave plays Madeleine Rees, a real-life official of the Human Rights Commission, who offers moral support and also warnings that Bolkovac's life may be in danger. Monica Bellucci is Laura Levin, a bureaucrat who refuses to help repatriate young women, because, in cruel logic, they have no passports. And David Hewlett is Fred Murray, Bolkovac's superior officer, who is himself part of the cover-up.

The film's director and co-writer, Larysa Kondracki, infuses the film with an atmosphere of pervading male menace, which, after all, is based on facts and court findings. In wartime, the rape of civilians is often considered one of the spoils, and no doubt it is a morale-booster for troops who feel in danger. It is also a cruel blow against enemies — but these girls are not enemies but simply and pathetically victims.

The male world in which Bolkovac moves contains many men who regard her as a sex object, and see sexual aggression as an expression of their masculinity. In this boys' club, it is expected that members will go along, participate or turn a blind eye. There is unspecified but clearly sensed danger if they don't. On one hand, they can party and enjoy sex. On the other, they can lose their jobs, their salaries, their pensions and perhaps their lives.

For 20 years the news has reported from time to time of crimes alleged by employees of paid defense contractors. These cases rarely seem to result in change, and the stories continue. We can only guess what may be going unreported. "The Whistleblower" offers chilling evidence of why that seems to be so.

The Whistleblower is a 2010 film starring Rachel Weisz. I recently watched it for the first time. The drama is based on the experiences of Kathryn Bolkovac, a Nebraska cop who served as a peacekeeper in post-war Bosnia and exposed the U.N. for covering up a sex scandal.

Larysa Kondracki wrote and directed the fact-based film. Kathryn Bolkovac, the woman on whose real life experiences the film is based, sold the rights to her story to director Larysa Kondracki for $100, who then tried for 8 years to get it made. When Rachel Weisz finally signed on to do the film, it went ahead.

Rachel Weisz did a fantastic job in the grim drama. It was full of horrific images of sex slavery and abused women, which might be a trigger problem for some viewers.

The story was tense and dangerous, filled with betrayals and deceptions from those who should have been trying to stop the trafficking in women. Human trafficking is a billion dollar industry. Despite her courageous efforts to do something about it, Kathryn Bolkovac was unable to stop it. She finally took the story to the BBC in London, since everyone around her was on the take. The people she exposed went unpunished. They were sent home, nothing more.

Only two people helped her. Madeline Rees (Vanessa Redgrave) and Peter Ward (David Strathairn). Otherwise she wouldn’t have even been able to get the evidence she collected out of Bosnia-Herzegovina.

Human trafficking is still an important, on-going human rights problem. The film deserves watching for that reason alone. It stands on its merits as a terrific film with brilliant acting all around, especially from Rachel Weisz.

Kathy’s journey as she leaves Nebraska and enters into the new environment is well-paced. She slowly realizes the depth of the corruption around her. She becomes attached to one woman played by Roxana Condurache that she desperately wants to save. Bit by bit, she sees the conditions in which the women live, the kind of abuse they are subjected to. She learns who around her are slimy, greedy, predators – and they are everywhere.

She’s threatened and fired for stirring up trouble. She flees with the material she gave to the BBC. Then she sued for unfair dismissal, and won.

The real Kathy Bolkovac continues her activism fighting human trafficking. You can check her website, but it’s rather out of date about her activities. In 2015, she was nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize.

Not too far into The Whistleblower I was ready to chalk it up as another “inspired by a true story” feature wallowing in the misfortune of others as one person faces hardship in the face of many to set things right. It’s a familiar narrative that doesn’t make a film of this nature anything special and, for the most part, The Whistleblower is merely mediocre. But Rachel Weisz delivers a starring turn that gets better and better as the film wears on providing one reason for praise.

Making her feature film debut, The Whistleblower is directed and co-written by Larysa Kondracki and she has put something together that is not for the faint of heart. Set in 1999 it follows the true story of Kathy Bolkovac (Weisz) as she trades in her position as a Nebraska police officer for a job as a peacekeeper working for the United Nations in Sarajevo. Her decision was primarily money-based, but once she gets there she soon lands a position as the head of the U.N.’s Gender Office and stumbles onto a sex trafficking scandal involving members of the U.N., fellow peacekeepers, local police and just about every other authority in the region.

Kathy is forced to work through opposing factors such as the fact most of the guilty have diplomatic immunity and the girls that are being treated as “whores of war” are too afraid to speak out for reasons you will see in scenes that are disturbingly graphic. One scene in particular involving a lead pipe is so audibly disturbing, and goes on for so long, it’s quite hard to take.

This is a film primarily focusing on the ill-treatment of women and the growing rate of human trafficking. As a result it takes a singular focus on one character in particular, Raya (Roxana Condurache), a Ukrainian sex slave, whom Kathy has made it her personal mission to save.

As the stakes get raised the movie improves, primarily based on Weisz’s performance. Weisz is the only thing that keeps it going and in a scene late in the picture she really goes for it and lands a blow that elevates this film above its average origins, but she can’t deliver an overall saving grace.

The supporting cast includes small performances by Vanessa Redgrave, Monica Bellucci and David Strathairn. All three adding very little to the film. Redgrave and Strathairn’s performances are fairly typical with Redgrave playing the head of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) and Strathairn playing an Internal Affairs officer. Bellucci plays the ignorant head of the repatriation program serving as something of a quasi-villain but ultimately only servicing the story by adding a rather unnecessary wrinkle to a plot that wasn’t really needed.

None of this changes the fact Kondracki shows signs of being a top notch director with this serving as her feature debut. Her two lead characters are well established and she isn’t shy when it comes to the tough stuff. Had this film been able to figure out exactly what it wanted to be it could have been great, but at the very least we get an introduction to a director that could be entertaining us over the next several years and yet another solid performance to add to Weisz’s growing list

In the lineage of real-life David-and-Goliath movies in which intrepid seekers of the truth investigate malfeasance in high places, “The Whistleblower” deserves an honorable mention. This earnest film may not be as dramatically coherent or as gripping as “Serpico,” “All the President’s Men,” “Erin Brockovich” and “Silkwood,” to name four much-decorated Hollywood prototypes. But its revelations are, if anything, more devastating and far more immediate than the dirty deeds uncovered in those predecessors.

The directorial debut of the Canadian filmmaker Larysa Kondracki, this grueling exposé of human trafficking in postwar Bosnia teeters in an uneasy balance between quasi-documentary and fiction. Its most sickening moment shows the rape and torture of a rebellious young prostitute smuggled from Ukraine into a Bosnian backwoods brothel while other young “whores of war,” as one character dismisses human trafficking victims, are forced to watch.

But for all its high-mindedness, “The Whistleblower,” filmed largely in Romania, has a choppy, fumbling screenplay (by Ms. Kondracki and Eilis Kirwan) that lurches between shrill editorializing and vagueness while sorting through more characters than it can comfortably handle or even readily identify.

As Kathryn Bolkovac (Rachel Weisz), the movie’s slingshot-toting American heroine, marches into a political minefield, she seems strangely immune to danger until near the end of the film. “The Whistleblower” ultimately fizzles by withholding any cathartic sense that justice was done, or ever will be done, once Kathryn spills the beans to the British news media.

When the story begins, she is a police officer and a divorced mother living in Lincoln, Neb. Prevented from transferring to Atlanta to be nearer to her daughter, she impulsively accepts a lucrative job as a United Nations peacekeeping officer in Bosnia in 1999. The blunt, fearless Kathryn embraces her new job with a gusto that immediately raises eyebrows among her cynical co-workers, who look down at the Eastern Europeans they have been charged to help.

Continue reading the main story

Ms. Weisz’s feisty performance is the strongest element of “The Whistleblower.” She imbues Kathryn with the same stubborn-verging-on-fanatical zeal that Rose Byrne (whom Ms. Weisz physically resembles) brings to her character, Ellen Parsons, in the television series “Damages,” with which “The Whistleblower” shares a strain of paranoia.After demonstrating her mettle in prosecuting a case of domestic violence, Kathryn is offered a job in the United Nations Gender Affairs Office, working with the police to investigate rape, domestic abuse and sex trafficking. Her gumption earns her the admiration of Madeleine Rees (Vanessa Redgrave, in a cameo), the head of the United Nations Human Rights Commission, who remains an enigmatic, undeveloped character. The party-loving Kathryn also begins a casual affair with Jan (Nikolaj Lie Kaas), a fellow peacekeeping officer.

Kathryn comes face to face with the truth when she journeys to a bar in the countryside, where she discovers a nest of imprisoned young prostitutes who are so frightened that they refuse to talk to her. When she reports back to her smirking boss, Fred Murray (David Hewlett), and he mockingly asks her if she’s “going Columbo,” she realizes that he is part of a conspiracy of silence among her male co-workers. Even Laura Leviani (Monica Bellucci), the chilly head of the repatriation program, is of no help: she insists that bureaucratic rules leave her unable to rescue prostitutes whose passports have been confiscated by their kidnappers.

As Kathryn gathers evidence, including Abu Ghraib-like snapshots of the girls and their johns, a fuller picture begins to emerge of a lucrative, far-reaching operation involving the police and United Nations peacekeepers, many of them protected by diplomatic immunity. The more noise she makes to United Nations higher-ups, the more apparent it becomes that she is viewed as a troublemaking nuisance, and her job is terminated.The movie concentrates on Kathryn’s efforts to coax two terrified Ukrainian girls, Raya (Roxana Condurache) and her best friend, Irka (Rayisa Kondracki, the director’s sister), to identify their kidnappers. Kathryn recklessly promises Raya protection if she agrees to talk, with dire consequences. Near the end of “The Whistleblower,” a scene is awkwardly inserted in which Raya’s mother discovers that immediate family members sold her daughter into slavery.

Kathryn is so outraged by her discoveries that she has no room for panic. Her lack of caution suggests that only someone blindly immune to intimidation would rattle so many cages without fearing for her life. Some of the horrors in the book Ms. Bolkovac wrote about her experiences, including the fact that many of the trafficked girls were much younger than those shown in the movie, are softened.

Kathryn’s only ally is Peter Ward (David Strathairn, in ominously brooding, conspiratorial mode), an internal affairs specialist who, in the film’s most suspenseful scene, helps her smuggle evidence out of her office.

“The Whistleblower” tells a story so repellent that it is almost beyond belief. Its conclusion — that in the moral quagmire of war and its aftermath, human trafficking and corruption are collateral damage — is unutterably depressing.

“The Whistleblower” is rated R (Under 17 requires accompanying parent or adult guardian). It has a graphic rape, brutalization and strong language.

Server 1 – Estream

Watch Full Movie

Server 2 – Vidto

Watch Full Movie

Watch Ambushed 2013 Dubbed In Hindi Full Movie Free Online

Director: Giorgio Serafini

Starring: Dolph Lundgren, Vinnie Jones, Randy Couture, Gianni Capaldi

Genre: Action, Crime, Drama

Released on: 16 Oct 2013

Writer: Agustin

IMDB Rating: 3.9/10 (1,306 Votes)

Duration: 96 min

Synopsis: In the frenetic underbelly of Los Angeles, Agent Maxwell closes in on an international cocaine smuggling operation run by criminal mastermind Vincent Camastra. When Agent Beverly Royce goes undercover with the drug dealers and finds herself deeper than she can handle – the case becomes personal for Maxwell who has to combat ruthless killers and dirty cops in an all-out action filled finale to bring the criminals to justice.

A veteran DEA agent clashes with a crooked cop while pursuing a ruthless cocaine smuggler whose power is slipping in this action thriller starring Dolph Lundgren, Vinnie Jones, and Randy Couture. When ambitious mid-level drug dealers Eddie (Gianni Capaldi) and Frank (Daniel Bonjour) make a risky power grab, a violent underworld war threatens to erupt in the streets of L.A. Before long, DEA Agent Maxwell (Lundgren) is preparing to make his move against international cocaine kingpin Vincent Camastra (Jones), but as undercover Agent Beverly Royce (Carly Pope) dives ever deeper into the city's lucrative drug trade, corrupt cop Jack Reiley (Couture) starts to realize that his days of double-dealing are about to come to an end, and prepares to fight back with everything he's got.

Ambushed (in some regions called ‘Hard Rush’) is not a movie I was looking forward to.  It seemed to have come from the same people responsible for a recent Dolph/Vinnie Jones movie, ‘Blood Of Redemption’.  Now I rarely turn movies off, but I simply couldn’t suffer that movie for longer than 20 minutes or so.  This looked to be more of the same, but this time I at least made it ’till the end.  Does that mean it’s a better movie?  Probably, but could also mean I had more endurance in me this time around, for whatever reason.  There are some hot broads in this movie, that helped.  It’s also one of Dolph Lundgren’s best acting performances – for what little he appears in the movie.  Same for Randy Couture.

The plot is a mess.  Some guys want to make money from the drugs business, Randy Couture, bent cop, wants to make money from them.  Dolph Lundren, FBI, wants to gather evidence to bring in Couture, for doing that.  If that sounds halfway decent, trust me, it truly isn’t.  That’s a premise, the movie itself fails to follow up on it.  Instead, it insists on awful yet pointless ‘montages’ that look like something from Windows Movie Maker. There are giant holes in this ‘script’ where the plot was supposed to be, all of these stories go nowhere.  I could be wrong here, but I have two inclinations on why this is.  First, it’s a DTV movie, and we shouldn’t expect ‘The Departed’.  But second, and less forgivable, the ‘story’ seems to have been tailored towards who could make an extended cameo at that given time of shooting.  For example it seems like Vinnie Jones is the villain in the first half and Couture is the villain in the second half, almost like each took turns based on scheduling, at the expense of the story.

This kind of thing, aside ruining any narrative sense, is borderline false advertisement and a growing plague on the DTV industry.  Hire two or three C-Listers, who we might be marginally interested in, have them shoot for a few days then put them on the cover.  Then have have shit actors who no-one cares about eat up the actual screen time.  Which leads me to the main problem of this movie.  The two protagonists are really, really annoying.  DTV lifers, most people couldn’t be blamed for turning the movie off because of these two.  The movie could’ve survived the cheap and pointless montages and broken story problems, but it cant survive these two fucksticks.  Let me reiterate too, they’re the protagonists.  It fails, and it’s because of them.  They’re exceptionally shit actors and not 1/10th as charismatic as they believe themselves to be.  I don’t even want to waste any time talking about them any further, because there is one positive to finally sign off on.  Dolph, though appearing scarcely, gives a good performance, a side I haven’t seen of him before, actually.  Maybe it could’ve been a great turn, if it was a full role.  For that, and a ‘serviceable’ turn from Couture and Jones, also heavily MIA, it gets a 5/10 instead of a 3/10.

Once again, I feel conned.  Dolph, Randy and Vinnie Jones are on the cover.  Play the movie though, and get ready for two truly cringe worthy actors from Z-List hell trying too hard, and then some.

This should serve as a note to all up-and-coming young actors: If you find yourself faced with the choice of actually starving to death or earning a paycheck by landing a role in a movie such as 'Ambushed,' the choice is easy: you starve. Otherwise the shame that follows you from that moment on will truly be a fate worse than death.

Written and produced by Augustin (that's right, he goes by the same naming convention as, say, Madonna or Cher) and starring some recognizable faces such as 'Expendables' teammates, Dolph Lundgren and Randy Couture, this wannabe drugs-to-riches story not only comes across as lame, infantile and utterly amateurish, it also takes the cake as the most repugnant, puerile and ridiculously unwatchable movie of 2013.

Despite what most flicks of this ilk would have you think, layers of lazy nihilistic misanthropy, topped-off with a healthy helping of misogyny (there's an actual moment when a female undercover DEA agent engages in a slow-motion pillow fight with a drug dealer's girlfriend), and some half-baked ideas about capitalism and the inefficacy of the war on drugs don't make for much of a movie, especially when they have nothing pertinent or intelligent to say about nihilism, misanthropy, or, heaven forbid, capitalism and the drug war. And things are only made worse when all of the abovementioned defects find there way into a screenplay with little interest in things like pacing, character development or dialogue that doesn't sound like a pre-teen who – having just smoked his first cigarette after watching 'Scarface' for the eleventh time this month – is pretty sure he's got this whole complicated, bureaucratic, decades-long battle with drugs and the inherent questions of the legality/illegality of narcotic substances all figured out. What it all boils down to, however, is a string of surface-level deep pontifications on the drug trade smattered across 97 minutes of tedious action-movie larking about that manages to forget most of its cast and subplots about halfway through the movie. 

'Ambushed' opens up on Frank (Daniel Bonjour), who is at the tail end of his journey from being a strip club owner to wannabe drug kingpin who's looking to retire and settle down with his conservative girlfriend Ashley after finally making his big score. Augustin is clearly attempting to juxtapose the two facets of Frank's life – namely, his suburbananite-in-the-making façade that he presents to his girlfriend and her WASP-y family, and the down-and-dirty drug dealer who'll kill a colleague just to get ahead – but he only winds up painting two slightly different pictures of the same incompetent and detestable moron. From beginning to end, Frank is supposed to be the audience's surrogate, taking them on a wild ride through the criminal underbelly via his completely unnecessary voiceovers that make him less of a tour guide and more an insufferable dolt, espousing insipid didacticisms intended to be poignant, meaningful and edgy.

The rest of 'Ambushed' concerns an anemic plot revolving around a dirty cop played by Randy Couture, trying to make one last cash-grab before retirement, and Dolph Lundgren, the DEA agent trying to bring everyone down. Meanwhile, Frank and his loose cannon (read: dimwitted, yet volatile) partner Eddie (Gianni Capaldi) wind up in a sure-to-end-badly business deal with Vinnie Jones' kingpin, Vincent Camastra that last all of five minutes and begs anyone watching to actually care. Now, it's possible there are people who think characters like Frank and Eddie are interesting to watch, and they maybe even identify with them in some way or another, but these characters are not only completely loathsome, they're dull and dumb as hell. Why anyone would ever develop a film around characters like them is the only semi-worthwhile question that comes from watching this movie.

Amateurish movies are sometimes entertaining based on the pure ineptitude that's on display, and 'Ambushed' feels like it should at least be that kind of movie. Instead, it winds up being the kind of flick that was made for the sake of hammering out semi-serviceable manufactured goods and somehow spinning them into cash for the producers. This is the epitome of a soulless manufactured product that is completely and utterly devoid of artistry, creativity, purpose, and intelligence. When a film can't even be enjoyed for how fruitless and awful it is, then it is truly a failure in every respect. 

If nothing else, 'Ambushed' should be commended for nearly having as sloppy and banal an image as it does a storyline. To be fair, there are some moments in the film where the picture actually approaches something along the lines of a cinematic image, but most of the time the 1080p AVC/MPEG-4 encoded transfer just comes across looking shallow, washed-out, or otherwise far too sterile.

For the most part, the image here vacillates between a disastrous camcorder-y presentation – complete with bargain-basement stock footage of Los Angeles – and some semi-competent digital cinematography that actually makes good use out of some of the locations in which the movie was shot. As the image is actually so uneven, there are moments when the contrast and use of filters is so high it looks B-roll from a training class on what not to do when making a film, while other times, such as Frank's cliffside heart-to-heart with Eddie, the image actually produces some clear, distinct facial features and a convincingly warm golden hue to denote time of day and location. And while there is a great disparity between the good and the bad portions of the film, when it actually does look good, it is generally on par with that particular moment.

Otherwise, the image contains muted fine detail and even more muted or washed-out colors that give the film an uninteresting monochromatic look and diminish any appeal it might have otherwise had. At best, this is an uneven image that has flashes of brilliance in a package that is otherwise a letdown.

As is their MO, Starz/Anchor Bay have chosen to slap a Dolby TrueHD 5.1 mix onto 'Ambushed' and the result is a fairly nice, but standard action-movie sound that struggles at times with balance between dialogue and sound effects or score, but manages to deliver them individually on a somewhat competent-sounding level.

For the most part, dialogue is clear, though it can be problematically low at times (which could be a blessing in disguise) and occasionally becomes muddled when the film's soundtrack or sound effects begin to take over. Thankfully, during the climactic sequence, there's little in the way of dialogue, so the film can focus primarily on the rain effects and making the brutal punches and kicks of Randy Couture and Dolph Lundgren sound as thunderous as they look. In that regard, there is not only a nice sense of directionality on the mix, but also the ability to generate an immersive environment (á la the rain) that extends through multiple channels in a dynamic fashion.

If only the mix could have managed this level of intensity on a more consistent level, then it would have been the best part of an incredibly disappointing movie. As it stands, this uneven and spotty mix is just another slip-up in a movie that's loaded with them. 

Server 1 – Estream

Watch Full Movie

Server 2 – Vidto

Watch Full Movie

Watch Inside Man 2006 Dubbed In Hindi Full Movie Free Online

Director: Spike Lee

Starring: Denzel Washington, Clive Owen, Jodie Foster, Christopher Plummer

Genre: Crime, Drama, Mystery

Released on: 24 Mar 2006

Writer: Russell Gewirtz

IMDB Rating: 7.6/10 (301,118 Votes)

Duration: 129 min

Synopsis: From a cell, a man tells us he has planned the perfect bank robbery; he invites us to watch. An efficient gang enters a Manhattan bank, locks the doors, and takes hostages. They work deliberately, without haste. Detective Frazier is assigned to negotiate, but half his mind is occupied with the corruption charges he is facing. The bank’s president has something to protect in a safe deposit box, so he brings in Madeleine White, a high-power broker with a hidden agenda. With an army of police surrounding the bank, the thief, the cop, and the plutocrat’s fixer enter high-stakes negotiations. Why are the robbers asking for a plane, if they are so competent and they know they won’t get one? Why aren’t they in more of a hurry? If the job’s perfect, why is the thieves’ leader in a cell?

At New York City's Manhattan Trust Bank, a Wall Street institution established in 1948, Dalton Russell and three accomplices, referring to one another as Steve, Stevie and Steve-O, enter the building wearing white painters' coveralls. Using an infrared device, they surreptitiously disable the closed circuit television, then don masks and sunglasses. After Russell declares he is robbing the bank, the gang members draw automatic weapons and order the bank's fifty occupants to the floor, then throw a smoke bomb near the entrance, alerting beat patrolman Sergeant Collins. At a police station, Detective Keith Frazier is on the phone with his girl friend Sylvia, talking about her drug-addicted brother who lives with them, and explaining they must delay marriage for financial reasons. Under suspicion because of money missing from a drug arrest, Frazier, who is innocent, is surprised when his superior, Captain Coughlin, puts him in charge of the hostage crisis. Meanwhile, inside the bank, Russell orders the hostages to hand over their cellphones. Upon finding that one bank employee, Peter Hammond, has withheld his cellphone, Russell beats him behind the wall of one of the offices. The hostages are then ordered to strip to their underwear and don hooded dark blue coveralls and masks. Humiliated, grandmotherly Miriam Douglas refuses to undress, but Stevie, a female, takes her into another room and forces her. Outside the bank, the Emergency Service Unit, headed by Captain John Darius, blocks off adjacent streets, stations snipers and surveillance cameras in key locations and diverts the bank's phone lines to the Mobil Command Center van. Upon learning about the situation, the bank's founder, elderly Arthur Case, calls Madeleine White, a discreet, high-priced power broker and corporate fixer, asking for her assistance in retrieving heirlooms in his safe-deposit box in the bank. When White diplomatically suggests Case is not being honest, he assures her that the box's secret is dangerous only to him if disclosed, and she agrees to help him without further questioning. Meanwhile, Russell and his group separate the hostages into different rooms. With well-planned, coordinated precision, Russell's people take turns harassing the hostages while secretly digging a small hole in a basement storage room. Intermittently, various hostages are moved from room and to room, allowing some of the robbers to spend brief periods pretending to be captives. Russell sends one hostage, a Sikh, Vikram Walia, out of the bank with his hands tied, still wearing the dark blue coveralls, a mask and sunglasses. Russell's demands for two buses and a jet plane are written on a safe-deposit box attached with rope around Vikram's neck, but Frazier, his partner, Detective Bill Mitchell, and Darius agree that they cannot accede. After another demand is made for food, Mobil Command Officer Berk, a surveillance expert, suggests they order pizzas and insert transmitters into the containers. After the pizzas are delivered with the transmitters in place, the police receivers pick up a man speaking in a language they cannot identify. Upon learning from one of the surveillance team that the language is Albanian, Frazier recruits the man's Albanian immigrant ex-wife Ilina to translate. After first insisting that her many parking tickets be excused, Ilina identifies the transmission as a tape of a speech delivered by a now-deceased Albanian president. Realizing that they have been hoodwinked, Frazier phones Russell, who asks him to solve an irrelevant riddle. After hasty discussion with his colleagues, Frazier answers the riddle and Russell orders that the next meal be sandwiches. One of the hostages, Brian Robinson, an eight-year-old Brooklyn boy who was with his father when the gang took control, is separated from the others, but remains naïvely unafraid as he concentrates on a portable electronic game. When Russell gently asks to see it, he is shocked by its graphic violence and says that he will talk to his father about it. Later, inside safe-deposit box number 392, Russell finds several bags of diamonds, a large diamond ring and a document bearing a Nazi seal. Meanwhile, after calling in past favors, White has had the mayor introduce her to Frazier and insist that she be given carte blanche . When Frazier objects, White smoothly suggests that she could have him fired over the missing money issue or assure his promotion, forcing Frazier to allow her permission to enter the bank. Inside, she offers the masked Russell a light sentence and $2,000,000 in exchange for the contents of Case's safe-deposit box. Refusing, he shows her the Nazi document and tells her that an American Nazi collaborator was able to start a bank by taking advantage of Holocaust victims. When Russell declines to give her the document, White promises him a large remuneration for it, if he manages to escape. He assures her he will leave by the front door. Afterward, White tells the skeptical Frazier that she does not believe Russell is a murderer. Frazier guesses that the robbers have been stalling for time and, calling their bluff, phones that their plane is ready, but first insists on proof that the hostages are alive. Russell allows him to enter the bank and, while escorting Frazier through rooms containing the captives, offers him a stick of gum. During their conversation, Frazier mentions that he cannot afford to marry his girl friend because of the cost of a ring and Russell unexpectedly says that, if he is in love, money is unimportant. When Frazier threatens to have the ESU storm the building and arrest him, Russell says he will walk out the door when he is ready. Impulsively, Frazier tackles Russell, but is interrupted at gunpoint by Steve-O. Because Russell did not retaliate, Frazier later tells Mitchell that Russell is not violent, but then, through a second floor window, they see a hostage shot through the head. Frazier demands that Russell say what it is he really wants, but Russell answers that the detective is "too smart to be a cop." Displeased by Frazier's performance, Coughlin now places Darius in charge and, relieved of responsibility, Frazier chats with Collins, whose casual comment prompts him to realize that Russell has been listening in to their plans via a recording device contained within the box attached to Vikram when he was released. As the ESU prepares to break into the building, Russell's people briskly herd the hostages toward the front door. After bursting it open with explosives, they blend into the group, although Russell is not among them. Outside, the police roughly corral and handcuff the hostages, and then bus them to the station, where they are interrogated. Inside the bank, the ESU finds no one, living or dead, no booby-traps and no evidence of a robbery. Instead, they find the white coveralls with fake blood and toy guns, and conclude that the perpetrators have taken refuge among the hostages and that the murder was faked. After the interrogations, when Frazier reports that the hostages were unable to identify their captives, Coughlin says to "bury" the case, because, having neither evidence of a robbery nor major injuries, no one is pressuring him to solve it. Dissatisfied, Frazier and Mitchell cannot stop thinking about the case and eventually notice a discrepancy in the bank's safe-deposit box inventories, which list boxes numbered 391 and 393, but not 392. Without drawing attention to her actions, White restores Frazier's reputation by arranging for the missing drug money to be found and sets in motion his promotion. Regarding the mystery of the deposit box, she suggests to Frazier that many Fortune 500 executives have profited from chaotic times. However, when she informs Case that he will have to pay blackmailers to regain the document containing his secret, she also confronts him about his alliance with the Nazis. He confides that he betrayed a close friend and has since tried to compensate for that and other sins through philanthropic deeds. Instead of being indignant, White jokes that she is currently funding a co-op for the nephew of Osama bin Laden. About a week later, Russell, in disguise, emerges from his hiding place, a small cell behind a wall in the bank storage room where the robbers had been digging. Crossing paths with Frazier and Mitchell in the lobby, he bumps into Frazier, who does not recognize him, and they make brief apologies. Outside, when Russell reunites with his four accomplices, he has most of box 392's contents, but not the ring, and tells his partners that the ring is "in good hands." Later, armed with a search warrant, Frazier and Mitchell discover box 392 contains the ring, gum wrappers and a note, reading: "Follow the ring." Presuming a connection between Case and the box, they inform Case they will look into the ring's history. Frazier tells White and the mayor that the ring was connected to a wealthy Jew who died in a concentration camp and indicates that he is communicating with the War Crimes Unit. Approvingly, White offers to get Frazier coverage on the front page of the New York Times . Later, when he is with Sylvia, Frazier finds a large diamond in his pocket and smiles as he realizes that Russell slipped it in there, as he bumped into him walking out the bank's door

Server 1 – Estream

Watch Full Movie

Server 2 – Vidto

Watch Full Movie

Watch The Holcroft Covenant 1985 Dubbed In Hindi Full Movie Free Online

Director: John Frankenheimer

Starring: Michael Caine, Anthony Andrews, Victoria Tennant, Lilli Palmer

Genre: Action, Crime, Mystery

Released on: 18 Oct 1985

Writer: Robert Ludlum (novel), George Axelrod (screenplay), Edward Anhalt (screenplay), John Hopkins (screenplay)

IMDB Rating: 5.7/10 (2,372 Votes)

Duration: 112 min

Synopsis: Noel Holcroft is a foreign-born American citizen working in New York City as an architect. In Geneva he meets with a respected Swiss banker who tells him he has been designated to be executor of a huge 4 1/2 billion dollar trust fund designed to make reparations for the war crimes of the Nazis. Holcroft’s father, who committed suicide in 1945, was a key Hitler financial advisor who became conscience-stricken about German war atrocities, turned against the Fuehrer, and covertly diverted Nazi funds to a secret Swiss account. Under the terms of the covenant Holcroft must locate the sons of his father’s two associates so they can jointly activate their fathers’ account. They battle the sinister forces seem to be trying to prevent them from signing the document as it is believed that it will be used to establish a Fourth Reich.

Veteran director John Frankenheimer was approached by the producing team of Ely and Edie Landau to direct an adaptation of Robert Ludlum’s best-seller The Holcroft Covenant. The project had been set up with James Caan expected to play the lead role. However, there were disagreements over the script and after a re-write process, Caan did not attend the first day of scheduled shooting and the film had to commence without a lead actor in place. Soon, Michael Caine signed to the role, necessitating yet more re-writing. Although Ludlum liked the adaptation of his book, a troublesome distribution deal between Universal in America and EMI in England ensured that the film was barely released in the United States, thereafter going straight to video. The film marked the first collaboration between Frankenheimer and scriptwriter George Axelrod since the classic The Manchurian Candidate in 1962. As was the case with much of Frankenheimer’s work after that brilliant film, it cast a shadow over this project and drew unfavorable critical comparisons. The Holcroft Covenant was a critical and box office flop and like much of Frankenheimer’s work in the period is considered thus only evidence of his coarsened technique, the director admitting that some of his choices in the late 1970s and early 1980s were inspired by too much drink. Sadly thus, the opportunity for another stylish, hit thriller was squandered.

In Berlin in 1945 with the Nazis at the verge of defeat, three Nazi officers make a secret pact. Forty years later, their surviving offspring are to be the committee in charge of a vast fortune to spend on supposedly benevolent reparations. Michael Caine is an architect in America who is contacted by a Swiss accountant (Michael Lonsdale) to come to Europe for important news. Caine learns of his power over the money, some 4 ½ billion dollars and is somewhat befuddled over what to do. Because of the danger and power involved in such a large sum of money, assassins and spies are already on his trail when he is taken by British agents and introduced to a surviving descendent (Victoria Tennant). He goes with Tennant and the two of them soon meet up with Tennant’s brother (Anthony Andrews) who must co-sign the Covenant with Caine in order for it to take effect. In a world where nothing is what it seems, Caine must prevent a kidnapping attempt on Tennant and in the process kills a man for the first time. Caine hears of the involvement of his mother (Lilli Palmer) and indeed some machination seems directed against her. As Caine and Tennant contact the last surviving descendent, a well-known orchestra conductor (Mario Adorf), Andrews apparently has plans of his own and goes after the leader of a spy institute. Caine soon fears for his own fate as the situation becomes ever more murky and convoluted.

The Holcroft Covenant is a stylish but mediocre thriller. Like many of Frankenheimer’s lesser films it has the proverbial style to burn but here is laden with such an exposition heavy script that the film never catches fire except as an efficient succession of plot twists. The many hands in the script unbalance it so much that the film’s comedic stresses are unsure of themselves and the film never seems certain if it is played for thrills or black comedy. This is usually Frankenheimer’s forte but he stumbles here. Still, what remains intriguing here is the offbeat effort to balance comedy and thriller, to create a fast-paced, location-hopping piece of glossy entertainment. It is in all whole-heartedness an attempt at genre sophistication and it is a shame that it fails so badly. Although the film is best thought of as an attempted spoof of the spy genre, it retains enough apparent solemnity of purpose that it cannot let its sense of comedy wholly take over and is unbalanced and uncertain of what it wants to be. Taking itself too solemnly in the end the film can only create a bathetic sense of non-involvement. Style takes over without much of any substance to back it up and the result is a wholly superficial, glossy entertainment. However, the weight of its ambition is sometimes clear and sadder for its evident faltering. It remains thus a film of moments of style which never gel into a truly memorable overall work: a patchy, spoofy thriller.

The film is ostensibly about a naïve man, pure at heart but surrounded by selfish, greedy forces – a fable about money and the soul of man. Like in so many of John Frankenheimer’s movies, a man has his perspective on life challenged by situations which soon threaten to overwhelm him. This aspect makes The Holcroft Covenant finally a film about one man’s efforts to regain control of his life after fate has re-defined it for him considerably. The legacy of the father, of Patriarchal fortune and responsibility saturates this film, hence with Caine and Andrews played off each other as rival inheritors to the past, Tennant between them as an oddly sexual force, although her eroticism is never brought out by the filmmakers and they lose out on that potentially rich field. With such an exposition-heavy and convoluted plot, there is a stress on the appearance of things, the underlying suggestion that nothing in the world is what it seems. In the Berlin sequence, however, a subtext of perversion surfaces through into the film, the effectiveness of the visual style revealing both the deficiency of the script and the inability to tie otherwise intriguing sequences together thematically to explore the important undercurrents of the world of duplicitous selfishness and perversion hinted at throughout in the stress on deceptive appearance. Such is never fully explored – as would be more effectively done in Frankenheimer’s subsequent 52 Pick Up.

Server 1 – Estream

Watch Full Movie

Server 2 – Vidto

Watch Full Movie