Bholaa Shankar

As a personal review, I must admit that "Bholaa Shankar" left me deeply disappointed. The film's attempt to replicate the success of the Tamil original "Vedhalam" falls drastically short, and Chiranjeevi's performance in the lead role is nothing less than disappointing. His portrayal lacks the charisma and depth that Ajith brought to the original character.

In all honesty, this movie stands as the worst cinematic experience I've had this year. The cringe-worthy moments, coupled with the uncomfortable romantic angle between Chiranjeevi and an actress of his daughter's age, were hard to overlook.

For those considering watching this film, I strongly advise against wasting your hard-earned money. The original version is freely available on YouTube with subtitles, offering a more fulfilling entertainment option. Rather than spending your money on "Bholaa Shankar," I'd suggest using those funds to treat yourself to a delicious meal through Zomato.

Chiranjeevi's decision to take on such roles only highlights the stark contrast between his performances and those of actors like Mammooty, who, at the age of 72, continue to excel in thought-provoking and artistic films. It's a reminder that there are far more rewarding ways to spend your time and resources than subjecting yourself to the disappointment that "Bholaa Shankar" brings.

My rating 0.00001/10.

Watching the Telugu movie Bhola Shankar, headlined by Chiranjeevi and directed by Meher Ramesh, is like going back in time by a few decades but not in a good way. The film repackages outdated, formulaic tropes and presents them with the confidence that star presence - Chiranjeevi, Tamannaah Bhatia and Keerthy Suresh - is enough to salvage a listless narrative. Meher Ramesh, credited with 'story development', adapts an eight-year-old Tamil film Vedalam starring Ajith, which was no great shakes either. What unravels is a cocktail of a sappy brother-sister bond, cardboard-ish villain characters, a leading lady who is supposed to contribute to absurd fun and comes across as utterly silly, a lot of tasteless humour and loud, forgetful music.

"Bholaa Shankar," the remake of the Tamil film "Vedalam," made it clear in its trailer that moviegoers and fans should keep their expectations low. The songs were also not chart-toppers. Following the failures of "Shadow" and "Shakti," director Meher Ramesh became a target of trolls. So, no one had high expectations for this film. We, too, entered the theater with zero expectations. Meher Ramesh, the director of "Bholaa Shankar," has proven that he cannot even meet the lowest of expectations.

"Bholaa Shankar" is a complete damm bore movie. It neither entertains nor features appealing tunes, as one would expect from a Chiranjeevi film. This one is packed with outdated sequences and cringe-worthy situations.

A complete disappointment!

Stay Away.

Honestly speaking, I enjoyed this film, but at the same time, I was so annoyed with it. This film is a remake of the Tamil film Vedalam, and in my opinion, Bholaa Shankar was not as boring as Ajith's opinionated film.

The first thing I want to omit from this film would be the character of Vennela Kishore. His overacting was so painful. Chiranjeevi did an amazing job, though he seemed a bit old against the young role he played. But his youthful appearance made it realistic. Keerthy and Tamanna did well in their roles. Tarun Arora seemed timid. I think Tarun Arora should get rid of this kind of stereotypical roles and acting. Chiranjeevi fans can watch this.

I must regretfully confess that "Bholaa Shankar" left me utterly disheartened. The film's desperate attempt to mimic the triumph of the Tamil original "Vedhalam" falls woefully, shockingly short, and Chiranjeevi's portrayal in the lead role is nothing short of a monumental letdown. His performance lacks even a fraction of the magnetism and complexity that Ajith effortlessly infused into the character in the original.

To put it bluntly, this movie stands as an unequivocal low point in my year of cinematic experiences. The cringe-inducing moments are piled high, and the uncomfortable romantic subplot between Chiranjeevi and an actress young enough to be his daughter is impossible to disregard.

For anyone entertaining the thought of subjecting themselves to this film, I implore you to veer away from squandering your hard-earned money. The original iteration is conveniently accessible on YouTube with subtitles, presenting a considerably more satisfying option for entertainment. Rather than parting with your money for the dismal affair that is "Bholaa Shankar," I'd wholeheartedly recommend investing those funds in a sumptuous Zomato feast.

Chiranjeevi's decision to embrace such roles only serves to underscore the jarring contrast between his lackluster performances and the outstanding work of actors like Mammooty, who, at the age of 72, continue to shine in intellectually stimulating and artistically profound films. It's a stark reminder that there exist far more gratifying avenues for spending your time and resources than immersing yourself in the profound disappointment that "Bholaa Shankar" epitomizes.