I'd like to begin with the funny moment: recently I have been presented with a DVD (4 movies on 1 DVD, among which there was Crook), when I wanted to watch Crook, I realised that it was recorded at the multiplex, I threw it away immediately. The movie grabbed my attention from the very first frame, but the sequence at the multiplex with Emraan Hashmi doing a CamRip didn't turn out to be what I expected of the movie, even though I wasn't thinking about racism at all. A litlle bit of illegal actions which don't come over-exaggerated, a little bit of romance and sure a little bit of Australia. So that's why the movie is not boring: it is sometimes entertaining, sometimes dwelling superficially on very serious problems and I can claim that most of the audience me included don't want no more. Why should the writer dig deep into the problem? If Taran Adarsh wants to investigate into it, so he must write a review for a documentary on Indian-Australian relationship if someone shoots it. I want actors and entertainment. There's no need to find an explanation for every scene, because there must be place for your own thinking to flow. Australian guy Russell changed his mind to revenge Suhani, he heard her shout to the cell "Save Nicole, save the city". Moreover, he had a relationship with her sister and he knew who was responsible for her death, that's why both parties are to think over their actions. The behaviour of any character can be explained by preceding actions. The movie made me worry.
