Present film industry doesn’t give enough importance for a writer but “Writer” is the one who gives birth to a story. Even the director who directs his own stories is a writer first. “Kona Venkat” is one among the writers who is striving to stand as a WRITER. So, this writer turned producer and came up with “Sankarabharanam”. While Nikhil and Nanditha appeared in the lead roles, “Uday Nandanavanam” got an introduction as director.
Gautham (Nikhil) is the son of a bankrupt NRI millionaire (Suman). To save him, sending his mother Rajjo’s (Sitara) palace named “Sankarabharanam” in Bihar is the only way. So, Gautham lands in Bihar. Rest plot deals with what kind of persons and experiences Gautham faced.
A writer should be confident about his work. Even before the film’s release, writer-producer Kona Venkat portrayed his overconfidence that the film’s victory is going to be completely writer’s. We cannot blame him completely as he had a good track record and a lot of experience with which he wrote deep dialogues like “షర్టుకు జేబు ఎడమవైపే ఎందుకు కుడతారో తెలుసా? అది ఖాళీగా ఉన్నా గుండె ధైర్యం చెబుతుంది కనుక!” Such things got disappeared in Kona’s works long ago. Now-a-days he always comes up with routine stuff. Sankarabharanam is not an exception for this.
However, every film has its good and bad shades, let’s discuss about this film’s good things. The basic plot written by Kona has a lot of space to discuss various things like how mad money turns a person and how much money is valued over human relations etc. Kona has a habit of expressing philosophy and even revolution with a sarcasm attached. He followed the same trend even in this film. Except the first song, all songs were parts of screenplay. It’s also a good thing that Kona didn’t cast Brahmanandam this time.
Coming to the other side, Kona’s screenplay to this plot was very routine and unattractive. If he wanted to make a “Thriller” then he should write a racy screenplay but he came up with a slower one. 150 minutes of runtime for these kinds of films is not at all necessary. Melodrama making a guest appearance meanwhile failed to touch the heart. Though first half was a little bit entertaining because of Saptagiri, Viva Harsha and so on, Kona and Uday failed to arrest the audience by the intermission time.
I thought at least second half would be better than that of first but it lied the same. Cinema took its birth from the society, so it has a right to criticize it but present writers like Kona has to rethink, to what extent that criticism should go. Kona always criticizes some aspect of society in his writings sarcastically. It may make you laugh or think for once or twice but doing it every time raises a boredom. Characters played by Krishna Bhagawan as a romantic film director and Giri as Bajrangi who says like “ప్రవాసభారతీయుడివని సినిమాను ఊరికే విమర్శించకు, వీలైతే సినిమా తీసి చూపించు” Digging the old things again is not a good aspect I feel.
Prithvi Raj (30 years Industry) entertained at his best with his comedy timing. Anjali’s entry to the plot wasn’t effective, the sarcasm regarding women’s dominance over men was slightly indigestible. Anyhow, with no interesting element, Sankarabharanam came to an end.
If talked about music, Praveen Lakkaraju’s work in a couple of songs was good but background score was not so effective.
Coming to performances, Nikhil suited the role of an NRI with his well built body and diction. Nanditha was good too. Prithvi Raj, Viva Harsha, Saptagiri entertained well. As said, Anjali neither suited the role nor her performance was appreciable. Veterans like Suman, Sitara and Rao Ramesh got decent roles. Sampath Raj was unattractive as main antagonist. Bollywood actor Sanjay Mishra suited the role of Bihari gangster but I hardly noticed him opening his mouth and uttering a dialogue. Everything was felt managed in dubbing regarding his role.
1) Kona’s Basic Plot. As said, basic plot of this film was good.
2) Sai Sreeram’s Cinematography. This is the main eminence of the film with authentic visuals of the locations in Bihar.
3) Production Values. Though it wasn’t felt much amount was spent for this film, producer Satyanarayana didn’t compromise in the film’s quality.
1) Routine Narration. Kona’s screenplay has completely damaged the basic plot’s essence.
2) Over Criticism. Kona should stop criticism and come up with an independent stuff.
3) Runtime/Editing. 150 minutes runtime should have given some work for the editor’s scissors.
– Yashwanth Aluru