It is a nice sweet story, and seems like it’s been tailor-made for Suneel. With the filmmaker revealing the storyline much in advance there is hardly anything to expect. The director does away with popular comedians and allows the situations to bring in comic relief but that is too sparse. The highpoint of the film is the climax in which the story gets dramatic and the lead pair drown you in a whirlpool of emotion.

Suneel as usual never disappoints with his dances and always cashes in on any opportunity to display his ease in foot work. The song ‘Ammayi Kitiki Pakkana’ makes a pleasant watch. So Suneel succeeds once again in wanting to be something more than just a comedy guy, he might get more chances of doing more serious roles. Saloni makes a refreshing return, dishes out a convincing performance and Nagineedu as the villain is just apt for the role. The supporting artistes help in showing that the story other than having a whole heap of running, has some real characters though they threaten to be clichéd and prosaic.

Brahmaji comes out with his character effectively, his work as a man in dilemma, doubt, hesitation has been sincerely portrayed. Because of the nature of the plot, the movie tends to look long, there is nothing that thrills or excites you..it’s just a good story that follows a formula with the director consciously avoiding missteps instead of making an extra effort to figure out what’s missing. With less sheen, shine, cheer, excitement and absence of star power, the filmmaker banks on his story and it needs to be seen if it ticks at the box office. Technically, nothing to complain about, the film is nothing more than an average watch.

RATING : 2/5

Cast : Suneel, Saloni, Nagineedu, Brahmaji, Rao Ramesh, Supreet, Venugopal, Prabhakar, Kaanchi, Anuj Gurwara, Jayavani, Sandhya, Anithanath, Baby Rishika, Master Saathwik and Others.
Action : Peter Hein.
Art : S. Ravinder.
Banner : Arka Media Works.
Cinematography : Ramprasad.
Editing : Kotagiri Venkateswara Rao.
Music : MM Keeravani.
Story : SS Kaanchi.
Stylist : Rama Rajamouli.
Producer : Prasad Devineni, Shobhu Yarlagadda.
Director : Rajamouli.
Release Date : Today (July 23, 2010)

One fine morning, Shravya arrives in India to take a documentary on the Indian music and traditional arts. Naturally, the hero assists the best in her venture, and they fall in love with each other. But, when the heroine says ‘I Love You’ to him, Balu gets stunned and immediately says ‘No’. Why did Balu reject her love, though he is in love with her? Whether Balu realized his goal and entered his village? These factors form the crux of the film.

Manchu Manoj Kumar looked decent in his role as an aspiring playback singer. There is a lot of improvement in his body language and diction. In some of the scenes, which he shared with his dad Mohan Babu, the young actor dominated the screen. Tapsee is not beautiful but would make the show run with oomph, showing little prospects of her sustaining in the industry. Her skin show would turn embarrassing to the family crowds, in case of their going the movie going by the cool title or that if they think that it is a musical entertainer. Mohan Babu played the third important role in the film, with ample comical touches. Brahmanandam has some doses of laughter for the audience, though not all through.

Ace director K. Raghavendra Rao never abandons his tested formula of treating love stories in old fashioned manner. Though he brings a stylish format,the director has not shed the old techniques in screenplay and direction. Jhummandi Naadam is touted as a musical love story, but only the songs do the job, but the flavor is missing in the storyline. But for Manoj’s performance and Tapsee’s skin show, the film holds nothing for a serious moviegoer. The audience after coming of the theatre will definitely feel that the movie should have been shot a decade ago.

Music by MM Keeravani is a big asset to the film. The background score too is neat. The art work is another plus point. Costumes are enchanting. Editing by Marthand Venkatesh is like cutting the loose threads and does not fit the bill. Of course, it should not be construed as the flaw of the technician, but the resultant of the product handed over to him.

The first half is ok, while the second half is dragging, but for a moderate climax. The major or to that matter the biggest drawback is the storyline, which is predictable from the start to the finish.

Verdict: Average

Artists Performance

Manoj Manchu: Manoj Manchu comes up with another rocking performance in this movie. His styling and dialogue delivery is more like of those characters we see in comic books and video games that are developing using comic books. His performance in the confrontation scene leading to interval is good. He matched the screen presense and comedy timing of Mohan Babu in the scenes involving both of them.

Tapsee: K Raghavendra Rao gives Telugu film industry another commercial heroine in the form of Tapsee. She has good camera friendly looks and reminded me of Rambha in many ways. She is effervescent and bubbly. She is good at acting too. It is no wonder that she grabbed many projects before the release of her first movie. She is going to be a good glamorous heroine in Telugu. It is up to her to choose right projects to make herself a performing actress too.

Others: Mohan Babu plays the third most important character in the film. It is nice of Mohan Babu to allow others (including comedians) to have satires on him (especially ‘I appreciate you’ dialogue). He is comical most of the time and performed with extreme passion in intense scenes. Brahmanandam entertains though his comedy is of old-fashioned type. Ali is humorous as ‘naa name ranjith. Naa game encounter’. MS Narayana is extremely funny as the sidekick of Mohan Babu. Suman, Dharmavarapu, Apoorva, Sudha, Ahuti Prasad and Aishwarya are adequate. Tanikella Bharani is powerful in a small role.

Technical departments

Story – screenplay – direction: The basic story given by Bhupati Raja is simple. K Raghavendra Rao handled this simple story in a simplistic way by including adequate commercial elements so that it reaches everybody. Screenplay of the movie is adequate. K Raghavendra Rao proves that there is no retirement for creativity and age never becomes a disadvantage while dealing with romantic subjects. He has shown the heroine Tapsee in the most glamorous way. He also made sure that there is something in the film for A/B/C center audiences. There are a few old-fashioned scenes for the sake of commercial elements. But they are minimal and they don’t disturb the flow of the narration. There is trademark of K Raghavendra Rao in songs picturization of the movie.

Other departments: Music by MM Keeravani is good and background music is also handled well. I rate the 3rd song (shot in Kerala) as the best song in the movie. The last song (desamante Mattikadoi) is the life of the movie. All songs are picturized colourfully. Cinematography by S Gopal Reddy is very good. However, he should have shot stunt sequences in a better way. Dialogues by Rajasimha are good. Editing by Marthand K Venkatesh is smooth. Art direction by Raghu is neat. Production values by debutant producer Lakshmi Manchu are very good with rich visuals.

Analysis: First half of the movie is nice. Tempo goes down in the second half a bit. The climax song makes it up for all. Plus points of the film are main leads (Manoj’s comedy and Tapsee’s glamour) and K Raghavendra Rao’s commercial elements coupled with attractive music/visuals. On the flip side, old-fashioned story might not be liked by urbane crowds. On a whole, Jhummandi Naadam is a film that has something for every kind of audience (A, B or C). It is a K Raghavendra Rao’s masala entertainer that has all ingredients do well at box office.

Final Verdict:one time watch movie,not so novel,regular old fachined movie

Presentation:The director has come up with a thought provoking theme and though the presentation was average, it is the narrative that scores. The real highlight of the film is the dialogues, the script was alright and the screenplay was effective. Background score was okay and two songs are good. Cinematography was mediocre. Editing could have been better. Costumes and art department made their presence felt. Uday Kiran did his bit well and was appreciable, Meera Jasmine needs no description, she has always been on top with her roles, Richard was evil enough, Sudarshana looks sensuous, Vivek failed to impress, Radha Ravi was regular, the cameos by the noted names added value.

Conclusion:The film is basically another dubbed story from Kollywood and this has been written by the Tamilnadu chief minister Karunanidhi and this time, it revolves around the women and their role in the society. While the first half goes about with the regular elements of romance and drama, the second half takes a twist and culminates into a climax at the court hall. The technical values were just regular but it is the depth and content of the dialogues which create an impact. At the box office, this might appeal to a certain section of audience.

Rating: 2.5/5
Banner: Nandini Arts
Cast: Udaykiran, Meera Jasmine, Richard, Sudarshana Sen, Vivek, Radha Ravi, J K Ritheesh, Ramba, Larencce Raghavendra, Lakshmi Rai and Others
Music: Deva
Cinematography: Vijay Raghav
Producer: SP. Murugesan
Director: Bali Srirangam
Released Date: June 25, 2010

A Robinhood Veera (Vikram) kidnaps Ragini (Aishwarya Roy), wife of SP Dev (Prithviraj). The beautiful lady is dumped at a nondescript village in the Nallamala hills. Symbolizing her with Seeta of the Ramayan, Dev gets into action and is in desperate search after her, followed by Hanuman like Karthik, who is thorough with the topography of the rough terrain of the Nallamala forests.

The encounters between Veera and Dev and their men, with several police being killed, all go into a dampening mood. Coupled with this, Ragini is often shown with pathetic looks in the custody of the villain. What happens at the climax? Does Veera continues to remain as a baddie or will there be any change in the outlook of the audience at the ravenous character? These are to be answered on the big screen.

An out and out imitation of India’s famed epic Ramayan, Manirathnam succeeded in bringing to play the characters with élan, but the ancient depth is very much lacking. The director also failed to establish the character of Vikram, who donned the prime role and that why the police were after him. As there is no clarity between the confrontations of the two powerful characters, naturally the story would get kudos from the audience.

The director chose to give equal importance to the protagonist and the villain as well. Till the intermission bang, the audience was in a dilemma as to why the villain kidnapped the modern Sita.

Leave alone the directorial point of view, the film is a rich tribute to the visual grandeur with high technical standards. But, a piece of art with no feel of life is not worthwhile venture. What can the audience do when one of the world’s fantastic beauties is shown always in rundown mood with stony expressions? In contrast, Vikram is shown in overflowing emotions. Prithivi Raj, an alien to the Telugu film industry, further added to the mood of non-involvement.

The obese Prabhu brought some cheers to the audience, while Priyamani is wasted. The songs are regular, but the music of AR Rehman in the background would really touch the senses of the audiences at times.

Going by the brands of Santosh Sivan as the cinematographer and AR Rahman as the music director and above all the presence of Aishwarya might help the movie to garner considerable crowds at the theatres, but how long is the factor to ponder over. The success of the film would purely depend on the admirers of Aish, Vikram and Manirathnam.

Rating : 2.5/5

Credits to Moviebuzz at Sify.com

The main problem with Panchakshari is its flawed narration and hackneyed script written by Samudra himself. He has included some silly comedy elements that mars the film’s quality.

Samudra’s lacklustre and unimaginative direction is in full evidence in many sequences. In one of the scenes Anushka and her imaginary lover are burnt alive and there is not even a scream that is heard. Despite directing many films so far, it seems Samudra has not learnt any lessons from his past mistakes.

Panchakshari revolves around an ambitious business woman Honey who runs her own firm. But she is anti-marriage and for her parents’ peace of mind she lies to them saying she is seeing someone. The family members are surprised when the same person lands up at their doorstep.

Meanwhile, in another place there is a Honey lookalike called Panchakshari – a much revered woman who gets killed by criminals pursuing a treasure. It’s left to Honey take revenge from those who killed Panchakshari.

The story has a lot of similarities with Arundhati, but Anushka, who looked brilliant in Arundhati, has given inconsistent performance in Panchakshari. She impresses as Panchakshari, but is not up to the mark in the role of Honey.

Samrat comes off well in expressions and can be groomed. Veteran character artists like Nasser and Pradeep Rawat look convincing in their respective roles. Though there is lot of scope for comedy sequences, the film suffers from overacting from even veteran comedy artists like Brahmanandam and Telangana Shakuntala.

The music by Chinna is ordinary, but the camera work is much better. Noted editor Marthand Venkatesh has nothing much to do in elevating the film marred by an erratic script.

Panchakshari is like a crude attempt to copy the hugely successful Arundhati and director Samudra spoils the show.

Rating: 1-1/2 / 5

Credits to Moviebuzz at sify.com

The first half of the film depicts the characters in their respective problems. Rahim, a Muslim is distressed, he is drawn into an argument, a fight and his wife suffers a miscarriage in a rally held by the Hindus. The man is upset with his past, unable to come to terms with reality and wants to leave the country. The police still suspect him to be a terrorist and trouble him unnecessarily.

There is Saroja who wants to take a flight to freedom, unhappy with the exploitation at the hands of a sex worker, the lady with her colleague escapes from the brothel house. Vivek Chakravarthy, a rock star who wants to make it big in the music world, have a band of his own leads his troupe for a show. Ramulu, an old man has a lofty dream, wants to educate his grandson and is dying to come out of debts. He sets out on a journey with his daughter-in-law to get some money home.

Finally Raju, an educated youth finds himself trapped in poverty, woos a rich girl, lies about his status as a cable operator, goes on a mission to find 40 thousand rupees to party with his girl friend.

Now all of them in a quest for life begin their journey and are beset with problems at the same time. Rahim is questioned by the police while he goes for his Visa, Saroja is trapped by her previous employers, Vivek is entangled in a road fight, Raju gives into the temptation of theft and Ramulu’s money in the city is stolen.

In the next level it is opportunity that comes in form of help from unexpected quarters. As human beings do we grab it and change for the good or do we fall prey to sin and sadism? Finally the story wraps up with redemption, realization and destiny throwing up so many good things – it makes some lives worth living and some worth dying for.

The film initially begs for freshness but as it hits the second hour it touches you, draws you into their purgatory, their ups and downs. A prostitute, a Muslim trying to prove he is not a terrorist are boring characters, how differently you project them on screen depends on their performances and the dialogues given to them. The film is backed by solid performances, no one overplays their role. The USP again is the dialogue. Allu Arjun dominates the film with his flawless work.

In the second part of the film, his expressions are splendid, especially when he tries to steal money at the hospital, while going to pay for the tickets and his scenes with a small child whose smile he chose to overlook in a hurry to fulfill his desire. Seiya as Manoj Bajpai’s wife does a good job, Posani Krishna Murali who’s been earning the wrath of critics scores some decent points, Bajpai is perfect as a vulnerable man, and Anushka is simply natural and yes pretty too.

Manoj has a reason to be upset, the only scene which strikes chord with the audiences is when he’s lying in the coffin and his mother takes pride in his martyrdom. There couldn’t have been a better person than Nagaiyya to deliver the role of a grandfather fighting with abject poverty.

Even small, inconspicuous characters like Prithviraj, Raghu Babu leave their mark. The last scene has the terrorist with a rifle resembling Kasab. Brahmanandam has a single scene but he brings in the laughs. Towards the end some lay down their lives, some get a new life, and some continue to sin. The film touches you in the finale, and could make you wonder what if you were caught in a theatre that goes up in flames, that has no fire extinguisher, or a hospital surrounded by terrorists, how would you react?

All the characters who are led by goals become selfless, the metamorphosis is complete with striking dialogues and aided with visuals. The movie appears crammed first but later the narrative becomes emblematic of the director’s aim. Everyone learns something or the other from this story, from the characters, emotions, about life being terrorized by greed, lust, ambition, power play, and that good begets good, and life is all about the choices you make.

MovieFilm.In Rating : 2.5/5
Cast: Allu Arjun, Manoj, Anushka, Lekha Washington, Deeksha Seth, Manoj Bajpai, Nagaiah, Raghubabu, Satyam Rajesh, Brahmanandam and Others.
Action: Ram-Laxman.
Art: Rajeev Nayar.
Banner: Arka Media Works.
Cinematography: Ganasekhar VS.
Editing: Shravan K.
Music: MM Keeravani.
Producer(s): Prasad Devineni, Shobu Yarlagadda.
Story, Screenplay, Dialogues & Director: Radhakrishna Jagarlamudi (Krish).
Release Date: June 04, 2010

Gangaram (Gopichand) is an orphan whose burning ambition is to become a policeman. Working as a labourer in a hotel, he realizes his dream. His boss (Nassar) gets attracted to the dare of the hero, and immediately promotes him as “Encounter specialist.”

The city (Hyderabad) is under fire due to the gang war between two baddies – Talwa and Khalid. As and when Gangaram gets into the shoes of the encounter specialist, he swoops on the mission to eliminate the gangsters. This helps him obtain gigantic media publicity. It invariably brings him enemies in his own department as they are jealous of the publicity.

How the internal moles troubled the sharpshooter and how he taught them a fitting lesson would form the crux of the movie. Making a pass, the story also has a vital link – what brings Pavitra (Priyamani), who hates men, closer to Gangaram. Prior to that what is the relation between the heroine’s mother (Roja) and Gangaram? The director seems to have thought that this might serve as the suspense factor.

Gopichand as usual brought justice to his characterization as an encounter specialist. Many a time, Puri Jagan said that the character was influenced by the real life shooter Dayanayak. Whether the screen role matched the stamina of the realistic character has to be judged by the audience.

Priyamani’s character sounds funny without any consistency. Those who donned the roles of villains lacks nativity in a city like Hyderabad, which is more dogged by the terrorists than the mafia. Roja’s so-called vengeful comeback in this film does not click. The audiences feel that Puri is yet to come out of the Pokiri hangover in chiselling the characters.

The story is farfetched from the ground realities in Hyderabad. Most important, the encounter specialist theme is not a novel one to the Tollywood audience. Unlike other films of the director, with separate comedy track, there is an intermingling of the comedy, which is weak. Editing is crisp. Dialogues are not effective. Songs are not impressive. Music by Chakri is mediocre. Stunts are a saving grace, but not without violence.

Above all, Golimaar unleashes a feel among the audience that the gap between the thoughts of Puri Jagan and their reach with the spectators is widening with each film.

Verdict: Disappointing

Nandu (Sarwanand), a village youth who works in a city, is altruistic. His colleague, Paddu (Padma Priya), is a composed girl, who is particular about spending each and every rupee for her own good. Yet, both are surprised at each others’ attitude towards philanthropy, and still being friends.

For some reason, the girl comes to Nandu’s village, and sees the real essence of helping the individuals around. Paddu slowly falls in love with Nandu for all his nobility. A situation so develops that Nandu pledges his eyes and heart for a loan of Rs 5 lakh, which he distributes for public good. When the money lender, who happens to be a goon, arrives to claim the heart and eyes of Nandu (as he fails to repay the loan), what happens? It forms the crux of the story.

Sharwanand, the rich arrogant boy of Gamyam, a politically powerful youth in Prasthanam, is now a gentleman with an overflowing generosity for society here. Interestingly, he shows the best shades of his prowess in each film, making him win the accolades from the audiences as a versatile actor at a young age. His character sounds unique from the start to the finish.

Padma Priya looked beautiful all through the film, with a close resemblance to Tabu in some angles. Kudos to the director, for providing the girl footage not only as a performer but also as glam doll.

Naresh, who did a hilarious performance in Aa Naluguru with his Rayalaseema accent, did a key role here in this film. He succeeded in evoking both laughter and pathos in the theatre.

For Telugu audiences, the film is definitely a novel experience. The positive factors in the film, say in the storyline and its treatment, are difficult to practice in real life, and this again comes as the commercial angle – what can’t be practiced off the screen, can be a reality onscreen.

Dialogues by Balabhadrapatruni Ramani are funny and the spoof on Bommarillu climax dialogue is amusing. Cinematography by Gummadi Krishna looked average. Editing was poor in some patches. Anoop Rubens’ background music would win thunderous applause from the audience and it actually would make them forget the film’s drawbacks and even moving at a slow pace. Art work deserves kudos for its natural flavor.

As the film touches the sidelined in society and yet perennial topics inside the man like money, sex and selfishness, there is a possibility that it could tickle the senses of the youth. The longevity of the film could be gauzed in the coming weeks. Watching this movie will not bring any disappointment to the audience, though it has the A certification.

Verdict: Worth a watch

Presentation: The director has come up with a flimsy storyline and though the presentation was effective, the narrative was not so. The dialogues were good, the script was hollow, the screenplay was average. Background score and songs were failure. Cinematography was excellent, art department was impressive, costumes were apt, locations were beautiful. Editing was alright. Raghava does his bit to gain attention but then he honestly doesn’t have that material as a hero, Padmapriya looks exceedingly beautiful and she did her bit, Lakshmi Rai was seductive, Sandhya was there for a song, Sai Kumar was good, Nasser was natural, Manorama, Delhi Ganesh, Ilavarasu, Vaiyapuri, Ramesh Khanna, M S Bhaskar, Senthil and others contributed efficiently.

Conclusion:The film is basically a dubbed version of the Tamil film ‘Irambu Kottai Murattu Singham’ and though it is a cowboy tale, it doesn’t have the require punch to engage the audience. While the first half was very stale with not much happening, it is only the second half when the momentum picks up. Overall, the film is good in bits and pieces with flashes of brilliant comedy and some really creative settings and sequences. Technically, the film is well made but content wise it is very weak and fails to entertain. This could appeal to the masses to an extent but otherwise, it is hard to extract the investment.

Verdict : Not upto the mark

Rating: 2.5/5
Banner: SGS Entertainments
Cast: Lawrence, Padmapriya, Lakshmi Rai, Sandhya, Sai Kumar, Nasser, Manorama, Delhi Ganesh, Ilavarasu, Vaiyapuri, Ramesh Khanna, M S Bhaskar, Senthil and others
Music: G V Prakash Kumar
Cinematography: Azhagappan
Direction: Simbu Devan
Producers: Kalpathi Agoram, Kalpathi Ganesh
Release date: May 07, 2010