There is enough substance for an average film-goer to look at and appreciate here. It is up to Shiva to bring back the kingdom's glory by doing what is right: unshackle Devasena, his mother, and take back what is lawfully his.
How things take a swift turn to what led to the events in the first part is what essentially the first two hours of this film is. What ensues is a game of shifting, smarmy egos and value of integrity between Bahubali and his aunt, Sivagami (Ramya Krishnan), whom he regards as his mother. It's a ploy actually, which he masterminds with help from his crippled father, Bijjaladeva (Nassar). Bahubali, with ample help from Kattappa, fool around with Devasena, as humor and borderline slapstick enter the concoction (but do not stay for long), which soon shifts to high drama as the lover boy's brother, Bhallaladeva, now has his eyes on Devasena. Predictability is all over the place as you follow the flashback story involving Bahubali (Prabhas), who uses a method previously sampled by the protagonist in the 2005 Tamil film "Ghajini", to woo Devasena (Anushka Shetty), the fiery queen of a nearby smaller kingdom. Shiva (Prabhas), upon realizing his lineage, has to save the kingdom now and settle some scores. Resuming exactly where the first part ends, the story follows king- slave Kattappa's (Sathya Raj) narration of the past events that occurred in the Mahishmati kingdom and how they directly led to its degeneration under the rule of the foxy and narcissistic Bhallaladeva (Rana Daggubati). This epic romantic drama, which is South Indian director S S Rajamouli's eleventh feature film, has the combined effect of all these factors, but is unsurprisingly let down by lack of logic. The frenzy and thirst for more that the first part started and caused in 2015 had to be quenched by content that has more power, more action, and more grandeur. Wait, what?!! The statue's head FLOATS?!!! Even in shallow waters? What is the statue made of? Due to the film's idiotic, boring premise and the number of issues, I didn't enjoy this film one bit.
Also, are Mahendra and Bhallaladeva human or gods? The things they're capable of are definitely not of human ability. One should have been able to distinguish them better. The film is also a bit confusing due to both Mahendra/Shivan and Amarendra Baahubali being played by the same actor (Prabhas) and their appearances being so identical. Wow, for a big budget 2017 film they're really bad! Much of the effects looks animated - and I mean as in animated, not CGI! The visuals during the film's final moments (especially) were cringe worthy. The story is filled with conveniences, credibility issues and questionable events. Some of their 'inventive' stunts were laughable instead of amazing. In their attempts to make the film as impressive as possible, they made it ludicrous. The 'love story' was presented in a comedic way - and then they make war over it!! Oh boy, seriously!! Due to the very REASON behind this warfare, I found it utterly ridiculous and not in the least interesting. The storytelling and script felt immature, the acting silly (even slapstick) and the actors wood-faced and theatrical. For one bother it was love, maybe, but for the other it was simply a competition). The first hour revolves around two brothers' love for the same woman (if one can call it love, actually. I enjoyed the first film in its entirety, whereas I only enjoyed about an hour (if that) of this film, with a runtime of nearly 3 hours. The first two hours is a prequel, before continuing where 'The Beginning' left of. 'Baahubali 2: The Conclusion' is a prequel and sequel to 'Baahubali: The Beginning'.