MovieChat Forums > Nayak (1966) Discussion > ICB Film Discussion ***SPOILERS****

ICB Film Discussion *SPOILERS**

posted 12 years ago by RRHowell41
18 replies | jump to latest

I don't mean to limit the discussion to this one thread, but I didn't have a brilliant title in mind for a thread either. I watched the movie a little early, because I am likely to be too busy on the 1st.

This is an interesting movie, and I think it will be fun to write and talk about, but in terms of just my sense of "Oh, that was a wonderful movie" I'd give it about a 6/10.

One question I would like to pose is how are the little subplots interconnected?

Are they rooms on a train, all going together to the same place, but essentially isolated from each other? Are they different sides of fantasy and reality playing out? Are they simply ways of expressing the various reactions that a "hero" has to face?

What do we make of the Swami and the advertising agent? I don't know how to evaluate his advertising budget of 30,000. If I convert by today's standards, that's about US$600, which is not very much, again by today's standards. But was it a substantial amount of money, in which case, has the guy been pimping out his wife to chase one account when there was a great opportunity in his very car?

The drowning in money dream sequence is interesting. It reminds me some of the dream sequence in Awara http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLCmhNeaYfA&feature=related and also a very surreal scene in red and black where Amitabh Bachchan played out his sense of being trapped--is that enough for some film buff among us to figure out what I am talking about, because I no longer remember which movie? And it's even possible that I am thinking of the wrong actor? Can anyone else think of similar dream scenes in Indian cinema?

Here is the dream sequence I was thinking of with Amitabh. But this is in Inquilaab (1984) so it should be noted that this is substantially later than the Nayak sequence.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k167feGhh_Y

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] elanor-3 12 years ago

Hm, for me it was not as good as the Apu trilogy, but certainly as good as the far more famous "Shatranj Ke Khilari". Story-construction of Nayak worked better for me, concerning the cinematography it worked better for. The acting of the protagonists felt not as good to me. But I felt more involved with the Nayak characters than with the "Shatranj Ke Khilari" characters.

but given the man's illustrious career, they were rather forgettable.

Which of his films do you feel not "forgettable"?

--- each brain develops its own preferences ---

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] RRHowell41 12 years ago

This is an interesting movie, and I think it will be fun to write and talk about

I really don't have this feeling! :)

Fair enough. I think that what I was thinking was that it had characteristics that used to mark some books I read in school as great fodder for writing quasi-literary book reports.

In terms of "the movie star is a real person" and whether this is the first, maybe Kagaaz Ke Phool is in the same general genre and earlier (1959). And, IMHO, a better movie, though it's been a while since I watched it.

I was looking at one of the reviews for Pather Pachali, and saw that someone felt that Nayak was Ray's best movie. I certainly doubt that, now that I've seen it. If this were his best, I don't think he would have the stellar reputation he has.

[–] elanor-3 12 years ago

In terms of "the movie star is a real person" and whether this is the first, maybe Kagaaz Ke Phool is in the same general genre and earlier (1959). And, IMHO, a better movie, though it's been a while since I watched it.

Kagaaz Ke Phool is about an director and an actress (versus actor/editor). Also for me Kagaaz Ke Phool was the better film. But both Nayak 8/10 and Kagaaz Ke Phool 9/10 were not as good as the Apu trilogy (10, 9, 10) for me.

--- each brain develops its own preferences ---

[–] elanor-3 12 years ago

This is an interesting movie, and I think it will be fun to write and talk about, but in terms of just my sense of "Oh, that was a wonderful movie" I'd give it about a 6/10.

It's not a film I love. But for me it has a very good quality in the picture structure (compositions were stunning from the first frame) and in the story construction (parallel stories). I did not like as much the story content, which also for me feels a bit standard. Moreover the two main actors felt not convincing enough to me. All in all a solid 8/10 from me.

One question I would like to pose is how are the little subplots interconnected?

Are they rooms on a train, all going together to the same place, but essentially isolated from each other? Are they different sides of fantasy and reality playing out? Are they simply ways of expressing the various reactions that a "hero" has to face?

Fore me those were real stories which made film far better than if it would have been solely the actor/editor story.

The drowning in money dream sequence is interesting.

For me this was one of the best dream sequences I ever encountered. I think it might be even the best. All other film dream sequences I remember feel far more melodramatic, operatic, staged, cheesy to me (Awaara, Kaminey, the just seen Inquilaab, Dali's dream sequence in Spellbound). Maybe it feels so convincing to me because it agrees better with my kind of dreaming . Maybe other people's dreams are more stagy.

--- each brain develops its own preferences ---

[–] LCgirl88 12 years ago

This is my first Satyajit Ray film and my first Bengali film, so I didn't know what to expect, and I'm glad to say that I was pleasantly surprised.

What I found most interesting was how relevant the discussions about movies and actors that Aditi and Arindam were having are in today's times. Like, when Aditi talked about how reality is absence in Arindam's movies, or when he refused the interview saying actors' shouldn't reveal too much about themselves, or when he said that the old man's (forgot his name) acting was outdated, and many more.

All those felt very familiar to me. I've heard many similar arguments here in IMDb about our current movies and actors. It's funny, here we are, almost five decades later, and it seems like nothing much has changed in the movie industry.

Of the other characters, I found Molly intriguing. She seemed so shy and uncomfortable in front of that old adversiting dude (I'm terrible at names) that her husband was having lunch with, and yet she confidently approached Arindam and asked to be in movies. That seemed contradictory. Was she just pretending to be docile?

I found a YouTube comment that I thought would be interesting to discuss :

"the usual Ray greatness, except that Sharmila took away from the greatness with her usual overly feminine portrayal."

I'm not familiar with Sharmila's work, so I'm curious to know what do you guys think of her performance?

Youth, like pristine glass, absorbs the prints of it's handlers

[–] elanor-3 12 years ago

I found a YouTube comment that I thought would be interesting to discuss :

"the usual Ray greatness, except that Sharmila took away from the greatness with her usual overly feminine portrayal."

I'm not familiar with Sharmila's work, so I'm curious to know what do you guys think of her performance?

For me also Tagore's play felt not convincing. For me she acted as if she would become the hero's Bollywood heroine in the course of the film. She was much too beautiful and feminine for this film. The thick black rim of her glasses looked ridiculous to me. It was the trope of the intellectual woman, who only has to remove her glasses and the hero falls in love with her.

As to her performance. It didn't work in this film, because I could not see a professional editor, I only saw a beautiful actress playing a nice and sympathetic character. She would have been all-right as a housewife and mother. As far as I remember, she was utterly convincing in the third part of the Apu trilogy as bride and young wife.

--- each brain develops its own preferences ---

[–] themanwithnoshame2016 8 years ago

Check out the Bengali movie called Autograph. It is about a director trying to remake Nayak with a resent day star.

[–] RRHowell41 12 years ago

My take on Molly was that her husband was essentially pimping her out--she was shy and awkward because her husband was asking her to get into a situation where she was going to be asked to sleep with the old guy, and she was not comfortable with that. But she knew that she was beautiful, and was very interested in having her beauty used in a movie--which might have given her financial independence, as opposed to getting into a situation where she was going to get pawed or possibly slept with to advance her husband's business interests. However, her husband couldn't see her in such a situation--why THAT would be scandalous, as opposed to what he was doing.

That's part of why I want to get a better understanding of how the swami reads, and his offer to the husband.

Sharmila certainly didn't seem like an overly aggressive editor. I got the impression that she was not much of a business woman, and that whatever she was editing was supposed to be an intellectual magazine, possibly a literary magazine.

[–] themanwithnoshame2016 8 years ago

"the usual Ray greatness, except that Sharmila took away from the greatness with her usual overly feminine portrayal"

What does that even mean?

[–] PsychoDingo 12 years ago

This was my first Satyajit Ray film, and I believe my first Indian film by an Indian director (have seen various films about India and its people, made by non-Indian directors).

I am left wonder if, as an outsider, I missed something, perhaps metaphors or things represented by custom or culture, that would only be obvious to Indians or people more experienced with Indian films.

On its face, Nayak seems like a "slice of life" sort of film, with a few flashbacks included. We spend a short time with these people on the train, and their stories never seem to fully play out (except maybe the editor story), or have a particular purpose or greater message. We see several episodes, with the kid, the compartment-mates, the alcohol-free movie hater, the actress, the folks back home, that don't seem to be driving at anything, and could easily have been omitted, except that there would be almost no movie left.

Maybe those episodes are insignificant in their own details, but create vehicles by which to get into the hero's head as he reflects upon his life and fears.

Am I seeing the film for what it is, or only what it appears to be to a person who is only somewhat in tune with the culture? Is it just a slice of life, or is there something deeper therein?

Paradise is a place with many exits, but no way in.

[–] jlam888 (574) 4 years ago

My favorite scene was the girl surprising him with a little audition.

[–] TheArgentinian (6423) a year ago

I loved that scene too! Her acting was brilliant.