On a day of solar eclipse, five year old, Naina, loses her eyesight and her parents in a road accident in London. Twenty years later, she is bestowed with the gift of sight thanks to the marvels of modern science. Her period of darkness is over; or is it? A horrifying period of darkness begins. What is this curse that has been upon her? Will she ever be able to escape it? Will this extraordinary s
Similar titles
Reviews
First off, I'll have to take the word of everyone who claims "Naina" is a ripoff of "The Eye". Since I've never seen it, I can't confirm or deny.Second, as an American viewer, I appreciated the notable absence of the "big song-and-dance" number that seems to make its way into most Bollywood films -- no matter the genre. The grandmother is endearing even if she seems a bit out of place."Bhoot" was a better offering purely as a horror film. Not that "Naina" didn't have its moments, but it wasn't so much scary as merely creepy. The first time Naina comes face-to-face with Khemi is a prime example of what I mean (and if you want to know more than that you'll have to watch it).But "Naina" has a special place for me because it was my introduction to Urmila Matondkar -- quite possibly THE most exquisitely beautiful woman in the world. And for her -- or any sighted person -- to play the role of a blind woman and do it with eyes wide open is a challenge. That Urmila was completely *believable* as a blind woman says a lot about her talent.And to a couple of earlier reviewers: The bald child in the hospital was a GIRL, and Naina was NOT blind from birth -- she was blinded in an accident at age 5. I wouldn't bring it up, but if you're going to call somebody out about attention to detail you should really make sure your own slip isn't showing first.
It's bad enough for a movie to be a remake of another. It's worse when two movies are remakes of the same flick and are released back-to-back. I'm talking about Nazar and Naina. I prefer the former. Nazar is a more thrilling and entertaining and has good songs. Naina, on the contrary, is quite intense--the type of movie that gives you a headache by the end. There are some repulsive scenes such as the operation. I must say, though, that Naina has better special effects. Although the movie is not too long compared to other Hindi movies, it feels like it goes on forever. Towards the end it becomes a complete drag and the climax is absolutely ridiculous.
The "Bhoot" of film Bhoot is still haunting Urmila and she is back to her histrionics and antics viz. screaming, flaring nostrils, Popping eyes et al. Imagine, the audience is subjected to Urmila making faces to camera for two plus hours. Unfortunately, there is no competent actor (like Ajay Devgan in Bhoot) to counterbalance these acts with his restrained, underplayed performance. Is it a show reel of Urmila's fear factor ? All this in the name of supernatural thriller packed with visual gimmicks, sorry effects ?. Too Much !!. Dearest director Shripal Morakhia, don't pick-up film-making influenced from Hollywood horror DVDs instead get real with your own story-telling. "Naina Barse Rim jhim Rim jhim"- can be a case only for distributors of this film as "Note nahi barse" at box-office.
I recently saw "Naina" at a multiplex in. I was hurt! It hurts to see a movie made with sincere Effort and Intention, succumb to failure. But then, if good intentions and great effort were the only criteria required for a movie's success, then "Naina" could become a blockbuster. But, that's not the case! Just good intentions and sincere effort don't make a GOOD film. So what does?? The Answer is - "Just one and only one thing-- A Good Script." This is the core area where "Naina" actually failed. Despite having an interesting story, innovative treatment, eye catching cinematography and great sound & special effects the film couldn't strike a chord with the audience, because of the flawed script. The Basic Four Progressive Comments on 'Naina' which I could think of were as follows: 1. Characterization: The problem with Naina is the pace at which emotions are thrown at the audience. Before the audience can digest one aspect of Naina's emotion, she starts to portray another. This results in her character failing to strike a chord with the audience, as they can't fully relate to her emotions and therefore are not able to empathize with her. EMPATHY of the audience for the lead character is a must for all movies to succeed. Because only when the audience empathizes with the characters, they can feel for them, cry-- when they cry, laugh-- when they laugh, are scared-- when they are scared. The empathy is a critical must. In order to make the audience to worry, sympathize, or be concerned for 'Naina's' situation, first they should be allowed fall in love with her, only then will they have any reason to empathize or sympathize or whatever emotion one needs from them. The characterization of Naina in the script doesn't allow the audience to realize this bond of empathy with her. For example -in the movie "Black" The little blind girl's enthusiasm and exuberance on feeling the water for the first time is empathized by the audience, because leading up to that situation, the audience had already been allowed to, go through, and suffer all the pain in her life as a blind child, and so they were in a better position to relate to her emotions. If the audience had got a little more chance to see, what Naina's character has to go through as a blind girl, while still keeping a positive outlook on life, I am sure the empathy aspect would have worked better. 2. One dimensional & Single layered approach: Once Naina's character starts having the visions of the dead, the whole movie takes that direction and that's it. It's one visionary encounter after another, then another, then another. The element of anxiety and fear diminishes with each repetition. One has to be very careful with the anxiety/curiosity element particularly in the 'Thriller' genre, which 'Naina' belongs to, because the whole movie is spun around these elements. Agreed it's the most difficult of tasks to maintain a high level of anxiety and tension in the audience throughout the movie. But then, making a good thriller movie was never an easy job in the first place. In order to maintain the level of tension in a thriller, multi-dimensional approach comes very handy; which can be done by creating a no. of interesting characters, with important roles to play in the main plot and showing different sequences from each of their point of views. For Example in the movie "Executive Decision" (An Action Thriller) the multi-dimensional element has been used very well. But then, I agree there are some movies where you can't use a multi-dimensional approach. Maybe the creator of Naina thought so too, Because as the whole story of Naina is lead character driven, and is basically the sequencing of the dramatic encounters faced by her. As it is primarily her story, so maybe demanded to be told only from her point of view. Even if the story demanded one dimensional approach i,e. to be told from Naina's POV, a suggestion is that, The script could have created sub-texts/plots to the Main Plot. This would have added variety and novelty to the Main plot, while helping in maintaining the anxiety level of the audience, without being repetitive. Once the Main plot (who's cornea did she receive, why was she getting these weird visions and what was to become of her?) is established, it can be treated as a an under current effect i,e. kept in the background, but always hovering in the audience's thought, while new sub plots can be created, where each sub plot arouse new puzzles for the audience to solve, but somehow points towards the main plot. This kind of multi-layered treatment helps especially in the thrillers/horrors genre to raise and maintain the anxiety and tension levels in the audience through major part of the movie. 3. Placement of the Final Sequence: This is strange but true. The best sequence in the whole movie was undoubtedly the final sequence (it single handedly lifted the standard of the movie), But which somehow seemed a misfit in the storyline. The reason it seemed so, was because the supposedly (the village girl part) climax scene had just preceded the final sequence. The audiences almost were ready to leave their chairs, when suddenly the final-climax scene is thrown at them. This actually isolated the final sequence from the rest of the movie, which was a tragedy, because no doubt it was the best filmed sequence of the whole movie. Placement of scenes in the correct sequence (which never has a fixed formula) is a very critical aspect for a good Movie.Please don't think that this is a critic talking! Because it's not. I am no Critic. I am just an ordinary guy who is a lover of "Beautiful Cinema." Cinema which compels your thoughts to keep giving it a backward glance, while your body has already moved on is 'Beautiful Cinema'.