Nishabd

The story is very simple about a love between a 60-year old man and an 18-year old girl but was told in a very stylish format. The aqua blue cinematography was excellent that really did suited the mood for the film and it's similar to Zinda. Jiah Khan's acting was quite good for her first film. I really liked her voice and it was a good idea that she had to speak a lot of English throughout the whole film because she was from Australia and it made her look foreign. Amitabh Bachchan is simply the best actor in Bollywood and he took care of the whole film. Nishabd was so much based on reality and it's true that most woman like older men & older men like younger women although there was a 42-year age difference between them. The best thing about the movie is that they didn't fall in love on first sight. Vijay (Amitabh) took Jiah out because his daughter was injured and couldn't make it. They both had a good time and slowly they fell in love which was much more sensible. The best scene is when Jiah was soaking herself with the water hose & Vijay was taking pictures of her. Music is also good although there are only two songs and they are not in the film but there are CDs & tapes. Rozana is a terrific song & Take light is also good but Rozana is one of the best songs of 2007.

There is nothing wrong with showing an old man falling in love with a young girl. Lolita did it. American Beauty did it.

But. They did it subtly. They did not make it so apparent from the start that the director is gearing them up to make them fall in love with each other. Not as naturally as two people would (Age no bar) but forcing them to be around each other as if they were SUPPOSED to fall in love.

All in all, there should have been chemistry. It would have solved the biggest problem. People with reservations against the subject would also have been engrossed and perhaps convinced. It would have become the perfect love story, no matter the impracticality.

I found it difficult to believe Jia's character at times. What I found more difficult to understand, is why Vijay - a photographer and an artist, who seems serious - would have had an interest in a girl so frivolous. Unless he himself has some frivolousness hidden in himself, which did not come out at all.

There is a lot of use of Dutch angles or angles in which the frame is tilted. It is generally used to show something unnatural or something that might lead to something that is not right. So RGV is himself calling the relationship unnatural.

The camera angles, background score, editing, and even the juxtaposition of shots and symbology emphasises and overemphasises their relationship. Is the Indian audience so dumb that we need to be told something in 10 different ways for us to understand? Especially when the two of them were dancing together... it was apparent what was happening. What was the need of slowing the scene down with dramatic background music? I feel the subject was very well chosen. But Verma should not have made the film with the fact in mind constantly that this is a controversial subject. If it is, then handle it delicately, why don't you?

While early word on this film was "Bollywood's Lolita", it's actually more like a subdued "Indian Beauty". Only, in this case the protagonist is not a loser, but a rather dignified old gent, well-respected and loved by his wife and daughter. The director claims that some of the inspiration for the story came from the real- life entanglement of Ayn Rand and Netthil Brandon, her young male disciple (both parties were married to other people at the time). Could be, but the shadow of American Beauty nonetheless looms over this film.

Amitabh Bachhan has developed a penchant for playing his roles a bit too stoically in his 'second innings' at the cinema (that and his stupid goatee make it look like he's always playing just another side to the same character), but conveys the feelings and emotions of his character reasonably well. Jiah Khan, the newcomer, does better in a difficult role that is deceptively shrill and tacky, but is actually quite insightfully written if you can see beyond the attitude. What is poorly written is the way the relationship develops between the old man and the sassy nymphet, and the roles of the wife and daughter are also under- written. That is especially a shame in the case of Revathy, as she is such a good actress. There is also an over-reliance on blue filters and panoramic shots of nature, and a general tendency to skirt the seamier or more base aspects of the relationship. In other words, "no sex please, we're Indian". Which is odd, since the director is clearly interested in exploiting (to some degree) the physical attributes of our young heroine, judging from the way he shoots her (to be fair, that dilemma has plagued Indian cinema for ages). He just doesn't seem to have the nerve to go all the way with his desires, which makes for an uneven tone for the film's basic story.

On the plus side, the film is devoid of stupid song and dance numbers (a couple of gentle tunes aside), and does pose some intriguing questions (even if the resolutions provided to some of the problems raised, are a wee bit too pat). An interesting experiment, but with not with enough conviction to follow through to the end, it is only partially successful. From a filmmaker like Ram Gopal Verma, more was expected than is delivered here.

I've been saying that I'd like to see Amitabh Bachchan in a role where he is vulnerable and confused, instead of being the wisdom figure he's been stuck in in too many roles by now, and Ram Gopal Varma has granted my wish. This movie mostly succeeds in creating complex, believable, and interesting major characters, and I'd say the overall story is a good one, even including the ending which a few of the few reviews I've read weren't satisfied with. It did not disappoint me psychologically.

I am glad someone has given AB a role like this, and hope it's the first of many. I feel sure he's happy about it himself, as I've heard him talk a bit ruefully about all the father/patriarchs he gets called to do. This is a real acting job, the creation of an individual character, with the camera almost always on his face, photographed in a naturalistic way that gives us his age, his true skin color, and his sad-eyed good looks. We also see a lot of his hands, and I think it's intentional - a constant reminder of his age, as they show it the most, especially as RGV photographs them.

It's not Lolita (so many people seem to say it is), but the 18-year-old girl Vijay, AB's 60 year old character, falls in love with is neither mature nor well put together, either.

When we first meet her, with her abundant beauty and lovely body, and her crass behavior and flauntiness, I worried that RGV was going to be trying to sell me this package of annoyances as purely lovable and "sassy." But I ended up feeling that she was very well-drawn and that he knew what he was doing: you can see her through the eyes of Vijay, whose need for something seems to be met in her youth, beauty, and liveliness - but Varma also shows her to you through the eyes of "some other adult" -- a grown woman (me, say), a man who's immune to her, etc. She is pretty and sexy-acting, has some idea of her sexual power and tries to use it, but she is also unquestionably a psychological mess, a mixed-up little girl who displays and provokes. A stroke or two of background info, not made much of, grounds a perception of somebody whose needs are all over the place.

She's come to visit from Australia. Her skimpy, sexy outfits -- shorts, tiny skirts, and the like -- are nothing that would be at all unusual in any western country during hot weather, and the Indian family she's visiting doesn't pay attention to them either. Somebody just looking at her body, as the camera often does (but not vulgarly, I'd say) might be captivated by "sex appeal," but anyone paying attention to her behavior -- for example, tickling Amitabh's foot with her own foot at the dinner table, with her friend and the mom present, or running off with the camera he is teaching her to operate, dropping it, and being petulant rather than apologetic -- anybody attending to all that sees a loose cannon.

The movie is a lot of close-ups and a lot of photography of the tea plantation where the family lives, all shot so it looks a dull green all the time. The holding of the tonality so even allows, I think, for our sustained focus on the emotional developments. Also, the story is squarely about Vijay, and he lives in a place that is like this, relatively muted.

I don't think I felt Vijay's "happiness" as much as recognizing it, and that may be a weakness of the performance. I have always found AB a great silent broadcaster of the emotions like sadness, regret, deep concern, and those gifts of his are well-used here. I liked the performance of Revathi as his wife, who conveyed calm, intelligent, mature contentment with her family and life.

In my opinion, Nishabd is a fairly well-made film. RGV tackles an unconventional theme - I won't call it bold, at least not bold enough - with remarkable ease. The director uses his signature style of very tight close-ups to great effect. Of course, the camera cannot enter the minds of the characters, but it comes very close. Through every minute expression, every twitch of the facial muscles, it shows you what the characters are thinking and feeling. And if you have an actor like Amitabh Bachchan, that only heightens the impact.

The absence of a plot actually works to the film's advantage. The film moves forth in a languorous fashion, which can be irritating to some viewers, but for me it worked well. It gave me all the time to witness and reflect upon the events as they lazily unfolded themselves. It gave me the time to savour the subtle directorial touches.

Yes, it also gave me enough opportunity to think about what could have been done differently. But that's precisely what I expect from a fulfilling movie-going experience - an opportunity to watch a movie at an emotional as well as a rational level: from the heart as well as the head.

The director opts for blue as the predominant color in the palette he uses to paint his vision of a May-November romance between his lead characters Vijay (Amitabh Bachchan) and Jiah (Jiah Khan). Each and every scene, even when it captures the breathtakingly beautiful and lush locales of Munnar, is bathed in a blue hue. Now that's an interesting color for a tale like this.

At the most obvious level, blue stands for romance and in that respect seems completely harmonious with the theme. If we really get into various kinds of symbolisms, blue also stands for virtues like truth, honesty and fidelity. And that's a delightful contrast from what we see in the relationship between Vijay and Amrita (Revathy). I can't say what RGV's real idea behind using this colour was, maybe I'm seeing too much into a device used merely to present a pretty picture, but to me it opens up a number of interesting possibilities.

Interestingly, elements of incongruity crop up in other areas as well - whether it's the quirky camera movement or the very out-of-character background music. While the story itself moves at a leisurely pace, the camera moves all over the place almost in an intrusive fashion. Ditto for the brilliant background music by Amar Mohile - the hammering, thriller-like background score is in perpetual conflict with the sensitivity of romance on the screen.

I don't take these incongruities as faults, though I must admit they were quite distracting at times. I thought that the very fact that they were in stark contrast with the film itself was an interesting way to depict the inner conflict of the characters. Rules of conventional film-making would say that the camera movements and music should be in tune with what's being depicted on film, but when has RGV followed rules or conventions? Now for the compromises - RGV clearly shies away from including any sexual angle to this unusual love story. Given the way the unashamedly voyeuristic camera (and to an extent the writing) has a field day presenting Jiah Khan as a sex object - the extra-short dresses, the wet scene (ah, this predilection of Hindi commercial filmmakers for showing heroines getting wet in a white saree!! Only, the white saree gets replace by a white shirt worn over an almost non existent pair of shorts), over-emphasis on showing her naked legs, and Jiah Khan's defiantly sexual demeanour - it is certain that the director had all the intentions of showing lust as the trigger for the relationship, but probably had to compromise on that aspect because of the demigod status of his lead actor.

This is one area where the disconnect between the technique and the content works to the film's detriment. The story would have been much more interesting and realistic if this aspect had been adequately explored. Much as I am in absolute awe of Amitabh Bachchan and think that his performance in Nishabd is one of his finest, I can't help admitting that his presence in the film dilutes the impact of the film. RGV clearly develops cold feet and refrains from adding any dirty thoughts into his male protagonist's mind; yet his camera is not quite convinced and continues to explore the baser emotions.

The other big compromise that RGV had to make also stems from trying to show Vijay in a more favorable light. There was no reason to add that monologue justifying/ rationalizing the attraction between a 60 year old man and an 18 year old kid - "an old man gets attracted to a young girl because he wants to hold on to his youth" - Phew!. I strongly believe that love, even when it is triggered by lust, does not always have a straight-forward reason, but is in fact a very complex psychological thing that cannot always be rationalized.

It is here that you just can't help thinking that the film definitely needed to take its title seriously: some things are better left unsaid - Nishabd.