Here we have a movie that tries hard to be 'deep and artful' and 'uncover human emotions' but fails miserably. In this story, a blind author has an intense fear of rain and then is confronted by a journalist who then pretends to be a psychiatrist, but then ends up being the man who raped her when she was young, which leads to an open-mouthed kiss and nude scenes just to keep the perverts in the audience interested. Other than that, the story is weak and unrealistic (I have a feeling that the writer for this movie designed the entire script around the kiss and the sex scene). Also, RAPE IS NOT SEXUAL, this is something that Indian directors have a hard time understanding.
7 Reviews
The film is really about a rapist, and his theories of sex and rape, a man who can't differentiate between being a eunuch and being impotent.
amitontheweb26 May 2007
Warning: Spoilers
A shocking plot secret is thrust on the viewers even as an open mouth kiss between the lead female and her chosen male is on its way -- the male happens to be her enemy, the destroyer of her life.
The theme of the movie appears to be a fear of rain suffered by a blind girl who was raped as a young girl on a rainy night. It is expected to show her sorrows and sufferings. Instead, the film chooses to show us her big, blouse-tearing breasts at every plausible moment. Rain, fear, phobia, blindness -- these are just psychological props used in the story to thrash out the main elements of the script: lust and sexuality.
The film is really about a rapist, and his theories of sex and rape, a man who can't differentiate between being a eunuch and being impotent. He is made to take several guises to cheat the girl -- rapist, social worker, journalist, psychiatrist, and her dream lover. He thinks there is no such thing as 'rape' among animals, where the males impose themselves on the females and make them enjoy sex. This, he claims, was true when he raped the blind girl who in his opinion enjoyed its conclusion, as proved by her growing silence during the act. But she won't admit it now, so he says.
Full free play is given to the male who goes about terrorising his chosen victim with ease, verbalising his thoughts and what he wants. The only thing that can be done in the script is to kill him. Just as it happens among a species where the female kills the male after sex, so says the blind girl, taking the theory of animal sex to its conclusion.
It is a weak argument, for it happens only in that species, and not all. So is the theory of animal sex alright for us? The weak point of the story is that its plot revolves around the male trying to beget a child from the blind girl to prove his manhood, and not lust or sex that both he and the girl are actually shown as interested in. The filmmakers don't appear to have made up their minds, and the story falls down here, for the viewer can't make sense of all this mess. The customary end sees the girl take her revenge and get the final word in -- that force can't be used to obtain favours.
It wouldn't be too far fetched to claim that the blindness of the girl character was exploited by the script, to run the plot around, and the film, to show the actress' body.
A glimpse of the comical and the non-sensical elements in the story:
The theme of the movie appears to be a fear of rain suffered by a blind girl who was raped as a young girl on a rainy night. It is expected to show her sorrows and sufferings. Instead, the film chooses to show us her big, blouse-tearing breasts at every plausible moment. Rain, fear, phobia, blindness -- these are just psychological props used in the story to thrash out the main elements of the script: lust and sexuality.
The film is really about a rapist, and his theories of sex and rape, a man who can't differentiate between being a eunuch and being impotent. He is made to take several guises to cheat the girl -- rapist, social worker, journalist, psychiatrist, and her dream lover. He thinks there is no such thing as 'rape' among animals, where the males impose themselves on the females and make them enjoy sex. This, he claims, was true when he raped the blind girl who in his opinion enjoyed its conclusion, as proved by her growing silence during the act. But she won't admit it now, so he says.
Full free play is given to the male who goes about terrorising his chosen victim with ease, verbalising his thoughts and what he wants. The only thing that can be done in the script is to kill him. Just as it happens among a species where the female kills the male after sex, so says the blind girl, taking the theory of animal sex to its conclusion.
It is a weak argument, for it happens only in that species, and not all. So is the theory of animal sex alright for us? The weak point of the story is that its plot revolves around the male trying to beget a child from the blind girl to prove his manhood, and not lust or sex that both he and the girl are actually shown as interested in. The filmmakers don't appear to have made up their minds, and the story falls down here, for the viewer can't make sense of all this mess. The customary end sees the girl take her revenge and get the final word in -- that force can't be used to obtain favours.
It wouldn't be too far fetched to claim that the blindness of the girl character was exploited by the script, to run the plot around, and the film, to show the actress' body.
A glimpse of the comical and the non-sensical elements in the story:
- The girl's pregnancy is not proof enough of the man's normalcy. - The girl gives birth to a still baby. The male's wife blames the girl. Yet, later the male comes back to the blind girl saying that his wife blames him for the still baby. - It is the male who is engaged in shocking, criminal and aberrant practices, full of lust. Yet the script allows only the girl to be described as 'abnormal' and a 'sex-maniac', when all that she does is explore herself.
C-grade film
AishFan24 October 2010
Terrible direction, dreadful performances, crude dialogs, repulsive plot, and lackluster music make this film a complete waste of time. Meghna plays the role of a blind author. We know she's no Rani Mukherjee, but Meghna's portrayal of a blind person is blinking every split second. The songs are so forgettable, that I phased out while they were on; they also came at the most inappropriate moments and ridiculous situations like old-school Hindi films. The dialogs are extremely crude and insensitive. The story is vulgar and gross, but that is the intent, so you can't really blame them there. I got this DVD for free at a fair. Now, I understand why.
An insensitive and boring movie
sauravjoshi8523 July 2019
Rain: the terror with in is an erotic thriller movie directed by Amol Shetge and starring Meghna Naidu and Himanshu Malik.
Although the movie is Erotic thriller but it's neither erotic nor thriller.
The acting is pathetic and we can clearly see the Struggle of Meghna Naidu playing a role of Blind girl, same with the male lead.
The direction is bad and the dialogues of the movie is insensitive and bad in shape. The background music is very loud and nowhere supports any scene. The songs are just comes from nowhere and the music is also forgettable. The climax is predictable and doesn't have any effect
A movie you must avoid.
Although the movie is Erotic thriller but it's neither erotic nor thriller.
The acting is pathetic and we can clearly see the Struggle of Meghna Naidu playing a role of Blind girl, same with the male lead.
The direction is bad and the dialogues of the movie is insensitive and bad in shape. The background music is very loud and nowhere supports any scene. The songs are just comes from nowhere and the music is also forgettable. The climax is predictable and doesn't have any effect
A movie you must avoid.
Unusual Premise
crossbow010629 March 2009
This story is about a blind author named Sandhya, played by the beautiful Meghna Naidu. She lives alone in a nice house and gets a call, presumably from a reporter named Prakash, played by Himanshu Mallick, to come over. He does and he finds out that she has an unusual fear of rain. He owns up that he is actually a psychiatrist, but is he? Its kind of a cat and mouse game, with each threatening the other. What it all boils down to is this is a psychological drama with a very narrow minded view of sexuality. I liked it less as it went along and by the end it admittedly grew preposterous. I don't think it is completely bad, but it took a wrong turn somewhere and kept going. I've never seen either of these actors before, so I don't know if there are better films with them in them. I'd say skip this, unless you're a fan of the two actors.
A good story ruined by making an unnecessarily stretched movie and illogical end
agnihotrisanjay29 May 2018
A good story ruined by making an unnecessarily stretched movie name "Rain" with good artists Himanshu Malik, Meghna Naidu and illogical end. But even these good artists (Himanshu Malik, Meghna Naidu) were not able to save that movie. A better version of the same story as a short movie originally made in Bangla "Kiss of Death" then dubbed in Hindi "Blind".
Meghna Naidu is hot!!
fuadkhan20027 August 2016
In all honesty, I found this to be a pretty decent and engaging thriller. Even though there is a hint of amateurish directing and acting at times, the smoldering hot Meghna Naidu plays her role with great conviction and has the physicality and sensual appeal to do full justice to her role. She epitomizes the sensual, hot and mature Indian woman for me in this movie. Himanshu has done a great job with his role as well, perfectly transitioning from a concerned, soft hearted well wisher to a demented, frightening sex maniac and predator. The mansion shown adds to the drama and intrigue, and I particularly enjoyed the constant references to sexual behavior in the animal kingdom and its twisted manifestations in the human psyche. There is a long, passionate lip kiss scene between Meghna and Himanshu, and honestly, I am a little jealous of him now! The song" Dhalne Lagi Shaam" is sumptuous, and is picturized outstandingly well on the lead actors with Meghna displaying her luscious figure to the best advantage of the viewers. Not a bad watch for a different kind of cinema and thought-provoking sexual philosophy.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
