Shalimar

I am so awfully sure that for anyone caring for the art of cinema in its qualities of western standards or the overall universal technical values, this movie is an example of "A guide of what NOT to do for a respectable movie"... But its charm (as one commenter puts: "..It's a bad movie but I can't help liking it...") lies somewhere else.

I must say I was surprised to find out that it didn't do well in India when it hit the theaters but that flopping may happen to any "big budget" movie anywhere anytime.. I also agree that Dharmendra and especially Zeenat Aman could have been performing much better or the Holly-Bolly partnership could be taken to a more qualified level. But this movie is like a showcase of what could be done within limits of a status-quotic cheesy-commercial cinema and utilising what's at hand in high quality. Despite its flaws, each and every moment is fun and as with all "bad but great" movies, technical or artistic flaws actually add rather than deduct from the film's value! It's one of my faves from 70s Bollywood and from many points, it really has its great moments. Never approach with cinematic excellency of Western values; nor it is too much typically Bollywood'ish either. Somewhere between the lines and hauntingly captivating and fuuuuun!

This is an absolutely splendid film!!!

Not only because this is a Hollywood and Bollywood joint venture film but also because the acting of all the star cast is great.

I especially liked Rex Harrison, Dharmendra, John Saxon, and Zeenat Aman's performances. The flair of their acting seemed so natural which led me to get engrossed in the film. This is very uncommon for me.

The song: "Mera pyar Shalimar" also has a very good soundtrack and is great to listen.

If you are doing nothing on the weekend, I suggest you visit a nearby video store to rent this video. You will just enjoy it!!!

i think that this film is a entertainer.It makes you cry.laugh and makes you think what will happen next.The great Mr Dharmendra was the best but i don't understand is that why did this film do so bad at the box office? and why Mr Dharmendra never signed for a western film again.The songs were also good like 'Hum Bewafaa' was good, the film was also made in English to but voices were dumbed over and the film opens with a good scene.I didn't not know that this film was produced by Hollywood and Bollywood and after this film they never did that again because it was a disaster at the box office but some people still think that they should make more films like this.The main credit for this film goes to both Dharamendra and Rex Harrison who both did a great so BRAVO!!!

I would start saying, it was a film too ahead of it's times, when released in India. It was what we have today as Ocean's 11 or 12 or the Italian job. For the fact it flopped in India, is because the majority of the audience saw it go over the top and there was no connectivity with this film.Caper films have never been a forte in 'bollywood', so shah's western influenced ideas did not really go well with the native masses who were more interested in revenge melodramatic dramas, 'dakus','mujras', and 'angry young men'. Looking back, it's definitely a cult film and the Gen today would appreciate shah's efforts more than the Generation of '78.

Let's not beat around the bush: this is a bad film.

The storyline is frankly weird, the pacing is choppy, the cinematographic style is erratic, and the film generally bears all the hallmarks of the Asian film genre - that is, it was obviously produced for an uncritical audience.

All the same, there is something oddly appealing about it. The sheer awfulness of the acting and the script fade into the background as one is dragged, almost against one's will, into the film's Dungeons-and-Dragons-like storyline.

Camp, curious, captivating. I can't help but like it, in spite of myself.