leyasusanviju

Cinema often thrives on strong storytelling, convincing performances, and an ability to emotionally connect with its audience. Unfortunately, Hridayapoorvam misses the mark on all three counts. Marketed as a heartwarming drama, the film comes across as an overhyped, disjointed attempt that never finds its soul.

The biggest weakness lies in the writing. A movie without a well-developed script is like a ship without a compass, and Hridayapoorvam proves this point all too clearly. The screenplay wanders aimlessly from one scene to another without a central conflict or a convincing arc. Instead of weaving together a coherent narrative, the film relies heavily on melodrama, filler dialogues, and overextended sequences that test the audience's patience. By the midpoint, it becomes evident that there is no real story being told - just fragments loosely stitched together to give the illusion of depth.

Equally disappointing is the performance of the female lead. A strong protagonist could have perhaps salvaged parts of this otherwise hollow film, but her portrayal is grating and unconvincing. Rather than embodying the character with subtlety and sincerity, the performance leans into exaggerated expressions and awkward delivery that come across as unintentionally comical. Instead of inviting empathy, it alienates viewers. Her screen presence feels more like a distraction than an asset, which drags the film down even further.

Visually, the film attempts to dress itself up with glossy cinematography and a melodramatic score, but these aesthetic touches cannot mask the absence of substance. Good production values alone cannot rescue a project when its foundation is so weak.

In the end, Hridayapoorvam is a textbook example of style over substance - a movie that was excessively hyped but fails to justify even half of the expectations surrounding it. It is not just forgettable; it is frustrating to watch. If you value your time and cinematic experience, this is one best avoided.

I found the film deeply disappointing, and unfortunately, the performance of the lead, Ahana Krishna, was far from redeeming. While her acting in this role lacked depth and conviction, the bigger issue lies in the storyline itself-which felt aimless, poorly paced, and emotionally unengaging.

One of the biggest drawbacks of this film is undoubtedly the lead performance by Ahana Krishna. Her acting lacks nuance, emotional depth, and screen presence-making it difficult to connect with the character or the story. Every scene she appears in feels forced and unnatural, pulling the viewer out of whatever little immersion the film tries to build.

Compared to her previous film Adi, which already struggled in several areas, this one falls even further in terms of both narrative strength and overall execution. It's not just a casting issue; the writing, direction, and character development all seem undercooked.

That said, repeated miscasting can have a broader impact on the viewing experience. I sincerely hope that future projects place a stronger emphasis on performance quality and cohesive storytelling-for the benefit of the audience and the industry alike.

The movie is the complete cinematic experience. I loved every single line every moment every little thing that makes this movie.

The only thing that is bothering me is the thirst so bad for the next part.

I felt like I was in the movie riding a sand worm, I was a fremen. I felt the pain the wonder the joy the anger. This felt like reading the book and you just can't stop. The excellence of this movie is not only the cast or the story it is the very making of it. I loved every dialogue that was uttered. Its just a masterpiece.

Though there is a stagnant pace in between it doesn't seem to matter. Because most of the second part of the movie is such a cliff hanger.