Connect with us

Movie Reviews

Maalik Movie Review – Gulte

Published

on

Maalik Movie Review – Gulte

2/5


02 Hrs 31 Mins   |   Action   |   11-07-2025


Cast – Rajkummar Rao, Prosenjit Chatterjee, Manushi Chhillar, Huma Qureshi, Saurabh Sachdeva, Saurabh Shukla, Anshumaan Pushkar, Swanand Kirkire, Rajendra Gupta, Baljinder Kaur and others

Director – Pulkit

Advertisement

Producer – Kumar Taurani & Jay Shewakramani

Banner – Tips Industries & Northern Lights Films

Music – Sachin–Jigar & Ketan Sodha

Advertisement

Over the years, Rajkummar Rao established a good will among the audience with his performances and script selection. More often than not, his films are backed by commendable scripts and relatable characters. In an attempt to give an image makeover to himself, he selected the script of ‘Maalik’, a rags-to-riches story. After generating enough curiosity with the trailer, the film was released in theatres today. How did Rajkumar Rao perform in a ferocious gangster role? Did the director, Pulkit, come up with a well-packaged commercial action entertainer? Did the Miss World 2017, Manushi Chhillar, finally score a hit? Let’s figure it out with a detailed analysis.

What is it about?

Deepak(Rajkummar Rao), based out of Allahabad, is from a poor family. Just as in any of the ‘rags to riches’ stories, he aims to become a Maalik(Owner) from a Naukar(Servant). What are the challenges, Deepak, faced in his quest to become a Maalik? Did Shalini(Manushi Chhillar), the wife of Deepak, help him to come out of the mess in which he’s stuck? What is Deepak’s relationship with Minister Shankar Singh(Saurabh Shukla)? Forms the rest of the story.

Advertisement

Performances:

Rajkummar Rao in the role of a deadly gangster performed well. However, he’s miscast in the role. The character like Maalik, commands the actor to possess inbuilt swag but unfortunately, it was missed in the way Rajkummar Rao carried the role. Saurabh Shukla in the role of crooked politician delivered a commendable performance as well. All other actors delivered a standard performance. There’s nothing special to talk about the performances.

Technicalities:

Cinematographer, Anuj Rakesh Dhawan is the only technician whose work is worth mentioning in the film. He captured the Allahabad raw and rustic locales of the 1990s Allahabad well. Editing by Zubin Sheikh is a big letdown, especially in the second half. At least, twenty minutes in the second half would have been edited easily. The last forty minutes of the film dragged on forever and it was a mistake from the editor. Sachin–Jigar’s songs & Ketan Sodha’s background score are very average. Let’s discuss more about the director and writer, Pulkit’s work in the analysis section.

Positives:

Advertisement

1.⁠ ⁠Pre-Interval Fight Sequence
2.⁠ ⁠Watchable First Half

Negatives:

1.⁠ ⁠Boring Second Half
2.⁠ ⁠Predictable Story
3.⁠ ⁠Routine Execution
4.⁠ ⁠Editing

Analysis:

KGF & Pushpa franchise movies worked out well all over the country but their performance in Hindi markets in India stood out compared to other languages. The commercial performance of the second parts of both KGF and Pushpa showed Hindi audiences’ appetite for well-packaged commercial action entertainers. There is a huge market for such films in the Hindi heartland of India but unfortunately, the Bollywood film makers in the last few years are unable to come up with solid commercial action entertainers. Rajkummar Rao’s Maalik is a desperate attempt to tap the commercial cinema potential in the Hindi markets but sadly what we get to see is a very predictable movie which was heavily inspired by KGF and Pushpa franchises.

Advertisement

The actors(i.e. Yash and Allu Arjun) who played the protagonist role in both KGF and Pushpa are relatively new and yet the Hindi audiences loved those two characters. It is because both Yash and Allu Arjun delivered quite a few ‘playing to the gallery’ moments with their swag and mannerisms. For a commercial entertainer to work well, the actors who play the lead character in the film should have an inbuilt swag and style. It is where, Maalik, struggled. Rajkummar Rao is a very good actor. There’s no doubt about it. He even delivered a good performance. However, it looked strange to see him in such a heavy gangster role. There was no style or swag or anything that we associate with a ‘mass’ hero in a commercial film, in Rajkummar Rao’s persona. Apart from the pre-interval action sequence, his seemingly ferocious performance as a gangster looked forced and out of place.

Another big letdown in the film is the predictability. The writer and director, Pulkit, selected a very routine script and the screenplay he chose to narrate a routine story is utterly predictable. Right from the word go, the audience will easily be able to guess the next sequence, including the twist in the climax. It is surprising to see a young director coming up with such an outdated twist. We have seen that twist in multiple movies in the past thirty years or so, starting with Krishna Vamsi’s Gulabi in 1995. There are two conflicts in the film, one in the first half and the other in the second half. The biggest mistake the director made was to come up with the face-off sequence between the protagonist and the main antagonist, upfront in both halves. It is almost impossible to sustain an audience’s attention with the remaining when a director decides to kill the main antagonist character at the very start of a tug of war. It is where the film lost track. The last forty-odd minutes in the film dragged forever with irritating action sequences one after the other.

Overall, Maalik has a watchable first half at best with a very well executed pre-interval action sequence and a boring second half that dragged on and on with a very predictable screenplay. You may give it a try watching the film when it releases on an OTT platform but it certainly don’t deserve a watch at a theatre.

Bottomline – Man’s KGF & Pushpa

Rating – 2/5

Advertisement

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Movie Reviews

Fantasia Fest 2026 Review: ‘Her Private Hell’ is Boring As Hell

Published

on

Fantasia Fest 2026 Review: ‘Her Private Hell’ is Boring As Hell

Share this with a friend!

During the opening ceremony of the Fantasia International Film Festival, Her Private Hell director Nicolas Winding Refn was awarded a Cheval Noir Career Achievement Award for his contributions to cinema. He made an impassioned plea on the importance of a festival like Fantasia and genre cinema as a whole:

“In the mid-90s, when I began, we really couldn’t make genre movies; we had to make important movies. But we were like, f— that! How do you piss off your parents? Make a horror movie! How to tell the politicians to f— off? Make something violent! A little fun, some sexy stuff? It’s the best thing in the world! Genre is cinema!”

“Genre is cinema” may be the truest statement the Danish provocateur has ever made, which is why it felt so painful to follow such an electric and impassioned speech with one of the least impressive movies Refn has crafted. A movie that attempts to provoke and elicit strong reactions out of us but isn’t nearly as aesthetically and thematically interesting as it should be.

With characters soaked in bisexual lighting and neon colors, one would think that Refn would want to continue in the trajectory that has defined his eclectic body of work. But dying for twenty-five minutes before being brought back to life gives him a new outlook on the world, as he’s not only stated at Fantasia but during its Cannes world premiere as well.

Advertisement

In a way, the harrowing event he experienced mirrored a lot the character he portrayed in Hideo Kojima‘s Death Stranding, which he acknowledged during the Q&A session following the screening. Unfortunately, this shift in his thematic and aesthetic conventions yielded a movie that has nothing tangible to say about any of the images it presents or the movies it references.

Plot and critical reception of Her Private Hell

One even wonders why Her Private Hell received such vitriolic reactions at Cannes. Don’t get me wrong, it’s not a very good movie, but it’s also not the kind of movie that will piss people off. People may be inclined to walk out of it, not because of its strong and explicit violence, both physical and sexual (none of them go as far as some of Refn‘s previous movies), but because of how boring it is. It attempts to morph the giallo into a cyberpunk/futuristic visual language while sprinkling in a dash of Hong Kong-inspired action, but none of these elements coalesce into anything meaningful or significant.

An astute moviegoer might notice his inspirations (Roger Vadim, Mario Bava, Seijun Suzuki, and even Kojima), but there isn’t a single one that feels decidedly singular or meaningful enough to yield a reaction from us. Oh, sure, there are plenty of scenes where the audience may be inclined to react, but once they see how little payoff it has, they might not react to them at all.

It’s even difficult to describe what Her Private Hell is about because Refn now prefers to throw the “three-act” structure out of the window and create movies that don’t necessarily adhere to preconceived audience expectations.

In fact, when pressed on this during a Q&A moderated by film critic Katie Rife the following day, Refn scoffed at the idea of a movie having an “ending,” simply stating, “What is an ending?” While some might have laughed at such a response worthy of David Lynch‘s greatest moments, it does reveal how one has to watch Her Private Hell; which is about letting yourself be absorbed by the hallucinatory images of Refn‘s storytelling and try to see the parallels he makes between the stories of Elle (Sophie Thatcher) and Private K (Charles Melton).

Advertisement

A perplexing and uninteresting film from Nicolas Winding Refn

Even then, the viewing experience of Her Private Hell remains perplexing. And from a purely thematic viewpoint, it isn’t a movie worth parsing or spending your time attempting to find meaning in what’s on screen.

It’s also very loud. Perhaps too loud. Definitely the loudest movie I’ve watched in a cinema since Christopher Nolan‘s Tenet. Unlike that movie, however, the sound isn’t a character but a deterrent. Refn is convinced he must make the audience suffer agonizingly to get a reaction out of us, but, again, there’s not much here that warrants any form of reaction. Sure, some of it is violent, and a lot of it is painfully unpleasant.

In fact, Her Private Hell might be extremely misogynistic and depicts many difficult scenes with such a regressive attitude. Again, he’ll present something provocative but never do anything with it. What changed for Refn after he died? He’s still doing the same old stuff, but with nary a thing to excavate beyond the graphic violence and depictions of alpha masculinity. That treads on similar ground to Refn‘s most well-known movies, the Pusher trilogy, Drive, and Only God Forgives. It’s violence for the sake of violence, à la Michael Winner, but without any point behind said violence.

Even the cast can’t save Her Private Hell

None of the performances from a star-studded ensemble is any good, either. Sophie Thatcher, Kristine Froseth, and Havana Rose Liu are all accomplished actors in their own right and have always been pretty great in everything they do. The latter, in particular, has such a magnetic screen presence and old-school appeal that it feels perfectly suited to Refn‘s vision for elevating her innate talents.

Advertisement

Charles Melton was recently nominated for an Emmy for his career-best work in the second season of Beef. Their talents are all wasted. If you like to see them howl like wolves, I’ve got the movie for you. Even when viewed through a giallo lens, their respective portrayals never seem fully in tune with the unwieldy, dense image-making at play.

Only Pino Donaggio‘s ethereal music gives Her Private Hell its only signs of life. At 84 years old, the Italian composer, mostly known for his collaborations with Brian De Palma (which, according to Fantasia’s Mitch Davis, is ongoing, as he’s working on his latest movie), delivers one of the most stirring and affecting scores of his entire career, one that words can barely describe. As someone who repeatedly listens to Donaggio’s Carrie and Blow Out soundtracks, Her Private Hell is destined to be relistened to on repeat in my household. However, I will never watch the movie again.

Also check out: Fantasia Fest 2026: Our Five Most Anticipated Films

 

Share this with a friend!

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

People Shared Their Thoughts About Movies They Watched And These 67 Reviews Are Comedy Gold – AOL

Published

on

People Shared Their Thoughts About Movies They Watched And These 67 Reviews Are Comedy Gold – AOL

If you love movies, chances are you’ve read a review or two before deciding what to watch. Most people keep things pretty simple—they talk about the acting, the storyline, or whether the film is worth your time. But then there’s Letterboxd, a popular social platform where movie lovers log, rate, and review the films they watch. While plenty of reviews are thoughtful and insightful, others take a… much more chaotic approach.

That’s exactly what the Letterboxd Reviews With Threatening Auras account celebrates. It rounds up the platform’s funniest, most unhinged, and wonderfully cursed reviews—the kind that make you stop mid-scroll and wonder what was going through the reviewer’s mind. These definitely aren’t your standard “Loved it, 4 stars” takes. They radiate such a bizarrely threatening energy that it’s almost impossible not to keep scrolling to see what wild review comes next.

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

We’ve all been there—sitting through a film, hoping it gets better, only for the credits to roll and leave you wondering what on earth you just watched. But if there’s one silver lining, it’s the internet’s reaction afterward. Sometimes the reviews are so funny, dramatic, or brutally honest that they’re more entertaining than the movie itself.

Advertisement

Whether it’s an accidental masterpiece of comedy or a hilariously savage one-liner, people have a remarkable talent for putting their thoughts into words. The truth is, movie reviews come in all shapes and sizes. They vary depending on who’s writing them, where they’re published, and what they’re hope to achieve. Some are designed to help you decide what to watch on a Friday night, while others dig deep into themes, symbolism, and filmmaking techniques.

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

One of the most familiar formats is the capsule review. These are the short reviews you’ll often spot in newspapers, magazines, streaming platforms, or entertainment websites. Usually just one or two paragraphs long, they quickly summarize the story, highlight a few strengths and weaknesses, and end with a clear recommendation or star rating. They’re ideal for people who don’t want spoilers or lengthy analysis—they simply want to know whether a movie is worth their time. Writing one isn’t always as easy as it looks, though. Condensing an entire film into just a few sentences while still being informative takes real skill. That’s why some of the best capsule reviews manage to say more in 100 words than others do in 1,000.

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

Professional critics often take a different approach. Publications such as Variety, The Hollywood Reporter, and major newspapers publish what are commonly known as trade reviews. These aren’t just personal opinions; they also consider a film’s broader impact, commercial appeal, performances, direction, cinematography, and where it fits within the industry. Their reviews are often read by moviegoers, filmmakers, studios, and even award voters. While audiences don’t always agree with the critics, these reviews provide a structured, informed perspective that goes beyond simply saying whether a movie was enjoyable. They aim to explain why a film succeeds—or why it falls flat.

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

Then there are academic film reviews, which take things to an entirely different level. These aren’t written for casual viewers but for students, researchers, and people who study cinema professionally. Rather than focusing on entertainment value, they examine symbolism, storytelling techniques, historical context, editing, cinematography, and cultural influence. It’s less about asking, “Was this movie good?” and more about exploring what the film is trying to communicate and how it fits into the history of cinema. They can be dense, detailed, and surprisingly fascinating, often revealing layers that the average viewer might never notice. Even a blockbuster superhero movie can become the subject of serious academic discussion.

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

Of course, not every review is carefully researched. Some of the most popular today are instant reaction reviews—the videos, podcasts, TikToks, or tweets people post immediately after leaving the theater. They’re fast, emotional, and completely unfiltered. You can usually tell within seconds whether someone loved the movie or absolutely hated it. Because there’s no time to overthink anything, these reactions often feel refreshingly genuine. Sure, opinions may change after a second viewing, but that’s part of the fun. They capture that immediate emotional response we all have after watching something memorable, whether it’s excitement, disappointment, confusion, or complete disbelief.

Advertisement

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

And then there’s arguably the internet’s favorite category: user reviews. Platforms like Letterboxd, IMDb, and Rotten Tomatoes have given everyday movie lovers a place to share whatever is on their minds. Some people write thoughtful essays that rival professional critics, while others somehow manage to steal the spotlight with a single sentence. One review might offer a heartfelt personal story about how a film changed someone’s life, while the next simply says something so absurd that thousands of people can’t stop laughing. Because anyone can contribute, there’s an endless variety of voices, personalities, and senses of humor. That’s exactly what makes scrolling through user reviews so addictive.

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

In recent years, these reviews have taken on a life of their own. Thanks to social media, the funniest ones are regularly shared far beyond the platforms where they were originally posted. Sometimes the review becomes more famous than the movie itself. A perfectly timed joke, an oddly specific observation, or an outrageously dramatic reaction can spread across the internet within hours. It’s a reminder that people aren’t just reviewing movies anymore—they’re entertaining each other in the process. For many film fans, reading the reviews afterward has become almost as enjoyable as watching the movie itself.

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

And that’s exactly where today’s collection comes in. Instead of looking at traditional movie criticism, we’re diving into the wonderfully chaotic world of Letterboxd, where movie lovers often express themselves in the most unpredictable ways imaginable. They aren’t polished critiques or carefully balanced opinions; they’re pure internet gold. Keep scrolling, Pandas, and see which review made you laugh the hardest—or left you wondering what on earth the reviewer had just watched.

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

© Photo:

Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

1986 Movie Reviews – Aliens and Vamp | The Nerdy

Published

on

1986 Movie Reviews – Aliens and Vamp | The Nerdy
by Sean P. Aune | July 18, 2026July 18, 2026 10:30 am EDT

Welcome to an exciting year-long project here at The Nerdy. 1986 was an exciting year for films giving us a lot of films that would go on to be beloved favorites and cult classics. It was also the start to a major shift in cultural and societal norms, and some of those still reverberate to this day.

We’re going to pick and choose which movies we hit, but right now the list stands at nearly four dozen.

Yes, we’re insane, but 1986 was that great of a year for film.

The articles will come out – in most cases – on the same day the films hit theaters in 1986 so that it is their true 40th anniversary. All films are also watched again for the purposes of these reviews and are not being done from memory. In some cases, it truly will be the first time we’ve seen them.

Advertisement

This time around, it’s July 18, 1986, and we’re off to see Aliens and Vamp.

 

Aliens

Really, what can you say about a classic?

Advertisement

Set 57 years after the events of Alien, Ellen Ripley (Sigourney Weaver) finds herself heading back to LV-426 when a colony on the planet stops communicating with Earth. Teamed up with Colonial Marines, she is still unprepared for the new horrors she will find at the claws of the xenomorphs.

I’m going to do something I normally don’t do and talk about a deleted scene. Aliens, as it stands is a heck of a follow-up to the original film, but for the life of me I will never figure out why James Cameron cut the scene about Ripley’s daughter dying. For those unfamiliar with it, there is a scene after Ripley returns to Earth where she learns her daughter passed away at the age of 66, two years before Ripley made it home. She cries over the fact she had promised her daughter she would be home in time for eleventh birthday.

This scene does so much to frame some of Ripley’s decisions throughout the rest of the movie. This scene, when included, improves the film far beyond the theatrical cut and adds immense weight to several other scenes.

The theatrical version is great, the extended cut is even better.

Where to watch: Available to stream.

Advertisement

Vamp

The 1980s seem to have already been fed up with vampire films with far more of them tackling the tropes instead of being straight-faced about the bloodsuckers.

Keith (Chris Makepeace) and AJ (Robert Rusler) are rushing a fraternity when when the latter promises the frat a stripper for their party to help their chances of getting in. They head downtown and wander into a strip club that features a dancer named Katrina (Grace Jones) that they are mesmerized by and decide she is the one they need. Little do they know she is actually an ancient vampire.

Considering this wasn’t long after Fright Night, it seems everyone was tired of the same old vampire stories. If they only knew what was coming several years later.

It’s a fine movie, and I mean that in the sense of “it’s fine.” It doesn’t do anything that new per se, but it has some fun visuals and sight gags.

Advertisement

Where to watch: Available to stream.

1986 Movie Reviews will continue on July 25, 2026, with , Maximum Overdrive, and Out of Bounds.


Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending