Login/Sign Up
Critics Review
2.75
An Honest Attempt At A Kids-Friendly Film But Needed More Charm!
But what the film needed was a certain colour. Well, it is colourful to look at. But the characters needed to be more fun. What we have in the film are actors trying to be comical and letting their hair down. But are the characters memorable? I am not talking about characters leaving an impact but even while watching the film, this is not a film where you are enchanted by a particular character and are eagerly waiting for the character to turn up on screen, every time he/she goes missing. Among the actors, Tapsee and Yogi Babu make an impression. It is good to see someone like Tapsee having some fun in a film like this. Vijay Sethupathi appears in his usual laidback style but this is a film that actually needed the actor to be having some fun.(more)
Source: Bharath Vijayakumar, MovieCrow
2.50
A COMEDY WITH AN INTERESTING PREMISE, BUT FLAT EXECUTION
At a conceptual level, this is an interesting take to have for a film with ghosts, and the rest of Annabelle Sethupathi, too, has many ideas that are good on paper. However, the trouble is that all these remain exciting only as ideas. The film is filled with flatly-directed scenes that lack the rhythm that comedy needs. It relies solely on the actors, who are sporting enough to act ridiculously, to make the scenes funny.(more)
Source: M Suganth, Times Of India
3.00
Clever, entertaining, but rarely complex
This is a shame, given how well-cast the film is. With Devadarshini, Babu, Madhumitha, Subbu Panchu, Radhika Sarathkumar, Rajendra Babu, and George Maryan, this could have been a terrific comedy. But it is not, which is why the elaborate flashback sequence is necessary � not because the story needs an explanation, they could have done that with dialogue. But because the narrative needs a breather. And the few minutes with Vijay Sethupathi playing King Veera Sethupathi turn out to be the best parts of the film. (more)
Source: Ranjani Krishnakumar, Firstpost.com
1.50
Taapsee Pannu, Vijay Sethupathi's film is neither funny nor scary
Taapsee Pannu as Rudra and Annabelle is adequate. It is a welcome change to see her have fun onscreen. In the second half of the film, Taapsee comes as Annabelle with a strong British accent. The entire period portion doesn't give out the feeling that the story is set in the 1940s. Only their clothes tell you that they don't belong to the present. The USP of Annabelle Sethupathi is the fantasy element. As a concept, it is great to see ghosts of the past having fun on screen. Again, it is not something you haven't chanced upon. This is what makes Annabelle Sethupathi bland. (more)
Source: Janani K, India Today
3.00
Vijay Sethupathi and Taapsee's film evokes laughter
For the grownups, Annabelle Sethupathi wouldn't be that exciting as Deepak's execution is mostly aimed at kids. Yogi Babu is in top form, he often evokes laughter while Vijay Sethupathi and Taapsee's period portions look grand. The bunch of comedians including Rajendra Prasad, Radhika, Subbu Panchu, George Maryan, Madhumidha provides good laughter in the first half. While pace gets slowed in the second half, the fun climax makes up for it. (more)
Source: Moviebuzz, Sify.com
1.50
Why did Taapsee and Vijay Sethupathi sign this mess?
The writing, direction and performances are theatrical, making the film look heavily dated. The background score constantly attempts to make us believe something highly hilarious is happening on screen. But no, it's just the same tricks over and over again. The dubbing is also off sync in many places. Annabelle Sethupathi is neither funny nor scary. But the most horrifying fact comes at the end. Apparently, there is a Part 2 planned for this. (more)
Source: Sowmya Rajendran, The News Minute