Sura First Half – Total Nonsense

(via iPhone)

Thank God for the intermission.

Sick, boring shit after 1-hour 3-minutes.

It’s 9.25PM, here on the East Coast.

Folks, the first half of Sura is total garbage.

Our eponymous hero Sura is a fisherman. There’s a minister, who is also a nasty character.

The paths of Sura and the minister have yet to cross.

We’ve gone past two songs, both not in the least entertaining.

The story so far is non- existent.

Vadivelu is irritating, not one bit funny. His antics are beyond stupid.

Doubt the second half can salvage the film.

We’re back home and will have the full review up soon.

God, the second half of Sura was as bad if not worse.

Related Stories:
Sura Review – Colossus of Nonsense
Vettaikaran Review – Punnaku Pandi & the Dysentery Before Sura
Thirupaachi Review – Punnaku Pandi and the Capture of Bin Laden
Madurey Review – Punnaku Pandi and the ‘Negro Problem’
Sivakasi Review – Punnaku Pandi and the art of Nonsense
Kuruvi Review – Nonstop Nonsense
Villu Review – Revoltingly Bad

4 Responses to "Sura First Half – Total Nonsense"

  1. mihi_rex   April 30, 2010 at 1:25 am

    Dude, you must have totally predicted this before even entering that shitty theater, since you have watched a some of his movies these past few days. Responds:

    Did no one ever tell you that hope springs eternal in the human breast. 😉

  2. STG   April 30, 2010 at 7:20 pm


    In that case will they (air in this case) have control over the content of the review?

    You say: Its done

    Hey what is this…so mild. Add more vile content!
    Provide vijay another pseudoname!!
    Make it as a controversial topic among visitors.
    Make more internal links
    There should be atleast ten mention of the word Sura made bold.
    Where the f*** is middle finger? forgot asual?
    😉 Responds:

    Since you are a regular reader of the SI blog, you should know by now we’re very objective, unbiased and steer clear of such tactics.

    In fact, we’d probably get more ads if we’re less strident in our writing-tone.

    You misread businesses. Most businesses don’t like controversies as it’s distracting from their main affair. They want a less controversial tone.

    Bottom line, we control the content of our reviews.

    • STG   April 30, 2010 at 7:38 pm

      Just in the lighter sense. No offence.

      Having managed two websites personally few years back, I know how hard it is to keep the website engaging so it draws more visitors.

      Morover its hard to make them stick to the website for subsequent visit. Most of all, it should be lucrative.

      @SI: In fact, we’d probably get more ads if we’re less strident in our writing-tone.

      SI parting its raw-language would be like taking communism out of Karl Marx 😉 Responds:

      You write: Just in the lighter sense. No offence.

      No offense taken!

      For the most part, we’ve tried to be open and straightforward.

      Given the enemies we have, any other course would be catastrophic.

      • STG   April 30, 2010 at 7:54 pm

        I found this interesting stuff about SI from…

        “Based on internet averages, is visited more frequently by users who are over 65 years old, have no children, are graduate school educated and browse this site from work.”

        It seems not only the site owner, even the visitors are in their autumn years 😉

        I fall in this category – browse this site from work 😉

        Ranks 80000 – not bad, not bad at all.

        with 10000 in India and 141000 in US (a good reason to stop bashing India who fetch and keep you in business atleast from now on? or its in vein? 😉 ) Responds:

        A lot of our readers are supposed to have graduate degrees (i.e. Master’s). 😉

        BTW, we don’t think too much of the Alexa numbers. Keeps wildly fluctuating.

You must be logged in to post a comment Login