no gossip, no scandals.
movie reviews ... and more
movie reviews ... and more
Rakht Charitra I - Notepad
Rakht Charitra I
quick review:
Never have the last 15 minutes of a film made me revise the rating of a film from bad to better (actually worse to bad, in this case). That might just be because the only story that happens, is in that span. The first 120 minutes is someone killing the other in a "brutality" competition. Yeah, only an optimist like me can find a positive in that one.
This page has additional observations, other than the ones noted in the main review.
Plot Summary
The law, order, administration, politics of a little town in Andhra Pradesh is non-existent. Or if you really want to call it that, is in the hands of a handful goons. Fearless, ruthless and unbounded by ethics, morals, humanity let alone law.
What Worked
- The symbolism in the raindrops in Gandhiji's statue's eyes.
What did not
Note: This section simply lists the things that I did not like in this movie. This is not the overall impression about this movie. Please read the full review here
- The first shot. The one with a 45 degree angle, close-up of a statue.
- Each character has a deep, gruffy voice. While that works for some of the characters, the rest sound too digital.
- The abrupt cuts from one scene to another. Totally mismatched at times, vis-à-vis color, background music, etc. no flow whatsoever.
Rakht Charitra I - Movie Details
- Official Sites: Website
- Banner: Cinergy Production, Vistaar Religare Film Fund, Cloud Nine Movies
- Producer: Madhu Mantena
- Director: Ram Gopal Varma
![[Has twitter account]](/site_media/images/icons/twitter_small.png)
- Lead Cast: Vivek Oberoi, Suriya, Shatrughan Sinha, Abhimanyu Singh
- Supporting Cast: Priyamani, Radhika Apte
- Story: Prashant Pandey
- Cinematography: Amol Rathod
- Editor: Nipun Ashok Gupta
- Background Score: Dharam, Sandeep
- Action Choreography: Javed, Aejaz
- Music Director: Sukhwinder Singh, Imran, Vikram, Dharam, Sandeep, Tutul, Bapi
- Running time: 135 minutes
- Reviewer: meetu
- Categories: Hindi Movies
- Genres: Action, Based on true life story, Crime, Politics, Social
Rakht Charitra I - Trailer
Rakht Charitra I - All reviews summary
External Reviews
43 reviewers have given Rakht Charitra I an average rating of 2.9/5.0. 22 yays, 15 nays, 6 so-so. See all external reviews »Twitter Reviews
On twitter, 100 twitterers have given Rakht Charitra I an average rating of 4.4/5.0. 85 yays, 11 nays, 4 so-so. See all tweets »
Browse
Recent Comments
acquisto plavix senza prescrizione on 'The Blind Side'
Absolutely with you it agree. In it something is also I think, what is it ... ...more
venda proscar farmacia on 'The Blind Side'
Thanks for an explanation. I did not know it. proscar ...more
diflucan on 'The Blind Side'
You are not right. Let's discuss it. Write to me in PM, we will communicate. ... ...more
compre proscar on 'The Blind Side'
Bravo, what necessary phrase..., a brilliant idea preco proscar ...more
Comments (36)
meetu-i m not getting your verdit.what's your final conclusion?did you liked it or not.your detail rating seems to be biased.Give us the overall rating from your detailed one.
@movie lover wogma verdict "even if you are keen, wait for the film to be out on TV/DVD"
Nice review, giving the reader to decide about the movie.
The review indeed sounds very prejudiced "every minutest part of every single word", but motivations for such prejudice arent clear though. Is it just a typical feminine repulsion for the darker side of reality? or because RGV once bashed this reviewer in his blog? or just the plain mental numbness resulting out of watching too many "Bollywoodish, Bollywodized or Bollywoodisque" movies?
Ps: I have a question. If the reviewer is sooo irked by the violence in Raktha Charithra, how come she is least bit bothered about the rampant plagiarism in Bollywood and the glaring use of soft porn in its movies and 'total absence of action from law enforcement agencies' about it?
Pps: Please read her review on stolen "Ghazini"
I agree with Meetu fully with the review. The movie has too much of violence - nay, unidentifiable violence - it is violence for violence sake.
This extra dose of violence may be good for some parts of the audience, but there are several who want a reason for all the violence.
This is not violence, it is plain and simple gore - I do not think we have the palate for that as yet.
I enjoyed it for whatever it is...:D
I understand not everyone is going 2 like it...
call it guilty pleasure or whatever I enjoy RGV style loudness...especially when he treats crime & politics...
Only if the voice over was avoided...!
@connect indya all reviews here leave the decision to the readers :P
@RGV THere are no ulterior motivations, which is why they might not be clear.
Pulp fiction is one of my favorite films, and so are some other pretty violent films. So, nope! it's my feminine side does not come in my way of enjoying a good film.
I'm not that air headed.I doubt RGV read the review he commented on properly, he commented on some sentences out of context.
aaah...numbness resulting of watching too many bollywoodish, etc films...there could be a point there...checking...naah!
Again, please read the review again, the violence didn't bother me, the meaninglessness was keeping me from enjoying it completely.
Ghajini barely has a better rating than this film
@Roy yes, i would have been happier if there was a reason for the violence. But, I think I have developed a palate for such violence. So, the gore is not why i marked this one down.
@jitaditya that's the thing, right? the voice over IS RGV-style loudness. Actually, I call it RGV-style comedy.
You were not just content with dissecting the meaninglessness of the violence in the movie. I am actually surprised at the vehemence of sarcasm in the overall tone of your review. You had 'three sarcastic footnotes' in your review which itself suggests how pissed off you are with the movie(or the director). And you wrote: "Oh yeah, the actors they all growl and widen nostrils very well! ....camera looked like it had nostrils that wanted to widen them beyond their capacity...............". Those words, I am sure, actually have nothing to do with Raktha Charithra and it's 'meaninglessness' but they were clearly playing down the director's supposed assumption, of his supposed talent with camera as supposed,obviously, by the reviewer. Why?? I think there are few other directors who can really come close to RGV's aesthetic(or passion) for compelling camera work(that's actually his USP, isnt it?. Hence, the review almost sounds like a personal abuse because when we are angry with somebody, we reflexively try to undermine the most what is perceived as the best in that somebody.
The film has excess (meaningless)violence. Alright. Agreed. But most of the other films suffer from some other 'excess'; the excess of (meaningless)mediocrity!!. I definitely would like to see you lambasting such 'excesses' as vigorously as you did those of this movie more often.
@RGV the film evoked that kind of sarcasm from me. So, to that extent it succeeded, didn't it.
The comment on the actors had to do with the acting or the lack thereof in the film. And I've never been a big fan of the camerawork in RGV's films.
I doubt i'll be able to control myself from pointing out an excess when I see it, whether it's slapstick, mush, loudness, whatever.
I see you have rated the film a so-so, and so have I.
Worst review I had ever read !!
you call pulp fiction a violent film???...grow up!!!
Dear Meetu,
You should not have watched the movie - RC1. This was not intended for women, children & faint hearted. Why don't you go and watch "Eat Pray Love"? I bet you'll love it.
@RGV Requiem for a Dream, Seven? Or maybe someday i'll write about my list of novel ways of killing people ;)? Till then, i shall go back to growing up. :P
Oh yeah, one grouse i do have is - if I had liked the film in its entirety, it'd be construed as RGV ke blog pe aayi thi iss liye she's liked the film. No-win for me. *Sulk* *sulk*
@Prince but why? I enjoy violence as much as mush. there's room in my heart for both. only for the well made ones though :D
first thing first, I haven't watched the film and my last comment about violent film is unrelated to your review.
you listed 2 more movies which 'YOU' think are violent. May be for me they r just thrillers.
Coming to novel ways of killing, go to villages in AP and be a crime reporter, you can learn a lot.
I am not criticizing your review, just didn't like the way u tried to justify it.
Do you agree that before going to a class, if you read a bit of the subject, you can understand it better?...I hope you got my point (if you think completely orthogonal to what I think [given that no two persons can think the same way] I may sound silly and stupid)
reviews here don't tell us about the actual story
@RGV hmmm...so then maybe you will find this one just a thriller too.
Aaah! i love the purpose with which you read reviews (my), will certainly keep that in mind while writing next time onwards. But, you have to agree that writing reviews the same way everytime, gets boring. So, i guess i wanted to go with what i was feeling while watching the film.
@Suman good thing! because the blog is called "without giving the movie away"
The violence depicted in the movie is not a gross exaggeration from the real world.
At least no one that I know of goes singing in the rain...
Isn't the violence part more about conditioning?
@Sridhar really? i reiterate, i DO NOT have an issue with extent of the violence. But, how long could a person like Bukka survie in real world politics, a guy who kills to entertain a whim. He's psychotic and that too will be tolerated only so much by anyone, even if it is out of fear, no?
This ain't a review anymore is it? It's a few lines about the movie at the beginning (by Meetu) that frankly doesn't give any clue whatsoever about the movie, followed by an argument between Meetu and RGV.
Meetu I am sure your intention to allow 'interactive' comments on a review webbsite was all good, however in this particular case it isn't helping you because you feel the urge to respond to commenters and in the process of still sounding right, you quite clearly are quibbling. Sometimes owning up actually works!
Your reply to Sridhar about the story is a bit silly considering your review of Rakht Charithra actually began with "This review is a tribute to all my friends who complain that reviews here don't tell them about the story.".
As for your comment about Bukka's character, it only shows that you have done no groundwork before you wrote the review - not that any groundwork would have compelled you to not be sarcastic, but more because you would have had atleast a clue of what this movie is all about. I for one actually think Varma made a blunder dubbing this into other languages because it is quite difficult to relate to the story unless you are from Andhra Pradesh.
@Nirmal heyyy! long time! Well, i thought the sarcasm would be read as the review. I own up, I tried something different because i was tired of writing the same-ol' way, and it bombed. Hits and misses, can happen with reviews too, i guess.
Same goes for comment 'quibbling' sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. It works for some, doesn't for others. Btw, what exactly do you want me to own up to?
My discliamer in the beginning was again sarcastic (hate it when i have to say it, beats the whole purpose of sarcasm!) Anyone who's seen the film knows I'm being sarcastic (hopefully), those who havent, I thought would get a feel of how gruesome the main (only character worth remembering) is. My reply to Sridhar holds up. Problem is Nirmal, even if i because of any vague reason wanted to, will not be able to give too much of the movie away.
Arre, are you saying when i enter a film festival and am going in to watch a Polish film which is about the enviroment in Poland in the 70s, i should do my homework? Only then, I'm allowed to dislike the film?
Its unfair to the audience if a film assumes that I have read up on the topic before going to watch it. I know it helps, but how can I be penalised (not allowed to give it a so-so rating) for not having done the research?
@meetu: before giving rating visit Anathapuram in AP.
Hello there Meetu
Long time indeed! Hope you are well. Sorry I have this bad habit of coming back to my favorite websites (yes wogma is definitely one of those) only once in a while and catch up on stuff that's been happening since my last visit (odd I know!).
I think you have owned up.. although what I meant by owning up was to accept that your responses were not so reasonable. Would you refuse to agree that some of your answers only looked like an attempt to continue to justify that your previous comments were justified and it's a never-ending thing?
I got the sarcasm but with a review that had just random comments about gore and violence, the sarcasm didn't seem apt.. or may be it was just me.
This is what I love about movies. No one movie can satisfy all kinds of audiences and everyone has an opinion about a film and often think their opinion is the best. I am not suggesting you are allowed or not allowed to dislike a film if you haven't done homework - that's your choice really. Myself yes I definitely think that I would 'understand' (as opposed to like) a Polish film and the reasons for filming it in a certain manner if I had some knowledge about the Poland of the 70s. When I watched 'Gangs of New York' I thought 'what nonsensical film was that, but then I bothered to go figure out what the film was based on and it all made a lot of sense. So yes a bit of context and prior knowledge helps the viewer connect!
But I do agree that it is unfair to assume that the audience would have read up on the topic which is why like I said previously I think Varma shouldn't have dubbed this into Hindi.
And please don't misunderstand me, I am not contesting your rating of the movie - it's just the very tone of the review. And I guess considering the fact that a number of movie-lovers are sorta depending on your reviews before they make the decision to shell out some money on a moview, the reviews should have a sense of responsibility.
I hope you are not regretting reviewing this movie 'cos you do a pretty good job most of the time.
Meetu, the RGV who made the first two comments is me and the second RGV who made other comments is not me. This is for information of all.
@nirmal no-no, i never regret watching films :) or reviewing them. ultimately it's just what i thought of the film. The rating is what i felt while leaving the theater and the review is a post-analysis of that feeling.
@epifinibox oh well, the bane of www. BUT, note that the wogma system has been able to identify that you are two different people :D yay!
hi meetu you may think this movie is meaningless but in RAYALASEEMA it is said that 'even an angry look by a person faces severe consequences'.i think you never visited that terrifying place
an angry look is still a reason. and from a stranger/unknown person i can still understand. but your own people??
@meetu there is no difference whether you and your people belong to them or not.block their way.. And you are out.that is the policy there.didn't you read mahabharata.they killed their own relatives,grand fathers,brothers,in-laws etc.you can read about the real stories on the internet.they took even minutest things to their heart,such is their self respect.its better for you not to criticise and hurt their feelings.thank you.
@kk have you seen the film? Bukka killing that guy with the brass elephant? anyway, i'm not saying it doesn't happen, i'm sure it does, we live in a strange world. But, do they get away with it for so long? Well, that too I'm sure happens, doesn't still mean i have to like it
yeah nobody can digest such violence.and i heard its a flop in bollywood with only 15-20 percent occupancy in theaters.so rgv is planning to make telugu movies but i think rgv wanted to show the exact picture of what has happened and so made such a violent movie.
@kk: sometimes you forget nobody cares about bollywood... it is just another industry... telugu movies make more money in rayalaseema alone compared to entire up / bihar sales.. so chill.. nobody cares about bollywood...
also... the violence is nothing compared to what actually happened....
@meethu: i feel sad for you.. with a name like meethu.. no wonder u will not like the movie... please contact karan and have a good warm coffee.. and some fun...
@meetu: I am back!..to comment on your point that how did bukka reddy survive for so long?... I don't know the answe but if I am correct, he was killed after the blast incident. So he survied long in reality than in the movie.
@RGV1 (epifinibox): Don't worry..there is no more than one dumb fellow here!
@Nirmal
u said
"Varma shouldn't have dubbed this into Hindi.."
its not a dubbed film yaar..in deed it is a straight hindi film n dubbed in to telugu n tamil..and the thing is this dubbed film in telugu did very well at box office(took top position) n original hindi version is a flop..
Just an aside...Bukka isn't a weird name down south. It harks back to ancient heritage with Bukkaraya being one of the founder brothers of the kingdom of Hampi.
@bollyfan dude. i'm sure you realise there are enough names around that sound weird and can be made fun of. this is a joke! sheeesh, can't believe i just explained a joke i made :(
@down_to_planet juz saw ur message.something very unfortunate happened.some ridiculed this movie due to ignorence and not knowing the severity of emotions in that region.Ramgopal varma who says that he is a daredevil got spine chills with that incident.see terror striken faces of vivek and surya ! Poor fellows but one thing is clear.RGV played with emotions of people.very sad!
meetu,i think the movie was perfect with action.let me tell you,its a reality based film.not the fiction...so would you write this review again?coz after reading such meaningless review i thought u are a silly moron.ill rate movie4.5/5 and your review1/5.
Leave a new comment