MovieChat Forums > Dor (2006) Discussion > bad!!

bad!!

posted 17 years ago by sujata-visaria
5 replies | jump to latest

Why do so many people claim to like this movie so much? I thought it was really bad.
1. The plot was bad. It was completely unrealistic, and was really just a poorly covered-up attempt to pontificate on the status of Indian women.
2. The script was bad. Unnecessary time was spent on obvious, predictable things. We could predict most things before they happened.
3. The dialogue was even worse. Who other than Doordarshan news readers talks in shuddh Hindi like that? "Kshama kijiye"???
4. The acting was bad, for the most part. The two main actresses were wooden. Ayesha Takia even more so than Gul Panag. The Bahurupiya redeemed things a bit. Girish Karnad and Uttara Bowarkar were good as always, but then they only had two-bit roles.

We only rented it because of the hype and because of Nagesh Kukunoor. We were completely let down. A total waste of 2 hours.

[–] valouisha 17 years ago

I beg to differ. The movie was really good, even though it had a few flaws.
1. The plot was really good. The possibility of this happening is really high. The fact that the movie displays the various conditions of women in India has been portrayed beautifully. There is nothing wrong if a movie contains social messages. I firmly beleive that movies should be used to instrument social changes and progressive thinking.
2. The beauty of the movies lies in the fact that though the movie is predictable, it was made such that no part of the movie was boring.
3. My native happens to be in interior AP, and I rarely get to hear english words in their daily usage, except for terms like Motor, Bus, car and so on. Why do you forget that Ayesha's character lives in rural Rajasthan. And shudh hindi was really nice to hear.
4. The best part of this movie was the acting. Gul Panags quite but strong attitude was portrayed really well. Ayesha Takia really proved to be a good actress.

I respect your opinion but for too many reasons this movie is really uplifting. For example, Girish Karnards decision to let Nagesh Kukunoor "have" his dughter in law in exchange of money is something which is very realistic. I used to be under the impression that the people of our viallages are very pure in thought and deed. Everything looks nice on the outside. the inside story can be very different.

[–] trigger_jam 16 years ago

Needless to state, highly subjective opinions.

[–] next_change 15 years ago

I would say the movie could have been better if the director had tried a bit harder and ,it is overrated.
The acting by ayesha takia is pathetic....she didn't even have a rajasthani accent even after been born there .Shreyas was the only saving grace

[–] shouri-1 15 years ago

I LOVED it. Even in my renewed, more critical scale, it gets a 10 (and after such a long time too)!! A '10' for me means that it is at the same level as movies like 'Amelie' or 'Forrest Gump'.

My only regret is that I have one great movie less in my list of 'yet to see' movies. By golly, I am Nagesh's huge fan now.

To give you a point-to-point reply Sujata:-

1) I completely disagree. What was unrealistic? That a women travel the distance across two states to try and save the life of the man she loves? Or that a friend eventually saves a friend from a life of misery and confinement of part-time prostitution? The plot was entirely realistic and believable.

2) Well, we all KNEW right from the start that she would sign those papers. How could she not? If you label the movie 'predictable' because of that, you will have a hard time finding a movie that is unpredictable enough for you. The movie is not at all about whether the papers are signed or not. It is about the triumph of the human spirit aganist all odds and is a tremendously uplifting experience to watch. What about all the beautiful and 'deep' things conveyed so simply and effectively before the end?

3) I couldn't care less about the dialogue but that's just me. I cannot agree or disagree with you on this as I cannot comprehend the varying styles with which Hindi is spoken across Northern India. Hindi is just Hindi for me and I had watched the movie with English subtitles on just to be sure I understood it all.

4) Lastly, the acting was superb to say the least. Gul Panag!! The picture she has created of this strong, resilient and fiercely independent woman is enduring and endearing - and one is left with an ardent wish - if only one knew such a woman for real. I dont care much for Miss Takia but she has done a very good job too. Thier efforts need to be commended.

[–] histerical_aman 15 years ago

I agree with the first comment.
The film was a waste of time. SO damn preachy! For what? What does Nagesh Kukunoor think he is? He is so above everyone that he fills his movie with the most top down look on society.
The acting was horrendous and the dialogues were awful. The dialogue delivery was far worse. Only when there were no words said, was there any point in watching the movie.
It was soooooo slow. Too slow and overdramatic. Highly predictable and zero experimentation in terms of shots. Only straight shots and no movement of camera. Pathetic stuff.
Shreyas was the only reason I could stand the movie. He was amazing as usual. I totally agree with the unrealistic part. For two months, she's sitting there chilling with this woman not worried about getting her signature and figuring out how to get the document to the required authority before it's too late? She only realizes when she hears that he is going to be hanged in two days? and that also in Saudi right? Isn't it Saudi law? So she will take the peice of paper via train to Saudi Arabia in 1 day?!?? WOW!! and not only that, show that paper and convince authorities that everything is genuine?
Come on, give us a break!