Greeku veerudu was a below average film with no plot.It looked as director has lifted the story from famous family movies and made his own film with a half baked plot.He didn't forget to add some emotional scenes to appeal family audience but they were simply emotionless.Its comedy was irritating.Only some scenes of Brahmanandam were funny which relieved me from such a boring movie.Look of Nagarjuna was good and he also acted good trying to carry this limping movie on its own but he too failed miserably.Nayanthara looked beautiful but his acting was average.Dialogues of the movie were very bad and seemed as writer had copied it from 90's movies.Music was below average and direction was the worst.If you are a fan of old fashioned family drama then you may watch it otherwise leave it.Still you are interested in it then i want to advise you to carry a saridon with you... RATING : 3.8 out of 10 is the maximum which i could give it
4 Reviews
A disaster!
sasikanth2020 January 2014
I am clueless on where to begin, for the movie was that bad. It's a story we've seen in many a films – a rich spoiled playboy (read Nagarjuna uncle) comes to India from New York (shot using green screen and graphics) to understand the importance of family and love. Now one can argue – how bad that could that be?? According to me, this one defines bad. The script is the same old-fashioned one which probably worked 10 years ago, with K. Vishwanath playing the same old grandfather role, saying no to love marriage initially, but later realizing his mistake, the aunties and their loser husbands, one bad guy with a loser son, and uncountable number of side characters. Dasarth has lost it, understandable, but what seemed more strange is why would others (read producer and actors) make a film with the same old formula, that too with an older Nagarjuna.
Talking about Nag, I did like his looks to an extent in the ads, but he looks really old in the film. The only place he looked good was in "Greekuveeruda" song, where in he has a different get up. On acting front, he is the saving grace of the film. Nayanathara looked glamorous, thank god for that. Brahmanandam has the routine bakra character, while the rest of the cast are put in just for the heck of it.
On technical and production front, the film is a disaster. Music is mediocre, but the background score is painful. Thaman needs to learn how to score for such bad movies. Editing by Marthand Venkatesh is sloppy, just like the screenplay. But what surprises me the most is the cinematography (Ani Bandari). Most of the film had graphics using static background – New York, airport scenes, outdoor scenes in India, climax shot in a village — all graphics. And the graphics were so bad that I felt like I was watching a second grade movie. I'm glad that they shot few scenes at least in real locations.
Overall, it's a boring and dull film you've seen many a times – only thing different is an older hero. They claim it's a family entertainer; forget entertainer, but in a way it shows how better off your family is compared to the dumbass one in the movie. Unless you are a die-hard Nag fan, stay away please!!
PS: Am glad Naga Chaitanya didn't do the film. I (and almost everyone who watched the film) would have been dead by now if it were him as Greeku Veerudu!!
Acting: 6.5/10 Story-Screenplay-Direction: 2/10 Technical Aspects: 3/10
Verdict: 3.5/10
For more reviews, please visit sasikanth.me :)
Talking about Nag, I did like his looks to an extent in the ads, but he looks really old in the film. The only place he looked good was in "Greekuveeruda" song, where in he has a different get up. On acting front, he is the saving grace of the film. Nayanathara looked glamorous, thank god for that. Brahmanandam has the routine bakra character, while the rest of the cast are put in just for the heck of it.
On technical and production front, the film is a disaster. Music is mediocre, but the background score is painful. Thaman needs to learn how to score for such bad movies. Editing by Marthand Venkatesh is sloppy, just like the screenplay. But what surprises me the most is the cinematography (Ani Bandari). Most of the film had graphics using static background – New York, airport scenes, outdoor scenes in India, climax shot in a village — all graphics. And the graphics were so bad that I felt like I was watching a second grade movie. I'm glad that they shot few scenes at least in real locations.
Overall, it's a boring and dull film you've seen many a times – only thing different is an older hero. They claim it's a family entertainer; forget entertainer, but in a way it shows how better off your family is compared to the dumbass one in the movie. Unless you are a die-hard Nag fan, stay away please!!
PS: Am glad Naga Chaitanya didn't do the film. I (and almost everyone who watched the film) would have been dead by now if it were him as Greeku Veerudu!!
Acting: 6.5/10 Story-Screenplay-Direction: 2/10 Technical Aspects: 3/10
Verdict: 3.5/10
For more reviews, please visit sasikanth.me :)
Perfect family entertainer filled with human relations and emotions
ravigudapati3 May 2013
It is a 100% family entertainer. Nagarjuna dominated all over the movie, he looks very handsome and very energetic even at the age of 54. The story mainly deals with human relations and emotions. Perfect movie for matured audience. Director dasaradh handled the script very well, music by thamann is awesome. Female lead Nayanatara have done impressive role, she is looking very beautiful. Viswanadh had performed at his standards in a dignified role. MS Narayana and bramhanandam filled the space for comedy. There are many character artists in the movie. The sentiment worked very well, dialogues penned by dasaradh are catchy and meaningful. Overall this is a cool movie to watch is this hot summer. Nag is back with his romantic stylish cool look after a long time. Don't miss it...!!!
Awesome
sanyamchhibber19 March 2020
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
