Teeyani Kalavo Review

Imagine a film where an irritating gay character apparently has more number of scenes than the main lead.  Imagine also a half-baked climax that is shorter than any of the scary comedy episodes in the second half.  That's `Teeyani Kalavo', where the hero wears the suspicious looks of a terrorist and the heroine has to be recognized only because of the dubbing artiste's familiar voice!

In the very first scene, you have Ajay (Sri Tej) singing a dreamy song in his mind as soon as he sees Geeta (Hudasa) in a railway station.  Geeta may not be having any sorrowful story in the recent past, going by the clearly happy expression on her face when she is travelling with Ajay, a stranger.  On Day 2, Ajay sees Geeta yet again, in the college in which he joins.

On Day 3, Geeta's uncle reveals her flashback to Ajay, a stranger to the uncle!  Geeta's recent past is filled with a tragedy and that's why Geeta `looks' upset.  (We don't get this feeling until Ajay says so!) .  On Day 4, Ajay and Geeta are off to a tour, a tour full of stupid comedy episodes.  A tour where nothing that is remotely profound takes place involving Ajay and Geeta.

Let's distinguish between bad films and gibberish first.  A bad film is where the writer writes the required scenes but fails to get the screenplay right and the dialogue good.  Gibberish is when the writer relegates the story (and even the main characters) to the background, writes a disproportionately higher number of superfluous scenes, and unabashedly rams through the climax.  This film belongs to the second category.

What kind of a film is it where the hero is seen around in two dreamy sequences with a damsel in distress, and goes off the screen, and makes an entry to ask `Geeta ekkada?' once or twice in a tourist place?  Is the hero himself a tourist in the story?  What kind of a film is it where 70 per cent of the second half is full of third-rate comedy scenes involving the lecturer Prithvi Raj and the female librarian he flirts with, a gay who boringly seduces a guy and so many other pairs trying to find a lonely place to have some romantic time?

As we forget the presence of Ajay in the story, he makes a comeback to sing a hit number to a seemingly happy heroine (is she a damsel in distress, we ask aghasted) in a daffar `Antyakshari' scene.  When a damsel in distress comes to know that someone is loving her, is it possible for her to speak casually to him, again, with a happy expression on her face?  What kind of a screenplay is this?  What kind a hero says, "Nenante ishtamani chepochu kada!" on Day 4 of meeting the girl even after being in the know of her sad past?  Is it that the writer doesn't understand the mentality of a girl?   If a character who has been living in the memories of a person who is not in her life says `Love is just a feeling', does it not perplex an already hapless audience?

The flashback is so boring that one actually starts concentrating on Kalanjali sarees instead of a stupid conversation involving the second hero (Akhil Kartheek) and the heroine.  The way  Geeta says to the second hero `Okarante naku ishtam', no person with a brain would think that it is he who the girl is referring to!  Does a person in love call her boy because she is bored of reading a magazine?  What kind of a boy says to his girl `Nenu korukunna ammayi tho pelli kavalani devudini adiganu' without even a hint that that girl in his heart is sitting before him?

All the performances are sub par and saying anything more on these would be akin to lending credence to crap.

The technical departments dish out absolute crap.

Verdict: A tragedy of a film.

Rating: 0.5