Connect with us

Movie Reviews

Hey Balwanth Movie Review – Gulte

Published

on

Hey Balwanth Movie Review – Gulte

2.5/5


02 Hrs 14 Mins   |   Comedy Drama   |   20-02-2025


Cast – Suhas, V K Naresh, Shivani Nagaram, Vennela Kishore, Harsha Vardhan, Sudarshan, Sravanthi Chokarapu, Ajay Ghosh, Annapurnamma, Babu Mohan and others

Director – Gopi Atchara

Advertisement

Producer – B. Narendra Reddy

Banner – Trishul Visionary Studios

Music – Vivek Sagar

Advertisement

From April 2024 to the middle of 2025, at least six films were released with Suhas in the lead role but none of them gave him the expected positive result. He took a pause for about six months in releasing his films in theatres and came up with a comedy-drama film ‘Hey Balwanth’. The inform producers and the presenters, Vamsi Nandipati and Bunny Vasu, took the responsibility of releasing the film and generated enough curiosity among the audience with some interesting promotions. After getting its title changed from ‘Hey Bhagawan’ to ‘Hey Balwanth’, due to the censor board objections, the film was released in theatres today. Did Suhas, score a theatrical hit after tasting not-so-favourable results with his last few films in lead roles? Did the actress, Shivani Nagaram, continue her success streak? Did Vamsi Nandipati and Bunny Vasu, deliver yet another successful film? How did the director, Gopi Atchara, do? Did Vivek Sagar’s music help the film? Let’s figure it out with a detailed analysis.

What is it about?

Krishna(Suhas), grew up watching his father(Naresh) working day in and day out. He wants to take up his father’s business after he finishes his post-graduation in business management. But, Krishna’s father asks him to find a good job elsewhere. To prove his worth as a worthy successor to his father, he joins as a business consultant at an NGO which is being managed by Mithra(Shivani Nagaram) and eventually falls in love with her. When everything seems to be going well, Krishna’s father suffers a heart attack and the doctors ask him to take bed rest for a few months. Since his father has to take a rest, Krishna decides to run the family business. What happens when Krishna decides to run the business? What exactly is the profession of Krishna’s father? How did Mithra’s family get themselves involved with Krishna’s family business? Forms the rest of the story.

Advertisement

Performances:

Suhas did a good job with his performance in comedy episodes. His ability to appear so effortless while generating fun, worked well at many places in the film. He did a decent job during the emotional sequences. Shivani Nagaram, delivered a decent job with her performance. She too did well during the comedy portions. Especially, the way she delivered the dialogue ‘Maadi chala orthodox family’, multiple times in the film, generated good laughs.

Sudarshan’s comedy timing and dialogue delivery are the major plus points of the film. He generated a good amount of laughs in almost every sequence in which he appeared. V K Naresh, made his presence felt during the emotional sequences. However, the comedy portions for his character, would have been written and executed in a better way. Vennela Kishore generated good laughs, although a few people may find it uncomfortable, in one episode in the first half. Harsha Vardhan and Ajay Ghosh with their timing, generated a few laughs here and there. Senior actress, Annapurnamma and the veteran actor, Babu Mohan, in crucial roles made their presence felt.

Technicalities:

Vivek Sagar came up with two decent to good songs. And, his background score was alright. Overall, his work in the film is adequate. Cinematography by Mahi Reddy Pandugula, is decent. He delivered a standard output to suit the scale and theme of the film. Viplav Nysdam’s editing would have been a bit better in the second half. Production values by ‘Trishul Visionary Studios’, are adequate. Let’s discuss the work of director and writer, Gopi Atchara, in detail in the analysis section.

Advertisement

Positives:

1.⁠ ⁠Fun Portions
2.⁠ ⁠Sudarshan’s Comedy Timing
3.⁠ ⁠A Few Good Dialogues

Negatives:

1.⁠ ⁠Unexciting Drama
2.⁠ ⁠Clichéd Narration
3.⁠ ⁠Melodrama

Analysis:

Advertisement

The entire promotional campaign of the film revolved around the profession or the business of the lead character and his family. In a way, the makers succeeded in generating curiosity and setting the expectations right among the audience by stressing the word ‘business’ during the promotions. To stay away from spoilers, let us not disclose the details about the profession. The ‘business’ theme on which the story of a father and son is narrated, can be made into an out-and-out comedy drama or a serious social drama. But, the director chose to make it as a social dramedy. In doing so, he succeeded as long as the film stuck to comedy episodes, but the film lost track, the moment the director started to blend the film with drama and a message.

The film has at least five sequences that generated very good laughs. The fun quotient during the pre-interval, interval episodes and a majority of the episodes involving the actor, Sudarshan, worked in favour of the film. Considering the core plot of the film, the director deserves special appreciation for not choosing the ‘below the belt’ comedy. Barring one or two instances, the film largely had clean comedy. Apart from executing the comedy portions well, the writer and director, also came up with a few very effective and heart-touching dialogues. Especially the dialogue – ‘Mogudu, koduku, anna.. inka chala perlu petti thanani pilichina kani… Nanna ani thanani pilichinappude…mogadu…oka hero la feel avvutadu’, worked out so well in explaining the emotional turmoil of a father to his son.

When a director chooses a sensible socially relevant topic as the backdrop of the film and decides to justify a certain profession, it should be executed as a serious drama with subtle social satire to generate fun. It looks artificial and out of sync when a filmmaker generates fun using a profession and social awkwardness around it, during the first and second acts and suddenly, takes a turn during the third act of the film to ‘justify’ the profession. It is where the film lost its track. The sudden shift in tone from comedy portions to serious drama, worked against the film. Also, the drama portions are executed in a very bland manner with unexciting writing and beaten-to-death narration. The entire third act of the film appeared so out of place and bored the audience to a large extent.

Overall, Hey Balwanth, has its moments and it worked to an extent because of the comedy portions and a few well-written dialogues but the film would have been much better had better care been taken in writing and executing the drama portions, especially during the second half.

Final Verdict – Fun Worked. Drama Did Not.

Advertisement

Rating – 2.5/5

Advertisement

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Movie Reviews

‘Balaramana Dinagalu’ review: A restrained look at the gangster mind

Published

on

‘Balaramana Dinagalu’ review: A restrained look at the gangster mind

In K M Chaitanya’s Aa Dinagalu (2007), actor Atul Kulkarni, playing gangster Agni Sreedhar, says man is the biggest weapon in the underworld. “The rest are just properties,” he adds. The yesteryear Kannada crime drama, based on the real incidents from a big chapter of the Bengaluru underworld, stood out for its understated storytelling.

In Balaramana Dinagalu, which has the skeleton of a sequel to Aa Dinagalu, weapons are seen in the first scene. As the film progresses, we encounter an arsenal of knives, razors, machetes, and guns — each an extension of the gangsters’ identities and an indispensable tool in their quest to remain feared and lethal. Chaitanya attempts to make the movie a mix of reality and entertaining tropes.

Balaramana Dinagalu (Kannada)

Director: K M Chaitanya

Cast: Vinod Prabhakar, Priya Anand, Atul Kulkarni, Ashish Vidyarthi, Ramesh Indira

Runtime: 151 minutes

Advertisement

Storyline: Balarama, an ordinary young man from a remote village in Karnataka, becomes a dreaded gangster who rules Bengaluru

The director has roped in the same cast, who played the dreaded gangster trio of Kotwal Ramachandra (essayed by Sharath Lohitashwa), Jayaraj (Ashish Vidyarthi), and Agni Sreedhar (Atul) in Aa Dinagalu. That’s what makes one instantly curious about Balaramana Dinagalu. The only difference in the latest movie from the previous one is the fictionalised names of the real dons. Jayaraj becomes Jayaram, Sreedhar is Shashidhar, and Muthappa Rai is called Monnappa Rai (played by Ramesh Indira).

Even if these characters are the big draw in the movie, the plot revolves around the journey of Balarama, a character with a small yet significant presence in Aa Dinagalu. Vinod Prabhakar’s portrayal of the titular role is the film’s biggest takeaway. He makes us feel for the character, and is quite impressive in the final portions of the movie, where Balarama struggles to break free from the underworld’s trap.

Balaramana Dinagalu is impressive when it reflects the psychology of a gangster. Jayaram is shown helping the needy while Balarama urges young boys to focus on education. It’s as if these men who commit heinous acts, have a heart as well. Shashidhar is often called “intellectual gangster”, as the film reflects how the underworld fears well-read men in the field. Politicians and policemen, the supposedly the protectors of people being part of the crime nexus, strengthen the movie’s world-building.

The film falters in its inability to rise above the plot’s predictability. Balarama’s journey is no different from the often-seen life of an innocent man from a small town who becomes a gangster owing to uncontrollable circumstances. I wish the film had delved a bit more into Balaram’s personality. Why does he not resist becoming a gangster? What dreams did he have when he moved to Bengaluru from a small town?

Advertisement

“My hands speak louder than my words,” says Balarama. This signals that he is someone who settles conflicts with fists rather than conversations. Despite this detail, Balaram’s entry into the underworld feels too sudden. The predictability strips the sheen away from the well-shot action sequences, as the result of every fight is known beforehand.

Chaitanya is careful not to glorify the act of violence. He wants to portray the negative effects of violence on the children in a family, as the movie ends with a hard-hitting frame. It’s impressive that the actor-director duo has delivered a non-hero-worshipping gangster saga.

That said, the movie could have benefited from a couple of gripping episodes. While it’s important not to romanticise the life of a gangster, there is no harm in delivering moments of peak tension, the biggest plus of the genre. 

The assassination of Jayaram, the impact of Kotwal’s elimination on the underworld, or the Sakleshpura incident involving Monnappa Rai, had the potential to offer edge-of-the-seat, high-stakes portions, but they are rushed. The love story is simple, but it lacks emotional intensity between the lead couple. Santhosh Narayanan’s dance numbers are forgettable (despite it being his forte) while his montage melodies are beautiful.

Balaramana Dinagalu adopts a restrained, almost clinical approach to the gangster genre. While that keeps it from glorifying violence, it also leaves the narrative feeling a touch too neat and emotionally muted.

Advertisement

Balaramana Dinagalu is currently running in theatres

Published – June 28, 2026 07:58 pm IST

Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

A New Dawn Anime Film Review

Published

on

A New Dawn Anime Film Review

Perhaps there’s a certain irony in a story about a fireworks factory mostly keeping away from explosive drama. Yoshitoshi Shinomiya‘s lowkey feature directorial debut A New Dawn is at the very least visually captivating, comprised of lush and rather hypnotic production design. The story is small scale focusing on a trio of friends who try to save a fireworks factory in their hometown, but the imagery feels expansive and lush. A New Dawn begins with a beautiful and vaguely familiar display of this beauty: the flowing, painterly imagery of its opening sequence recalls Shinomiya’s work on the flashback sequence in Makoto Shinkai‘s your name., immediately showing that the film’s visuals might transcend its small town drama.

A background artist himself on films by Makoto Shinkai as well as the similarly resplendent Pompo: The Cinéphile, it makes sense that this history would be felt in the background works of A New Dawn. They’re dense with detail, rich with almost luminous color and illustrative texture. Shinomiya, who also wrote and storyboarded the film, veers away from the photorealism associated with someone like Shinkai through some impressionist touches – like the splotches of green paint which represent treelines – which sometimes turns into outright abstraction like when a character begins to run through the space. Sometimes there are swaying, morphing textures in the background as splotches of paint subtly shift around. On a more intimate level, the cluttered and characterful interior spaces tell a story too. This is a long-winded way of saying A New Dawn looks really, really good.

It’s not just in the tableaux of its countryside habitats and ramshackle living spaces carved out of abandoned warehouses, but there’s a sense of invention permeating through A New Dawn‘s various experiments with visual languages of animation. The most prominent is an incredibly charming stop motion animated sequence using a cardboard diorama and real human hands invading the shot in a creative reflection of a drunken character’s perspective. Even though it broadly still looks “anime” through its character design, there are also smaller details which work to set A New Dawn apart from its contemporaries, touches like its occasional lineless artwork or the way rain is defined through smudged black brushstrokes.

It’s in the screenwriting where A New Dawn begins to feel more run of the mill. Its story about the constant chasing of the majesty of a fabled firework “Shuhari” feels both familiar in its premise but also a little bit alienating in its structure. The importance of the firework itself never feels clear – the moment its mystery is unravelled hardly feels like a revelation as a result, something amplified by how the writing often obfuscates what anyone is talking about. The whole story feels a little distancing, and despite the allure of the background art and design of the spaces the characters inhabit, the people themselves feel constantly at arms length.

It almost pulls things back with its climax – the detonation of the “Shuhari” goes a long way in justifying the circular conversations about its nature and origins – a painted streak of light launches into the sky before turning into something otherworldly, suddenly tripling down on the film’s captivating exaggerations.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

Hollywood Pariah Kevin Spacey Opens in a Straight to Video Movie with 25 Producers, 1 Review, No Theaters, No Press – Showbiz411

Published

on

Hollywood Pariah Kevin Spacey Opens in a Straight to Video Movie with 25 Producers, 1 Review, No Theaters, No Press – Showbiz411
★ Make Showbiz411 your Preferred Source on Google

As we know, Kevin Spacey is a pariah in Hollywood.

He’s in a rare club with Mel Gibson, Armie Hammer, Nate Parker, Jonathan Majors, and James Franco.

Spacey has managed to avoid jail time by reaching settlements with various accusers of sexual malfeasance, all men.

His film career — which included two Oscars and a Tony Award — has been destroyed.

Advertisement

Spacey has been reduced to appearing in straight to video films, made for whatever reason the various producers involved know only to themselves.

On Friday, a new Spacey movie surfaced against its will, but not in theaters. It also went straight to video. “1780” is a period piece set during the Revolutionary War. Spacey plays a toothless Pennsylvania country trapper.

There is no rating on Rotten Tomatoes, largely because there is only one review. The review by Alan Ng of Film Threat is positive. Ng recently reviewed “World War Bigfoot,” which he also liked. He seems to specialize in reviewing films no one has heard of.

“1780” does boast 25 producers who will probably not see a return on their investment. But they can say they made a movie with Kevin Spacey.

Advertisement

Donate to Showbiz411.com

Showbiz411 is now in its 13th year of providing breaking and exclusive entertainment news. This is an independent site, unlike the many Hollywood trades that are owned by one company. To continue providing news that takes a fresh look at what’s going on in movies, music, theater, etc, advertising is our basis. Reader donations would be greatly appreciated, too. They are just another facet of keeping fact based journalism alive.
Thank you

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending