|
| Author |
Message |
    
Aavakaaya
Bewarse
Username: Aavakaaya
Post Number: 1407
Registered: 04-2004
Posted From: 195.220.151.50
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, August 21, 2005 - 3:53 am: |    |
>>What Sivaji does these days is to imitate the acting style and mannerisms of that natural artiste Rajendra Prasad. It is more 'aping' than imitating.
donno if itz aping or imitation...Sivaji has loads of talent ..unfortunately his style appears to be heavily inspired from RP...involuntarily we start comparing him..that'll add minus marks to him..
but isn't he better in acting than many of our young tigers and lions.. |
Donga_evaru
Vooriki Bewarse
Username: Donga_evaru
Post Number: 5494
Registered: 08-2004
Posted From: 134.130.242.16
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, August 21, 2005 - 2:22 am: | |
good review 
idhi thuss annamata |
Eduman
Pilla Bewarse
Username: Eduman
Post Number: 27
Registered: 08-2005
Posted From: 202.65.136.134
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, August 21, 2005 - 2:16 am: | |
Source: http://www.cinegoer.com/
Much Ado About Nothing
But for a few parts of the first half of the drama, the entire film looks half-baked, exposing the director's lack of skills and imagination in handling comedy. Even the dialogue is poorly written. You cannot create humor just by behaving in awkward manner with physical gimmickry unless there is dialogue support and timing in expression. You fill the screen with any number of comedians, the result will be zero. This film too suffers from want of such ingredients. The very concept of writing story looks patchwork as if the story line is lifted from other films. For that matter the very idea of seeking compatibility between wife and husband itself is wrongly presented. And the narration moves as if to fool the audience in the name of maintaining suspense till the end. But the very objective of the filmmakers seems to mislead the audience and try to cater to the base tastes of the audience by creating romantic scenes tending to be lewd between women and men.
Even the very basic theme itself shows how a married man gets attracted to a model in the absence of his wife. The director makes the model his wife for this purpose. These two characters are played by Sivaji (as Chandram) and Sangeeta (as Padma). Like any ordinary man, Chandram bluffs to the model that he is 'alone' and when it is discovered that he is married already, he then pleads about his problems that led him to stay alone. All theses excuses and the model's own advances bring them together and they look as if they are going for their romantic union. That is when his wife is brought into the picture just to bombard her husband with a volley of moral questions, blaming all the men of this kind in the process. Does Chandram not know that his wife would be back any day, when he starts bluffing he is alone and open for another woman to enter into his life. But then there is a third character (MS Narayana) that steps into the vacuum of misunderstanding and explains to his wife that her husband is pure like gold and that he was only got tempted. Then there is a flashback to support this and presents what we are not told about what happened between Padma and Chandram, during their romantic bouts. When you start watching this flashback that includes an interview of a TV channel with Rajyam (Laya), who gives certificates to her husband as the most noble man on the earth, it sounds as if the whole film is out at fooling the audience, by these artificial interjections.
The story in brief is about this couple Chandram and Rajyam, who get married and beget a child, who is seven year old now. The itch for the company of other woman starts. When he appears to have already made way into the other woman's heart - a model named Padma - message reaches to his wife, who rushes to the place he is working, only to prove to the world that he is a 'Srirama'. But initially she is shocked to see Chandram and that other woman are almost in embrace. From these scenes you can imagine what kind of half-baked drama is this. The rest of the length is filled with a hoard of comedians, from AVS to Ali but without substance. The film looks a bad copy of many ideas perhaps borrowed from other films. The audience leaves the theatre with great disappointment.
What Sivaji does these days is to imitate the acting style and mannerisms of that natural artiste Rajendra Prasad. It is more 'aping' than imitating. Sangeeta looks beautiful. And Laya's standards are brought down by trying to put to view some exposures of her. In other roles none have anything to do, except Brahmanandam acting as man suffering from piles and Krishna Bhagawan playing an imaginary 'evil force' with two horns on his head, appearing and disappearing, finally to be kicked out by the hero. Srilekha's music sounds familiar, as her own tunes get repeated. It is a poor show. |
|
|
|
