Veera Simha Reddy

Murder, Gore, Rape

• Title: Veera Simha Reddy
• Cast: Balakrishna, Duniya Vijay, Varalaxmi Sarathkumar
• Director: Gopichand Malineni
• Music Director: Thaman

When Veera Simha Reddy is murdered, his son Jaya Simha Reddy avenges him and takes over his role as a community leader in Rayalaseema.

This could’ve been a straightforward revenge story if not for the added elements of morality and cycles of violence where were an afterthought. The reason behind the conflict between Veera Simha Reddy and Pratap Reddy is rooted in power struggles between the two and abuse inflicted by Pratap. However, it is mentioned repeatedly that Veera Simha Reddy prevents faction violence from continuing in the area. Except for a fleeting mention of it, the only violence we see is because of both of their presence. With so many half-baked ideas piled on top of each other, the plot is easier to ignore than understand by the end of the movie.

• Direction: The story progression is nonlinear with not much payback. Except for concealing the relation and conflict between Bhanumati and Veera Simha, there was no reason to flip back and forth so many times. The story had multiple ideas that were geared towards shining a positive light on Veera Simha which came at the cost of a forgettable story that you are not invested in.
  The story was definitely stretched out more than it needed to be with unnecessary romantic stories that add no value to the overall experience. With this being a movie starring Balakrishna, the extended violence is a given.
  There was definitely a mishap on the team’s part in not relating the characters to the audience. The storylines they were given were futile attempts to give them depth.
• Acting: Duniya Vijay gives a stellar performance as the villain. Another notable performance was given by Varalaxmi. Unfortunately, her role was dampened by repetitive writing. Her ability to express rage and shout was overused and wearying. Shruthi’s performance is difficult to assess with her cringey lines and ridiculous character. One can’t help but feel for her watching her act out embarrassing scenes. Her dancing skills were all that had the space to be seen. Balakrishna gives another performance similar to a majority of his movies with no noteworthy scenes.
• Cinematography: There were some good shots of Balakrishna, especially during the fights.
• Production: The makeup on all the characters that were made to look older or younger was apparent and basic. The costumes were well done, especially Veera Simha’s. His outfits gave him a powerful touch.
  Most of the sets were passable. Some, like the village set for ‘Maa Baava Manobhavalu’ was obviously fake. This wouldn’t have been a problem if it was a hypothetical setting, but the team chose to work this irrelevant song into the scene prior.
  For a movie that depends so heavily on the violence and the perceived heroism stemming from that, there wasn’t much put into the CGI of blood or fire that we see throughout the movie. The blood changes colors ranging from a Rose Rasna to cranberry juice. The shots of two Balakrishnas showed inconsistencies with proportions, which we’ve seen much better displays of before. There was a heavy prioritization on placing a fan in front of multiple characters which made the scenes comedic.
• Editing: The editing was clean, with smooth transitions through the narrative.
• Music: Veerasimha’s background/theme music captured his emotions well. The songs were catchy with a commercial nature to them.
• Dialogues: The movie would be at least forty-five minutes shorter if all the nonessential dialogues were removed. There was ineffective communication of stories and backgrounds.
• Themes: The one theme that sort of comes through in this movie is revenge.  In all honesty, however, the actual theme of the movie is elevating Balakrishna’s characters.

• It is clear as day that this movie was centered around praising Balakrishna’s characters. It was also clear that no one’s character, plot, or common sense would play into the writing as long as everything led up to a scene that highlighted Jaya Simha/Veera Simha.
  • During the flashback that shows the backstory between Veera Simha and Bhanumati, while punishing Shekhar, he says, “thelisi chesina theliyaka chesina, jarigindhi dhaarunam, poindhi praanam. Nee nirlakshyam khareedhu oka kutumbam.” This sentiment, however, translates into no other part of the story.
  • In the beginning of the movie, we are taken to Turkey to the restaurant Jaya Simha’s mother Meenakshi. A CEO of a group of hotels, Richards, walks up to a random table and eats the food of strangers as they smile at him. Then, he decides to buy the restaurant after eating one bite out of one dish and threatens her in public when she refuses to sell. Shortly after, Jaya Simha retaliates by beating up all the people that vandalized the restaurant. We never see the restaurant or Richards again. This absolutely redundant scene takes up seven whole minutes of screen time.
  • Even if someone suffered hearing loss, and chose not to go to a physician. Why would they choose to track down the person behind it with the help of extremely clear CCTV footage in a dimly lit pub? What revenge would you take with someone so comfortable holding a gun? Apparently Isha, only to fall in love with him and follow him around.
  • The home minister and Jayaram praising Veera Simha/Jaya Simha out of the blue makes no sense.
  • The angry goons among the grooms and brides, I mean – their facial expressions are everything. Somehow, no one except Veera Simha picks up on the most obvious Trojan horse of all time.
• Modifying the appearance of characters older than they are when we first see them revealed to the audience that they would play a part in a flashback and be related in some way to Veera Simha. This setup softened the attempted twists.
• The story sucks. Like really sucks. I know this movie isn’t made to honor a story. But, really? Think about it. For someone that supposedly cares so much about employment and people, he never knows anything about the atrocities happening unless someone comes and tells him.
  Yes, Veera Simha has self-imposed responsibility to help the people by taking out Pratap who has committed quite disgusting crimes. That has nothing to do with faction violence. He says he maintains peace in the entirety of Rayalaseema while he spends all of his time in two villages – Pulicherla and Musalimadugu. He also has no idea about elections and their aftereffects until Rajagopal comes and tells him. Going back to what I pointed out earlier, how is he claiming peace for the whole region when he doesn’t know what’s going on a short drive away?
  His high self-esteem which is praised and showered love on is actually narcissistic. In this context, him pushing onto others morals that he himself doesn’t follow, actually makes sense. Make of it what you will.

I can see fans of Balakrishna enjoying this movie if they can get past the stereotypes. If you are looking for one of his better performances, look elsewhere.
I don’t see anyone else having reason to watch it.

• Favorite Moment: ‘Siggu ledha neeku?” – Varalaxmi gave me goosebumps in that moment.
• Veera Simha Reddy says, “Telugodu narikithe ela untadho, thellollu kuda chustharu”
  • Fun fact: All Turkish people are not Caucasian. They have diverse heritage including European, Middle Eastern and Mediterranean. Just to make sure we’re naming that not every person outside India is completely White.
• Together, Veera Simha and Jaya Simha
  • Morbidly beat up 128 people (these characters did not visibly get up again in the scene)
  • Murdered 20 people

(This count is a minimum only, as I may have missed some)

• Some of the misogyny in this movie was appropriate for the character but I’d like to acknowledge it:
  • Using the word “aadangi” as an insult. Femininity is not deplorable. It is not in men, women, or nonbinary people. It is a part of all of us. If a person that believes in the gender binary is completely masculine in presentation, character, and being – they are allowing femininity to become a part of their identity by dictating what they can’t do or be.
  • The lack of autonomy for women is one of the biggest perpetrators of the patriarchy. After telling his mother about his interactions with Isha, Jaya Simha tells his mother that she is arrogant and he will send her off after he “decreases” it. With no self-reflection or accountability for her hearing loss, even if it was an accident, he decides that he knows what a complete stranger needs and takes it upon himself to “help” her. After Meenakshi meets Isha, she decides that Jaya Simha should marry Isha – again, no one asked what Isha wants in this scene, but they take control over her life with the excuse of “looking out for her.”
  • Isha’s grandma seems to take responsibility for ‘not foreseeing’ her lack of singing talent. Why is this her responsibility in the first place? It’s not like we see any interactions between Shruti and her grandmother indicating their closeness.
  • Isha’s entire storyline is reduced to meeting Jaya Simha, falling in love with him, and following him around. Her attire which is an attempt at being a goth/rockstar completely changes after meeting him, normalizing a woman changing for a man.
• More misogyny:
  • It’s unfortunate to see all Isha’s friends agree with her saying that she has potential as a singer. While this is not an entirely impossible scenario, women’s friendship has consistently been shown from a male gaze – to be highly toxic and never healthy.
• I despise shameless tokenism
  • In the introduction scene of Veera Simha, as he’s walking up to the ceremony conducting 300 weddings, he greets a Muslim man, with no proper Muslim representation again. Greeting a man consistent with their culture doesn’t make you a saint, just a decent human.
• While the song ‘Suguna Sundari’ was catchy, the entire song made me shudder and wince. There was no prior build-up between the two characters that justified so many dance steps with Jaya Simha’s hands on Isha’s body. This begs the question, what is the motivation behind forcing such interactions between a 62-year-old and a 37-year-old?
• The most painful parts of the movie were definitely Isha’s. Taking a reductionist ‘sexy carwash’ trope and using it because you have no better scene to write up yourself speaks for the level of thought that went into its making. As if that weren’t enough, we go on to see the ‘girl-that-breaks-into-song-and-dance-when-under-the-influence’ trope.
  • The entire bullet sequence is ridiculous. Temporary hearing loss is an actual medical condition that resolves on its own, sometimes with residual damage. Your hearing ability definitely does not come back in response to the sound that triggered the hearing loss in the first place.
  • Does she stop at tracking down a random man comfortable holding a gun? No, instead of practically transferring funds from somewhere other than her card, she agrees to work for him, no questions asked.
  • Talking about giving someone their surname with such smiles on their faces made me gag.
• My personal advice to Isha – if the only reason you’re with someone is for your personal success, who you need is a life coach, not a partner.
• Favorite line: “Mass mogudu line lo ki vachadu, iga villains ki paguls, fans ki whistles” – it was one of the most ridiculous lines I have ever heard. It made me laugh and I was entertained for about 4 seconds.
• An observation I must lay out for the readers:
  • Balakrishna is 62 years old, Shruti Haasan is 37 and Murali Sharma who plays Shruti’s Father is 50 years old.
• Suri’s nephew was severely traumatized by Pratap. As much as that child deserves vengeance and some sort of closure, his kicking a person’s decapitated head was terrifying, not satisfactory.

• Movie Rating: 1/10
• Maguva Impact Scale: -2.5