achenier A favorite past time of my wife and I is to take advantage of the great collection of foreign language feature films in our local library.In the last two years, we have rediscovered the wonder of great cinema through films from all over the world. It is so rewarding to view cinema that has not been designed with 12-year olds in mind.But there are exceptions to our overwhelmingly positive experience. Two nights ago, we placed the Baabul video in the DVD player and waited to be enriched and entertained. After fifteen minutes, we both decided that this film was unwatchable.In those few minutes.......a father meets his son in an airport. The son has been abroad studying. Amazingly,they don't recognize each other and engage into a ridiculous dialogue at the end of which they realize who they both are because they are going to the same address (or something like that). It is obvious that both characters, father and son, are computer literate. Surely they must have exchanged photographs in those years. And what son would not recognize his father after seven years? The only word to describe that kind of scriptwriting is stupid....father and son and family then engage in a car drag race ...in the middle of heavy traffic. Everybody is having a grand old time with much laughter and good spirit! The fact that dozens of other people's lives are endangered just make the event more exciting! Now this car chase is not brought about by events in the story i.e. it is not someone running away from bad guys etc.. It is a car chase for FAMILY FUN! This kind of film making is not only pitiful, it is also immoral in my view. Who would want to view a two-hour movie about of such imbeciles?At this stage, we pressed on the eject button unable to believe that any film maker who produces this type of moronic material can redeem himself in the rest of the movie.

daniel schut I found Baabul a B-category movie with an A-list-casting. The story, about a young girl being widowed, and the challenges she faces to try and get married again, is really an interesting idea, even though I am not sure whether it still is a common social problem amongst Hindustanis.There's two reasons which make the movie quite bad: Salman Khan and Screenplay/Dialogue.I don't know what people see in Salman Khan, but by the gods, this man CAN NOT act. He sounds like he is a half-German, half-Indian class B actor who is dubbing himself over in real-time. His post-modern interpretation of Romantic Love reminds me more of freshly laid asphalt then of anything else. Why do people still hire him? Were they out of money after Amitabh, Malini and Rani signed up?I found him so irritating that I could not suppress a small 'yay' when he gets run over by a car, halfway through the movie. "Great" I thought, "now let's get on with the people who CAN act and make it a good movie".The second reason: at about three quarters of the movie, I suddenly realized something: if at this, or at any point in the movie, any of the characters would suddenly be played by another actor, it probably wouldn't change any of the dialogue, screenplay or anything else. If Rani would have been replaced in every other scene by let's say Kajol, Priyanka Chopra and an anonymous street vendor from Kolkata, the movie would go on. Now, that may seem an interesting achievement, but it isn't: it shows that many of the people involved just did not care about the actors, the plot and the movie. Screenplay and dialogue should be made to fit the actors: this is what makes chemistry and empathy possible. This just felt like the producers and director thought of this movie as 'another day at the office'. This comes out during the climax: at the point where even hard and sturdy men like me should break down and cry: "oh yes, that's so true, how can humans be so cruel?", you just don't feel anything.The reason why I don't give the movie lower then a six, is that: well, at least the movie is tolerable. The camera-work is quite nice, the idea is quite nice, and the songs are not that bad. So, if you must see it, buy it on DVD and watch it at home when you have nothing else to do.

laiju This movie has a lack of excitement and energy and brings us to the brink of boredom during the first 1 hour 45 minutes, after this initial part the rest of the movie is very well composed and the actors have done well to lift up the movie in this period. Initial part of the movie shows the inexperience of the director to keep audience interested. If the movie be edited so that the initial 1 hour 45 minutes be compressed to 30 to 40 minutes the movie would be a treat to see.Anyway the movie is all about widow marriage. Where Balraj Kapoor (Amitabh Bachchan) tries to get happiness into his daughter-in-law Malvika Talwar's(Rani Mukherjee) life who is sad and depressed due the dead of her husband and Balraj Kapoor's son Avinash Kapoor(Salman Khan) by getting her to marry Rajat(John Abraham). This is objected by Balraj's wife and brother played by Hema Malini and Om puri.

diligentdrool_14 Baabul is a excellent movie. Peoeple are being biased and comparing it with Baghban Agreed Baghbanwas a great film but that is a league apart. Baabul is one of the best movies of the year. One of the finest performances of Amitabh Bachchan. He makes u cry many a time and for everyone who like to see with "Less style and more substance" unlike most movies of today, so see Baabul. Amitabh and Rani have done it again after Black. Big B and Hema look stunning together and they have created the Baghban effect (though Hema is relagated to the end of the frame almost all the time. Big B carries the film on his shoulders effortlessly. Very good film-Recommended.