Gautamiputra Satakarni Review
Suggestions
Can watch again
No
Good for kids
No
Good for dates
No
Wait for OTT
Yes
Gautamiputra Satakarni is based on the life of the eponymous Satavahana ruler. The only glitch is that we know nothing of his life except whatever little is stated in an inscription called the Nashik Prasasthi. The inscription lists out the lands under his rule and calls him the king of kings. While that is all very pleasant to hear, one has to acknowledge that the inscription provides no incidents about the family or the personality of the invasions of the said gentleman.
Notwithstanding this lack of data, the director Krish tries to concoct a story about the zeal of Satakarni (an earnest Balakrishna) for uniting the sub-continent, his love for his queen (an even more earnest Shriya Saran), and his respect for the queen mother (an uninterested Hema Malini). Throw in plot devices like conniving vassals, abducted princes, wailing wives and venomous vamps, and you'll still be frantically groping around to find a thread that'll make this a cohesive plot.
Which leads us to the lesson - as far as films go, history isn't the same thing as a story.
But then, we have seen enough non-stories which became memorable films. So you are still within your right to hope, like we did, that something good is going to come out of the film. Satakarni was after all the most successful expansionist ruler among the Satavahanas, and that's a matter of pride for the Telugu people. We could still have our hearts filled with pride by watching a rousing narrative of the king's exploits. This was, indeed, the rationale behind Krish's attempt.
Except, it leads us to our next, and rather bitter, lesson - pride isn't the same thing as competence.
Regardless of how much pride we are ready to fill our hearts with, we still need a rousing narrative to supply that emotion. If that weren't the case, you could open a new tab, go to the Wikipedia page on Satakarni, study his achievements at leisure, and beam like a model in the after shots of a Fair & Lovely ad.
But instead of a rousing narrative, you get one that makes you drowsy. The visuals are bright but they don't make for good story-telling instruments. The music employs every trick in the book to make itself sound grand but you don't remember a single tune from the whole film. There are war sequences but you know it's just poor CGI and hordes of junior artistes trying not to run into each other. The editor desperately tries to stitch shots together to make it all look exciting, but you really can't blame sour juice on the juicemaker when the fruit itself is rotten.
Balakrishna goes through the motions as ritualistically as he does in his other films. However, we can slightly relax on discussing Gautamiputra Satakarni as a Balakrishna film because it eschews most of the Balayya tropes that usually make his blockbusters work. He may have written some spectacular lines (which also get flawlessly delivered by the protagonist), but Krish hasn't got a clue on how star vehicles work or how fans think. It is a whole different issue that Balayya fans will perhaps still lap it up but that just demonstrates the kind of star the man is. It says nothing about the kind of film Gautamiputra Satakarni is.
The man you really need to worry yourself about is the director Krish. Gamyam and Vedam seemed to be ushering in a splendid career, but his next two films showcase a man who's more preoccupied with talk rather than show. Krishnam Vande Jagadgurum talked about illegal mining and dying theatre, but that doesn't automatically make a film a Maa Bhoomi or a Sankarabharanam. And Kanche spoke out against caste and the Nazis, but that doesn't make a film another Erra Mandaram or Schindler's List. You feel sorry for those flimsy movies breaking under the weight of their director's ambition.
Likewise, Krish wanted Gautamiputra Satakarni to be grand. He wanted it to be historical. He wanted it to rouse Telugu pride. In this single-minded pursuit of grandiosity, he forgot to make a good film. Which gives us our last learning for this piece - ambition isn't the same thing as vision.
Notwithstanding this lack of data, the director Krish tries to concoct a story about the zeal of Satakarni (an earnest Balakrishna) for uniting the sub-continent, his love for his queen (an even more earnest Shriya Saran), and his respect for the queen mother (an uninterested Hema Malini). Throw in plot devices like conniving vassals, abducted princes, wailing wives and venomous vamps, and you'll still be frantically groping around to find a thread that'll make this a cohesive plot.
Which leads us to the lesson - as far as films go, history isn't the same thing as a story.
But then, we have seen enough non-stories which became memorable films. So you are still within your right to hope, like we did, that something good is going to come out of the film. Satakarni was after all the most successful expansionist ruler among the Satavahanas, and that's a matter of pride for the Telugu people. We could still have our hearts filled with pride by watching a rousing narrative of the king's exploits. This was, indeed, the rationale behind Krish's attempt.
Except, it leads us to our next, and rather bitter, lesson - pride isn't the same thing as competence.
Regardless of how much pride we are ready to fill our hearts with, we still need a rousing narrative to supply that emotion. If that weren't the case, you could open a new tab, go to the Wikipedia page on Satakarni, study his achievements at leisure, and beam like a model in the after shots of a Fair & Lovely ad.
But instead of a rousing narrative, you get one that makes you drowsy. The visuals are bright but they don't make for good story-telling instruments. The music employs every trick in the book to make itself sound grand but you don't remember a single tune from the whole film. There are war sequences but you know it's just poor CGI and hordes of junior artistes trying not to run into each other. The editor desperately tries to stitch shots together to make it all look exciting, but you really can't blame sour juice on the juicemaker when the fruit itself is rotten.
Balakrishna goes through the motions as ritualistically as he does in his other films. However, we can slightly relax on discussing Gautamiputra Satakarni as a Balakrishna film because it eschews most of the Balayya tropes that usually make his blockbusters work. He may have written some spectacular lines (which also get flawlessly delivered by the protagonist), but Krish hasn't got a clue on how star vehicles work or how fans think. It is a whole different issue that Balayya fans will perhaps still lap it up but that just demonstrates the kind of star the man is. It says nothing about the kind of film Gautamiputra Satakarni is.
The man you really need to worry yourself about is the director Krish. Gamyam and Vedam seemed to be ushering in a splendid career, but his next two films showcase a man who's more preoccupied with talk rather than show. Krishnam Vande Jagadgurum talked about illegal mining and dying theatre, but that doesn't automatically make a film a Maa Bhoomi or a Sankarabharanam. And Kanche spoke out against caste and the Nazis, but that doesn't make a film another Erra Mandaram or Schindler's List. You feel sorry for those flimsy movies breaking under the weight of their director's ambition.
Likewise, Krish wanted Gautamiputra Satakarni to be grand. He wanted it to be historical. He wanted it to rouse Telugu pride. In this single-minded pursuit of grandiosity, he forgot to make a good film. Which gives us our last learning for this piece - ambition isn't the same thing as vision.
GAUTAMIPUTRA SATAKARNI SNAPSHOT
TOP COMMENT
I don't like commenting more than once, but this goes to all the butt-hurt fans that are seething in anger over this review:
One review will not devastate GPSK's prospects at the box office. If the audience like it, they'll go watch it. Take Sarrainodu as the perfect example.
One review will not devastate GPSK's prospects at the box office. If the audience like it, they'll go watch it. Take Sarrainodu as the perfect example.
GAUTAMIPUTRA SATAKARNI USER REVIEWS
1 - 13 OF 13 COMMENTS
3 USERS
Performances
Script
Music/Soundtrack
Visuals
NA
NA
NA
NA
Can watch again - NA
Good for kids - NA
Good for dates - NA
Wait for OTT - NA
I've watched both the movies, and I can say that the difference in both the movies is their Protagonists. While Chiru lifted the movie with his ease, Balayya made it look like he was trying very hard. I do understand the effort/cost put into GPSK and wish it could have been so better. I don't really complain about CGI, given our budgets are low, but in my opinion Krish was satisfied with a sub-standard performances from artists. The only saving grace for the film are it's dialogues and Balayya did a good job in dubbing.
Note: In both the movies I hated the last song - timing in KN150 and dancing in GPSK.
Note: In both the movies I hated the last song - timing in KN150 and dancing in GPSK.
The man going by the name Josh must be high on grass, thinks that he has the craft to review a movie without much knowledge on movie making.
I just saw the movie and liked it, acting, writing and dialogue are spot on.
I just saw the movie and liked it, acting, writing and dialogue are spot on.
I assure you, no grass was involved. Any talent or incompetence you perceive is completely without influence.
Good job Josh
Though I read a lot of review here and I have a similar taste as yours. I didn't read the review of this movie before watching it. I did it when I was watching it on screen. This states how boring this movie is. History is my passion and trust me guys, this is not even close to the real incidents.
It's ok to make a scene cinematic, but you have an overdose here. If they wanted to make a proper war movie, balayya wouldn't have killed 10 people with one swing of his sword. I won't complain on CG because of the budget constraints, that's acceptable.
For a war scene, game of thrones(Battle of bastards) can be taken as standard. And for people who crib on budget issues, please watch Korean movies. They have been made at same budget as ours, but far ahead as a movie in whole.
Anyways good review Josh
Though I read a lot of review here and I have a similar taste as yours. I didn't read the review of this movie before watching it. I did it when I was watching it on screen. This states how boring this movie is. History is my passion and trust me guys, this is not even close to the real incidents.
It's ok to make a scene cinematic, but you have an overdose here. If they wanted to make a proper war movie, balayya wouldn't have killed 10 people with one swing of his sword. I won't complain on CG because of the budget constraints, that's acceptable.
For a war scene, game of thrones(Battle of bastards) can be taken as standard. And for people who crib on budget issues, please watch Korean movies. They have been made at same budget as ours, but far ahead as a movie in whole.
Anyways good review Josh
I don't like commenting more than once, but this goes to all the butt-hurt fans that are seething in anger over this review:
One review will not devastate GPSK's prospects at the box office. If the audience like it, they'll go watch it. Take Sarrainodu as the perfect example.
One review will not devastate GPSK's prospects at the box office. If the audience like it, they'll go watch it. Take Sarrainodu as the perfect example.
Just because it's Balayya's 100th or Chili's 150th film, the movies should be good.From what I hear, both are horrible movies, with GPSK marginally better.Seriously CV Vinayak is one horrible director.He doesn't have even one original idea.Same with Boyapati SEenu, Vaitla SEenu, Gopichand Malineni etc.Vinayak and directors of his ilk are destroying many film lovers interest in Telugu cinema....
My contention is not about the money or the CGI or how quickly the film got made. None of them is a true bottleneck. Good cinema has to come from a mind which is excited by a story and tries to tell it well. Krish has been moving away from that space since KVJ. Even if he has such constraints on money I wish he spent about 10 L of that money on hiring himself a script doctor. And what's the hurry? Why shouldn't more time be spent on the script? Considerations such as a Sankranthi release shouldn't take a higher priority than making a good product.
Anyway, we can still build some bridges and communicate each other's point of view. Let me share mine by comparing some aspects (unrelated to expenditure) between Bahubali-The Beginning (BTB) and GPSK -
[SPOILERS AHEAD]
1) There are no spoilers in GPSK. There's just no surprise in the film. No major plot points nor small clever flourishes. In comparison, Bahubali shows thought put into it at almost every stretch. Where GPSK uses a nose stud or a toy horse as objects of affection, BTB devises a matching tattoo which is drawn with so much guile. You have a miniature serpent entwined around an arrow and a tap on the bow is used to distract the danger before sending it flying. Trebuchets, tent cloth, extensible spiked maces (okay, relax on the physics classes - I know that stuff is impossible but it's still superbly conjured up) and other assorted amazements make for weapons. What does GPSK have? A cleavage toting vamp who apparently pierces the king with poison without him even realising it when he's wide awake. You see the difference, I hope. Krish was trying to get the job done. But Rajamouli was having fun.
2) Extending on the previous point, the war strategems in GPSK are just lazy writing. The Trishula vyuham in BTB, whether we understand it or not, still gets filmed with a conviction that leads us to believe that this thing works. Satakarni's strategy in GPSK is basically to be chaotic and act like a mob. It's a non-strategy and that works for a mob because a mob outnumbers a strategically distributed police force. But the very point in GPSK is the army is outnumbered by over 300 %. Acting undirected is stupidity. This gets worse with the filming because the visuals clearly don't show this difference in numbers when the Yavana army is surrounded by the Satavahanas.
3) It's been two years since BTB. I still know who Sivagami, Kattappa, and Kalakeyas are. I know why Nasser and Rohini's characters behave the way they do. However, I don't know why the Shakas behave the way they do. I don't remember many characters from GPSK. All of this points to one thing - there's zilch character development in GPSK. Even the mother Gautami is a cardboard character whose personality is not even discussed in the film.
4) The worst hit the film takes because of this emaciated character development is it has no real villain. This is the most telling flaw. BTB builds it's villain so painstakingly and lovingly, both Bhallala and the Kalakeya war lord. You need that work put into the villain for the combat to make impact. And Rajamouli knows it better than most of our directors. If anything, his problem is he comes up with disgusting traits (mostly raping women) in order to make us loathe the villain. Coming back to our point, GPSK expects us to hate our villain simply because he's white? Xenophobia much? And what's this obsession with a single kingdom and a single administration in these times of bifurcations and micro-sized districts? I understand the concept of a peaceful society being a good economy but how is that supposed to make me invested in film about war?
I could go on but I hope I've made my point. If none of this communicates my perspective to you, I request you to ask yourself a much simpler question. Do you think Gamyam is better than GPSK? I'm sure you know the shoestring budget Krish pulled off Gamyam with.
Anyway, we can still build some bridges and communicate each other's point of view. Let me share mine by comparing some aspects (unrelated to expenditure) between Bahubali-The Beginning (BTB) and GPSK -
[SPOILERS AHEAD]
1) There are no spoilers in GPSK. There's just no surprise in the film. No major plot points nor small clever flourishes. In comparison, Bahubali shows thought put into it at almost every stretch. Where GPSK uses a nose stud or a toy horse as objects of affection, BTB devises a matching tattoo which is drawn with so much guile. You have a miniature serpent entwined around an arrow and a tap on the bow is used to distract the danger before sending it flying. Trebuchets, tent cloth, extensible spiked maces (okay, relax on the physics classes - I know that stuff is impossible but it's still superbly conjured up) and other assorted amazements make for weapons. What does GPSK have? A cleavage toting vamp who apparently pierces the king with poison without him even realising it when he's wide awake. You see the difference, I hope. Krish was trying to get the job done. But Rajamouli was having fun.
2) Extending on the previous point, the war strategems in GPSK are just lazy writing. The Trishula vyuham in BTB, whether we understand it or not, still gets filmed with a conviction that leads us to believe that this thing works. Satakarni's strategy in GPSK is basically to be chaotic and act like a mob. It's a non-strategy and that works for a mob because a mob outnumbers a strategically distributed police force. But the very point in GPSK is the army is outnumbered by over 300 %. Acting undirected is stupidity. This gets worse with the filming because the visuals clearly don't show this difference in numbers when the Yavana army is surrounded by the Satavahanas.
3) It's been two years since BTB. I still know who Sivagami, Kattappa, and Kalakeyas are. I know why Nasser and Rohini's characters behave the way they do. However, I don't know why the Shakas behave the way they do. I don't remember many characters from GPSK. All of this points to one thing - there's zilch character development in GPSK. Even the mother Gautami is a cardboard character whose personality is not even discussed in the film.
4) The worst hit the film takes because of this emaciated character development is it has no real villain. This is the most telling flaw. BTB builds it's villain so painstakingly and lovingly, both Bhallala and the Kalakeya war lord. You need that work put into the villain for the combat to make impact. And Rajamouli knows it better than most of our directors. If anything, his problem is he comes up with disgusting traits (mostly raping women) in order to make us loathe the villain. Coming back to our point, GPSK expects us to hate our villain simply because he's white? Xenophobia much? And what's this obsession with a single kingdom and a single administration in these times of bifurcations and micro-sized districts? I understand the concept of a peaceful society being a good economy but how is that supposed to make me invested in film about war?
I could go on but I hope I've made my point. If none of this communicates my perspective to you, I request you to ask yourself a much simpler question. Do you think Gamyam is better than GPSK? I'm sure you know the shoestring budget Krish pulled off Gamyam with.
Gamyam vs GPSK: which is better?
Before i answer that, i request you to please answer this: in what way is Antham (your overall rating:5, script 7) better than GPSK (your overall rating: 4, script 3). :)
Before i answer that, i request you to please answer this: in what way is Antham (your overall rating:5, script 7) better than GPSK (your overall rating: 4, script 3). :)
Same thing as Gamyam, Chaitu. Detail and effort in the script and direction departments. My whole problem with GPSK and particularly with Krish is the rather straightforward and plain approach. That's what I meant by getting the job done. His recent films feel more like an essay talking about important things and lots of sturdy vocabulary thrown in but with dull writing. No matter how important the topic of the essay, it has to work on the style of the writer.
Much of our discussion is on subjective aspects and we have a fundamental disagreement on most of the points. I don't think you got my point and I certainly don't get yours. So we could politely agree to disagree.
The one objective aspect, the war strategy part, I have a response for. I don't think 'asymmetric warfare' means what you think it does. If you go through the Wiki article, it talks about cases like terrorism, guerilla warfare, and insurgency. The idea is that the weaker side strategically (please note that word) plays on its own strengths (stealth and multiple fronts are key) and doesn't exactly follow Yuddha dharma (so to speak). And most of them are long term conflicts with multiple battles. Not a single day battle where a wild crowd runs amok.
If you are further interested in asymmetric warfare, you should look up this game called Colonel Blotto and its explanation on why terrorism is successful. I found it exciting.
As far as this discussion goes, I don't think we understand each other very well. And I don't feel very comfortable because it appears to be turning into an argument. If your purpose is to win, I'll gladly give you a walk over.
Much of our discussion is on subjective aspects and we have a fundamental disagreement on most of the points. I don't think you got my point and I certainly don't get yours. So we could politely agree to disagree.
The one objective aspect, the war strategy part, I have a response for. I don't think 'asymmetric warfare' means what you think it does. If you go through the Wiki article, it talks about cases like terrorism, guerilla warfare, and insurgency. The idea is that the weaker side strategically (please note that word) plays on its own strengths (stealth and multiple fronts are key) and doesn't exactly follow Yuddha dharma (so to speak). And most of them are long term conflicts with multiple battles. Not a single day battle where a wild crowd runs amok.
If you are further interested in asymmetric warfare, you should look up this game called Colonel Blotto and its explanation on why terrorism is successful. I found it exciting.
As far as this discussion goes, I don't think we understand each other very well. And I don't feel very comfortable because it appears to be turning into an argument. If your purpose is to win, I'll gladly give you a walk over.
I am sorry if this looked like an argument, Josh, but that was not my intention. I like your reviews. I was just trying to explain why gpsk should not be compared with baahubali, even in terms of story and character development.
Cheers and Happy Pongal :)
Cheers and Happy Pongal :)
Even within Krish's filmography, I feel GPSK is his weakest film after KVJ. My criticism comes from an actual high regard held for Krish.
Happy Kanuma :)
Happy Kanuma :)
Thanks for sharing your point of view. This surely communicates your perspective to me. I will share my pov, and try to explain some points you have raised.
[SPOILERS AHEAD]
War strategy: The war strategy used in final battle of GPSK is called "Asymmetric warfare". This is used when your army is vastly outnumbered by the enemy, not the other way round.
Characters and Character Development:
1) Please note that GPSK is not a fictional film like Baahubali. Its a "historical". Satakarni, Gautamibala, Pulomavi, Vaasishthi Devi are real people who once existed (2nd century A.D.). Very little detail about them is available to us, so Krish tried to make a film with the limited material. So he can't say much about Satakarni's mother and wife.
2) In a historical film, the director needs to keep the facts intact. Obviously he can't take cinematic liberties and show huge fictional waterfalls, fantasy worlds and so on.
3) The weapons used were realistic; arrows, swords, spears, axes and armours were the major weapons used by Satavahanas. Krish had done his research, he was not trying to "get the job done".
4) Baahubali is a 2-part movie, where the whole first part is devoted to character development, and the actual story is going to happen in the 2nd part. Thats not the case with GPSK. So comparing GPSK with baahubali in character development department is unfair.
5) The only character that matters in GPSK is that of Satakarni. Through the course of the movie, each facet of his personality is revealed, resulting in a fully developed character. This is the story of his military conquests, and the movie explores all the following points:
A) Motivation: Throughout the film, Satakarni sticks to his aim of creating a "united Bharat". This is because there used to be lot of infighting going on between the various small kingdoms, which Satakarni wanted to prevent once and for all. He wants to promote peace and unity. Even his wife and other people in the movie question his motives, but he reasons out by telling that once the final war is over, there will be no wars anymore. Krish is not "creating" a motive here; this guy really existed, and his motive is real. That should be reason enough to keep you invested in the proceedings.
B) Respect towards subordinates: After capturing a kingdom, Satakarni never shows pride, and treats the defeated king with utmost respect (thala dinchaku... adi nenu gelichina thala!).
C) Mother: Satakarni gives the highest position of respect to Mother (Mother in general, not just "his mother")
D) Wife: Satakarni loves his wife, but will not compromise for her sake when duty calls. This is shown when Satakarni takes his son to the war (one of the major highlights),against her wishes, just to meet the challenge posed by the enemy king Nahapana.
E) People: He started the Ugadi festival, as shown in the movie, which is celebrated even today in all Telugu households. This shows his impact on people's lives, and how his legacy has continued through the centuries.
6) Villains:
What character development did Kalakeya have in Baahubali? He was a cardboard villain at best. He "says" stuff, but does not "do" anything, thus breaking the classic rule of cinema "show, don't tell".
Throughout the war, he never steps down from his elephant to fight. He sits on it until Rana arrives and brings him down. He is repulsive to look at, he is foul-mouthed, but thats it. His actions are not at all threatening.
On the other hand, there are reasons to hate the villains in GPSK:
A) Nahapana: He kills Satakarni's messenger, and killing a messenger is a crime of the highest order among kings. This automatically draws hate.
B) Demetrius: He comes to conquer our country, so the stakes are high. Isn't that reason enough to evoke a patriotic feeling in us?
Moreover, he has already tried to kill Satakarni once, by sending assassins to his palace.
Most importantly, THIS STUFF REALLY HAPPENED. So where is the question of xenophobia???
Bottomline: Every film should be judged by its own merits.
[SPOILERS AHEAD]
War strategy: The war strategy used in final battle of GPSK is called "Asymmetric warfare". This is used when your army is vastly outnumbered by the enemy, not the other way round.
Characters and Character Development:
1) Please note that GPSK is not a fictional film like Baahubali. Its a "historical". Satakarni, Gautamibala, Pulomavi, Vaasishthi Devi are real people who once existed (2nd century A.D.). Very little detail about them is available to us, so Krish tried to make a film with the limited material. So he can't say much about Satakarni's mother and wife.
2) In a historical film, the director needs to keep the facts intact. Obviously he can't take cinematic liberties and show huge fictional waterfalls, fantasy worlds and so on.
3) The weapons used were realistic; arrows, swords, spears, axes and armours were the major weapons used by Satavahanas. Krish had done his research, he was not trying to "get the job done".
4) Baahubali is a 2-part movie, where the whole first part is devoted to character development, and the actual story is going to happen in the 2nd part. Thats not the case with GPSK. So comparing GPSK with baahubali in character development department is unfair.
5) The only character that matters in GPSK is that of Satakarni. Through the course of the movie, each facet of his personality is revealed, resulting in a fully developed character. This is the story of his military conquests, and the movie explores all the following points:
A) Motivation: Throughout the film, Satakarni sticks to his aim of creating a "united Bharat". This is because there used to be lot of infighting going on between the various small kingdoms, which Satakarni wanted to prevent once and for all. He wants to promote peace and unity. Even his wife and other people in the movie question his motives, but he reasons out by telling that once the final war is over, there will be no wars anymore. Krish is not "creating" a motive here; this guy really existed, and his motive is real. That should be reason enough to keep you invested in the proceedings.
B) Respect towards subordinates: After capturing a kingdom, Satakarni never shows pride, and treats the defeated king with utmost respect (thala dinchaku... adi nenu gelichina thala!).
C) Mother: Satakarni gives the highest position of respect to Mother (Mother in general, not just "his mother")
D) Wife: Satakarni loves his wife, but will not compromise for her sake when duty calls. This is shown when Satakarni takes his son to the war (one of the major highlights),against her wishes, just to meet the challenge posed by the enemy king Nahapana.
E) People: He started the Ugadi festival, as shown in the movie, which is celebrated even today in all Telugu households. This shows his impact on people's lives, and how his legacy has continued through the centuries.
6) Villains:
What character development did Kalakeya have in Baahubali? He was a cardboard villain at best. He "says" stuff, but does not "do" anything, thus breaking the classic rule of cinema "show, don't tell".
Throughout the war, he never steps down from his elephant to fight. He sits on it until Rana arrives and brings him down. He is repulsive to look at, he is foul-mouthed, but thats it. His actions are not at all threatening.
On the other hand, there are reasons to hate the villains in GPSK:
A) Nahapana: He kills Satakarni's messenger, and killing a messenger is a crime of the highest order among kings. This automatically draws hate.
B) Demetrius: He comes to conquer our country, so the stakes are high. Isn't that reason enough to evoke a patriotic feeling in us?
Moreover, he has already tried to kill Satakarni once, by sending assassins to his palace.
Most importantly, THIS STUFF REALLY HAPPENED. So where is the question of xenophobia???
Bottomline: Every film should be judged by its own merits.
Fair enough. Totally Agree about the characters being underdeveloped.
Script 3.0? That's quite a shock. I thought of watching it this weekend. But now I have second thoughts.
Dude, no. Please watch it and let us know what you think. I'm excited about this array of opinions GPSK is churning out. Yours is one I'm keen on hearing.
My schedule didn't allow me to watch it. But boy, what a debate it triggered! Apart from some snide remarks and condescension, an interesting variation in points of view. I went back and read the review of Kanche and found that it also attracted as many polarized comments as this one. Seems our readers and reviewers have a special interest in Krish.
I watched all the other works of Krish, and though his first two films are no masterpieces, they promised someone who is fervently practicing his craft to master it soon. But sadly, he resorted to shortcuts with more blatant forms of preaching when he could just leave more room for the audiences' perspective. Though he employed clever ways to present his point, be it the art that finally enlightens Rana in KVJ or the parallels he draws between German nationalist supremacy and local caste feuds in Kanche, it's the same sermon all the time: The transformation of selfish and morally ambiguous characters into butterflies. And he blames it all on the rotten system and societal failures and we have no problem nodding yes to that, but beneath that lie the dark corners of human psyche, which brings forth these various forms of evil from time to time.Now that is what an incisive mind should focus on bringing out.
Black-and-White heroes and villains are not what we expect from sensible filmmakers. We have Rajamouli for that. We need the likes of Krish to explore the shades of gray and how they project into society. We already have countless films that demonize the system and churn out preachy "message-oriented" movies (regardless of how loud and cartoonish they are).
But who am I to tell what he should do?
May be we are a tad too critical, but only because we believe he has a greater potential than what he is settling for. I feel that when he begins to trust his audiences and lets go of the heavy exposition he resorts to frequently, he can come up with a film that matches his potential.
I write all this as a simple, regular movie-goer and not as a reviewer.
And I stand with you Josh, when you said that the sharpness of your criticism is in proportion to the high regard Krish has for his own works. Yes, it is pretty evident that he deems them nothing less than masterpieces.
Anyhow, here we are, still waiting for his masterpiece. Apparently, GPSK is not it. But I am sure, it will come one day.
PS:
Also I am intrigued by how this filmmaker who took a dig at regional feelings and cultural divides in his last film glorified "Telugu Pride" here. In Kanche there is an elaborate dialogue that rants about how this planet is a speck of dust in a vast universe and that we still divide it by race and region. As I didn't watch GPSK, I can't comment much on this.
I watched all the other works of Krish, and though his first two films are no masterpieces, they promised someone who is fervently practicing his craft to master it soon. But sadly, he resorted to shortcuts with more blatant forms of preaching when he could just leave more room for the audiences' perspective. Though he employed clever ways to present his point, be it the art that finally enlightens Rana in KVJ or the parallels he draws between German nationalist supremacy and local caste feuds in Kanche, it's the same sermon all the time: The transformation of selfish and morally ambiguous characters into butterflies. And he blames it all on the rotten system and societal failures and we have no problem nodding yes to that, but beneath that lie the dark corners of human psyche, which brings forth these various forms of evil from time to time.Now that is what an incisive mind should focus on bringing out.
Black-and-White heroes and villains are not what we expect from sensible filmmakers. We have Rajamouli for that. We need the likes of Krish to explore the shades of gray and how they project into society. We already have countless films that demonize the system and churn out preachy "message-oriented" movies (regardless of how loud and cartoonish they are).
But who am I to tell what he should do?
May be we are a tad too critical, but only because we believe he has a greater potential than what he is settling for. I feel that when he begins to trust his audiences and lets go of the heavy exposition he resorts to frequently, he can come up with a film that matches his potential.
I write all this as a simple, regular movie-goer and not as a reviewer.
And I stand with you Josh, when you said that the sharpness of your criticism is in proportion to the high regard Krish has for his own works. Yes, it is pretty evident that he deems them nothing less than masterpieces.
Anyhow, here we are, still waiting for his masterpiece. Apparently, GPSK is not it. But I am sure, it will come one day.
PS:
Also I am intrigued by how this filmmaker who took a dig at regional feelings and cultural divides in his last film glorified "Telugu Pride" here. In Kanche there is an elaborate dialogue that rants about how this planet is a speck of dust in a vast universe and that we still divide it by race and region. As I didn't watch GPSK, I can't comment much on this.
I just want him to pay attention to his craft. It doesn't matter what subjects he chooses. Black, white, or fifty shades of grey. Just make it well.
No No :)
I didn't mean you meant it. I just rambled.
I didn't mean you meant it. I just rambled.
I loved movie a lot.....
But fullhyd you movies reviews going down why I don't know for good movies you guys are giving very less rating
But fullhyd you movies reviews going down why I don't know for good movies you guys are giving very less rating
That's because they are trying to review in the true spirit of reviewing of late although they have been good with words since long...
Very sad how there is an overexcited, dreamy-eyed fan who reviewed Khaidhi No 150 and made it sound like the movie of the century while you, Josh, made an extremely critical analysis of what may have been the better film of the two.
As usual, i love your reviews and your quirkiness, but it would have been nice if you threw a little more positivity in there.
As usual, i love your reviews and your quirkiness, but it would have been nice if you threw a little more positivity in there.
I should buy you a coffee, man. Better still, let's watch a film together. Also, where the hell is JayZ nowadays?
Hey Josh...why no review on Narayana Murthy anna film?? (P.S. This is the original JayZ....the one with whom you had long discussions on films a few months ago)
I'm on a one film a week diet, JayZ. Good to hear from you.
Oh wow. I like Fullhyd reviews but seriously K150 gets unanimous praise despite the ill-conceived humour, crass dialogues and zillion self-references to 150. GPSK doesn't even get an acknowledgement for trying, much less applause. Is it me or did my past fan status of chiru cloud my judgement!
RATING
6
Let's consider two kinds of films - low concept and high concept (they might appear like different names for mass and class but they aren't). I believe a film needs to be evaluated on the parameters it sets itself.
Truth is our films are obsessively low concept. So, reviewing them is a different scene altogether where the emphasis is largely on the film's capability to make you feel entertained. The few films that try more than that end up being poor shows (I can't think of a well made high concept Telugu film in the last decade aside from Prasthanam and Bahubali). And these films, simply by aiming higher, ask to be scrutinised deeper.
The trouble is people think that a film needs to be seen positively simply because it's high concept. I disagree with the idea of a participation certificate. Particularly when it's supposed to be handed to a guy like Krish who actually has it in him to be a winner.
Truth is our films are obsessively low concept. So, reviewing them is a different scene altogether where the emphasis is largely on the film's capability to make you feel entertained. The few films that try more than that end up being poor shows (I can't think of a well made high concept Telugu film in the last decade aside from Prasthanam and Bahubali). And these films, simply by aiming higher, ask to be scrutinised deeper.
The trouble is people think that a film needs to be seen positively simply because it's high concept. I disagree with the idea of a participation certificate. Particularly when it's supposed to be handed to a guy like Krish who actually has it in him to be a winner.
Is Bahubali so good my dear????? When has it become a benchmark???????( I didn't even bother to watch it actually).....
I agree with your evaluation of the high and low concept movies. I stopped watching telugu movies unless you folks recommend. But truth be told, even for a supposedly failed execution high-concept movie, GPSK drags on but never bores. Is it another baahubali, no. But it plays out like one of those stories we've all heard from our grandparents. My conflict is I've enjoyed GPSK, but had I read the review before, I'd have never watched it. Same with K150, (I still love tons of Chiru movies), had I read the review, I'd recommend it but I felt bored out of my mind and I didn't even see the original. When the sexual based comedy is given a pass, why not the cgi. Why vilify it for what it isn't than appreciate it for what it is.
You love tons of Chiru movies????? You must be subnormal.....
The odd thing is, I quite liked Kanche but you seem to have a very negative opinion on it.
However, I'm not sure how to take this review, because I have almost zero confidence in a Balayya movie being good (I thought most of his recent blockbusters were awful).
I guess I'll just watch Khaidi No. 150 and watch this when the ticket prices come down (it's £20 right now).
However, I'm not sure how to take this review, because I have almost zero confidence in a Balayya movie being good (I thought most of his recent blockbusters were awful).
I guess I'll just watch Khaidi No. 150 and watch this when the ticket prices come down (it's £20 right now).
I don't have a very negative opinion of Kanche. I just don't have a great opinion of it.
And please, my panning GPSK is not my endorsement of Khaidi150. In fact, I'm keeping away from the film myself.
And hopefully we'll have better luck with Satamanam Bhavathi.
And please, my panning GPSK is not my endorsement of Khaidi150. In fact, I'm keeping away from the film myself.
And hopefully we'll have better luck with Satamanam Bhavathi.
Forgot to add, I also saw Satamanam Bhavathi. I won't spoil it for you, but I will say that I give it a 6 for performances, 3 for script, 6 for music and 7 for visuals. Overall, maybe a 5. I look forward to comparing our views!
I didn't take it as an endorsement of Khaidi No. 150. I just chose that over GPSK because Khaidi was
I am not going to put myself through Khaidi No 150. So no views on it. But I can tell you why I won't watch it.
Kaththi goes playfully till that scene where Kadhiresan (the lout) realises the gravity of what Jeeva (the activist) is doing. The story gets intense after that and the emotional returns are high. There's a certain integrity with which Murugadoss narrates the whole thing (I don't particularly like Vijay btw - Murugadoss is my star here).
Later I heard about an item number in K150. What's an item number doing in a story like that? It got worse after I heard that a song called "Ammadu, let's do Kummudu" is inserted in the middle of the protest scenes.
And then there's the Brahmanandam problem. I hate to see him get abused by our heroes. There's not a single hero in this industry who can match his talent and yet he is always playing roles where the hero slaps him or calls him all sorts of humiliating names. I don't know what's funny about that. And I utterly don't see the point of such a comedy track in a story like Kaththi's.
Despite its shortcomings, Kaththi is made with some respect for its story and the issues it brings up. K150 can't make that claim.
Kaththi goes playfully till that scene where Kadhiresan (the lout) realises the gravity of what Jeeva (the activist) is doing. The story gets intense after that and the emotional returns are high. There's a certain integrity with which Murugadoss narrates the whole thing (I don't particularly like Vijay btw - Murugadoss is my star here).
Later I heard about an item number in K150. What's an item number doing in a story like that? It got worse after I heard that a song called "Ammadu, let's do Kummudu" is inserted in the middle of the protest scenes.
And then there's the Brahmanandam problem. I hate to see him get abused by our heroes. There's not a single hero in this industry who can match his talent and yet he is always playing roles where the hero slaps him or calls him all sorts of humiliating names. I don't know what's funny about that. And I utterly don't see the point of such a comedy track in a story like Kaththi's.
Despite its shortcomings, Kaththi is made with some respect for its story and the issues it brings up. K150 can't make that claim.
Do all these lousy, stupid, utterly unimaginative and boring movies like Khaidi150, GPSK and Bahubali deserve so much debate???? Buddies, please grow your mental space. Go and watch world cinema. Develop a passion for real cinema.
Baahubali being the gold standard for war movies is ok for telugu, but let's be honest, some of the Cgi is laughable. We all gave it a pass cuz we appreciate the effort and it was entertaining as hell. Kanche was good but I agree with Josh. a war movie with sprinkling of philosophy is good, a philosophy movie set against war...meh. I saw it, it was ok, don't care much for it.
This is insane! . Did u watch a different movie??
D movie was extremely rousing, d dialogues were clapworthy, d war scenes were goosebump inducing, d visuals were great. There was this amazing feeling of pride when I walked out of d cinema hall.
Besides, this is d only scathingly negative review on d web. All other reviews r positive, which says something.
PS: I m not a fan of any film star, just a casual moviegoer
D movie was extremely rousing, d dialogues were clapworthy, d war scenes were goosebump inducing, d visuals were great. There was this amazing feeling of pride when I walked out of d cinema hall.
Besides, this is d only scathingly negative review on d web. All other reviews r positive, which says something.
PS: I m not a fan of any film star, just a casual moviegoer
At least we agree on the dialogues :)
Jokes aside, there's a point you're probably missing. You might be a casual movie goer who takes the film lightly but Krish doesn't seem to look at his film that way. He seems to think of it very highly and on par with the best.
Bahubali has become something of a gold standard to evaluate a war film in Telugu. Going by that standard, I found the music, the costumes, the CG, the performances, the fights choreography, and the war strategy in GPSK pale in comparison.
The only department GPSK truly shines in, according to me, is the dialogues and that is further elevated by Balayya's superb command over the language.
But that is my experience of the film. It doesn't have to agree with yours. I'm glad you enjoyed it.
Jokes aside, there's a point you're probably missing. You might be a casual movie goer who takes the film lightly but Krish doesn't seem to look at his film that way. He seems to think of it very highly and on par with the best.
Bahubali has become something of a gold standard to evaluate a war film in Telugu. Going by that standard, I found the music, the costumes, the CG, the performances, the fights choreography, and the war strategy in GPSK pale in comparison.
The only department GPSK truly shines in, according to me, is the dialogues and that is further elevated by Balayya's superb command over the language.
But that is my experience of the film. It doesn't have to agree with yours. I'm glad you enjoyed it.
Bahubali is a 120-crore behemoth, whereas GPSK is made on a budget of just over 50 crore. FYI, Oopiri, SVSC, Rudramadevi are some of the 50-crore budgeted movies.
So comparing GPSK with baahubali is unfair. You need to compare it with other 50-crore movies, then you realize the significance of what Krish has achieved with GPSK.
Also, please visit SS Rajamouli's twitter account. This is from the horse's mouth:
Anjanaputhra Krish the blessings of 12 crore telugus across the globe will be with you.
How in the heavens could you make this epic in 79days? Unbelievable..i have got a lot lot to learn from you..Saimadhav garu, your pen is Satakarni's sword. Excellent camera work and extraordinary production values make Satakarni a proud telugu film to remember for a long time."
So comparing GPSK with baahubali is unfair. You need to compare it with other 50-crore movies, then you realize the significance of what Krish has achieved with GPSK.
Also, please visit SS Rajamouli's twitter account. This is from the horse's mouth:
Anjanaputhra Krish the blessings of 12 crore telugus across the globe will be with you.
How in the heavens could you make this epic in 79days? Unbelievable..i have got a lot lot to learn from you..Saimadhav garu, your pen is Satakarni's sword. Excellent camera work and extraordinary production values make Satakarni a proud telugu film to remember for a long time."
I replied in that other comment, Chaitu. It was getting too long for this indentation.
I know, I was looking forward to this review as other reviews were positive. Guess even these needed to be taken with a truckload of salt. Is the movie perfect, hell no! Is it engaging and good for a casual moviegoers, Hell yeah.
I'm too much of a fan of Kaththi. I am not likely to come up with an unbiased review of the remake.
LEAVE A COMMENT
fullhyd.com has 700,000+ monthly visits. Tell Hyderabad what you feel about Gautamiputra Satakarni!
MORE MOVIES
Latest Reviews
SEARCH MOVIES
Dissatisfied with the results? Report a problem or error, or add a listing.
ADVERTISEMENT
SHOUTBOX!
{{ todo.summary }}... expand »
{{ todo.text }}
« collapse
First | Prev |
1 2 3
{{current_page-1}} {{current_page}} {{current_page+1}}
{{last_page-2}} {{last_page-1}} {{last_page}}
| Next | Last
{{todos[0].name}}
{{todos[0].text}}
ADVERTISEMENT
This page was tagged for
gowthami putra satakarni full movie in telugu
gautamiputra satakarni full movie
Gautamiputra Satakarni telugu movie
Gautamiputra Satakarni reviews
release date