MoPoshy Absolutely brilliant

Afouotos Although it has its amusing moments, in eneral the plot does not convince.

WillSushyMedia This movie was so-so. It had it's moments, but wasn't the greatest.

Payno I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

Dr Deena Padayachee Jolly LlbThis is not a jolly film at all. It probes the murky undercurrent of the legal world with a very sharp scalpel, exposing the most frightening secrets and the most dastardly deeds.We expect that those who act for the human rights of all to be absolutely honourable, morally and ethically upright characters. After all, how is a person supposed to have confidence in anything less than the most ethical and careful of beings to defend their human rights? One expects such highly schooled experts in the law to be fully conversant with all aspects of the law and to act always in the best interests of their clients, not in the best interests of their bank balances. We expect them to be students of human psychology, to understand human beings and not to play with their clients' careers, lives and families so that they can get more wealthy.We expect lawyers to behave with a sense of very great responsibility and respect, not only for their clients but for themselves, their profession and their country as a whole. They should not behave in a manner that brings their profession into disrepute.Well, we all know that, often, all that I have written does not happen. Many people are terrified of lawyers, and with good reason. From the days of ancient empires – whether Babylonian, Assyrian, Egyptian or Roman, tyrants have used clever, wily lawyers to create a strait- jacket of decrees and laws to keep their subject populations in check and pliable. They have used these beagles to extract the wealth of their subjects and destroy those who offended them. Sadly, most lawyers have over-valued themselves and over-priced their services. The Gandhis and Mandelas have been exceptions to the general rule. One must not be conned by these exceptions.The sum result is that the legal profession has often been at the sharp end of denying human beings their human rights and keeping them manacled. It all turned on power and money. Lawyers acted not upon on what was right but what was in their best interests. And we suffered. Boy, did we suffer.The depiction of India's legal profession in this film was graphic. Lawyers are shown in open-air 'offices' working on antiquated type- writers and in the most deplorable of circumstances – literally on the street. In the evenings they have to lock their equipment in steel trunks enclosed in chains. That's a lovely metaphor. And all around them, there is evidence of the dire poverty that is India, today – the filth, the disorder, the lack of planning, and the wretched souls who try, somehow, to survive.From this fetid cess-pit some men of the law, some men of words, like rats in a sewer, have been able to claw their way up to higher positions – but that was often done only by the most foul of means. Their means of survival are the tiny wealthy class that many societies sport all over the world. The off-spring of that class, spoilt,badly reared, arrogant, used to abusing everybody and having their own way, are the lawyers' meal-tickets.We see a lawyer from Meerut come to Delhi and tout for business. He is no paradigm of virtue. He notices another lawyer doing well by courting the media and the TV stations. So he does the same by delving into a case involving a young dilettante. A film which documents the clash between the young, aspiring lawyer and the experienced, sly, vicious, older senior counsel is the stuff of best-sellers and block-buster movies.However, this is South Africa. There were just six people in the cinema the night that I was there; at Gateway, the film was whipped off the circuit in double-quick time, no doubt to the relief of the legal beagles here, many of whinge about how they do so little business. The female lead, such as she is, is stunningly beautiful as Indian beauties can be – and she is loyal despite the penury of her beau – as long as he is ethical. More than that, she is, amazingly ethical and not materialistic at all. When her husband acquires cash by illegal means she promptly deserts him. She helps turn him away from his path of legal parasitism onto the road less well travelled. There might be females like this somewhere. I must say they are a rare breed.This is a film well worth watching and I savoured every moment of it as lawyers did all the things that we all know so well: steal from their clients, get their clients into further trouble so that they can benefit, give bad advice, and manipulate matters so that they can appear like supermen when, in reality they are vultures preying on those in trouble, those who are weak and those who have strayed from the path of the straight and narrow.Are there really so few in our country who are like me, and find such a well made film well worth watching? What kind of South Africans are we? Why do so many prefer to spend thousands at the casinos, at restaurants etc, rather than on supporting something well worth supporting.Ours is indeed a strange, often bizarre country.We have come through one of the greatest struggles for human rights in the world; we have made our mark on the history of the world and our planet has been the better for it, but, somewhere along the way, many seem to have lost their souls.

Terence Frederick A very straightforward screenplay on the corruption in Indian court cases. I'm from the southern part of India, yet have I heard a lot on how the witnesses in court are forced and the evidences are manipulated in the north, esp. in the capital city. The film offers a predictable story with a script filled with satirical stuffs mocking Indian court. A sad note on the poor homeless citizens are highlighted too. Saurabh Shukla gives his best at the final court scene where he shouts at a particular attorney and comical slapstick ones too at the initial part. Bomman Irani is as always his best as a senior advocate. The first part of the movie carries too many songs, which I feel were necessary. Imo, a good movie to be watched with the family and children (except two mild violence scenes).

jmathur_swayamprabha Indian movies and novels, being influenced by the American pulp fiction, have always shown the courts as a place of enormous drama (and entertainment) whereas the reality is polar different at least in the Indian courts. For decades and decades, the Indian filmwaalas have shown the artificial, non-existing courts to the Indian audience on the silver screen. However in the year 2013, the Indian courtroom dramas seem to have come of age through Jolly LLB.Through the activities of a petty lawyer - Jagdish Tyagi, nicknamed as Jolly, the filmmaker has shown the courage of showing the real courtrooms of India. All the courtroom scenes are so realistic with the judge, the lawyers, the plaintiffs, the defendants, the cops, the witnesses, the court-staff; all appearing real and not filmy that it won't be an exaggeration to consider this movie as a landmark movie in the history of Bollywood. It's definitely a path-breaker and therefore, we can expect many more realistic courtroom dramas on the Indian screen in the times to come.Our hero Jolly (Arshad Waarsi) migrates to Delhi from Meerut on order to rise in his career of a professional lawyer. He finds public interest litigation (P.I.L.) as a means to be in news and get quick name and fame (which is expected to turn into money in future). Seeing a high profile lawyer Raajpaal (Boman Irani) winning the case of his client who is actually guilty of crushing some innocents sleeping on footpath under his car, Jolly decides to play a gamble which if he wins, is likely to take him much ahead in his career. He files a P.I.L. to reopen that case and then the game of checks and checkmates starts between the rival lawyers inside as well as outside the court. The hero wins in the end after passing through lures to withdraw, hardships and danger on his life. His Meerut-stationed sweetheart - Sandhya (Amrita Rao) plays the role of an eye-opener and a motivator for him when he is slipping from the correct path.Never before any Bollywood movie has shown such a real judge who is a normal human-being with all the weaknesses expected in the normal folks. The character of the judge (Saurabh Shukla) is the best developed one who is shown as more or less honest(perhaps to keep the movie optimistic and making the hero only as the winner in the end). He wants to do justice but not very much keen to improve the system. Corruption is rampant just beneath his nose but he is not bothered about it (perhaps because he feels there's little that he can do about it). He knows that a major part of his duty is only to give dates of next hearings of the cases and that he performs by consulting with the lawyers only. He seeks the help of the high-profile lawyer to get a good flat while sitting on the chair of the justice itself. He mostly remains subservient to the high profile lawyer but realizes the significance of his chair and the power inherent in that in the climax.The inexperienced lawyer in this movie wins the case because fortunately for him, the judge is not totally corrupt and his conscience is still alive. Had it not been, then ? Then our hero would have met the fate of most of justice-seekers in India. The climax has been designed with an optimistic twist which is seldom seen at least in the lower courts. But the complete proceedings and environment in the court have been depicted with utmost realism.How lawyers resort to rhetoric and hollow talks when they are exhausted of logic, arguments and facts, has been underscored very well in the climax through the character of the corrupt but highly successful lawyer - Raajpaal. The fact is, not only the lawyers, but the judges also go for rhetoric and nonsense comments when dealing with the cases, as if they have a license to say anything and everything. They want to become preachers for all but have they ever shown any concern for the corruption in the judicial system itself ? Arshad Waarsi has done exceedingly well in the title role with Boman Irani not far behind as the high profile but crooked lawyer. Amrita Rao has filled heroine's quota. The complete supporting cast has done perfectly. Especially veteran actor Ramesh Dev has delivered a touching performance. The actor in the role of a weak yet conscientious policeman (deputed as Jolly's bodyguard) is also very impressive. However the show-stopper is Saurabh Shukla (the session judge of Delhi).I term Johnny LLB as a highly realistic and hence, a praiseworthy movie. Kudos to its writer-director - Subhash Kapoor. While signing off, I reproduce the dialog of Raajpal for Jolly - 'Yeh Court Hai Mr. Tyagi. Yahaan Jaldi Kuchh Nahin Hota' (This is court Mr. Tyagi. Nothing happens fast here.' Very true. Nothing happens fast here, at least not justice.

Jash Mistry Jolly LLB is just one of the innumerable satires on the corrupt Indian judicial system. It does not stand out by any means. Two of the finest actors in Bollywood, Arshad Warsi(Jolly) and Boman Irani(Tejinder Rajpal) star in this one. And a standout performance is by Saurabh Shukla who plays the Judge. Three of them rise up. Amrita Rao as Sandhya, Jolly's girlfriend, is forgettable. Some of the dialogs from Jolly are quite remarkable like when Jolly yells at Rajpal , "Kaan ke niche aise bajaunga na, agli saat pushte behri paida hogi" (I'll slap you so hard, your next seven generations will be deaf). Hilarious! But the plot falls. The music is ear-numbingly bad. The comedy is good but also forgettable. The climax is predictable. Overall, Jolly LLB is strictly average. The three actors remain the saving grace.