Amazon.com

Sir Richard Attenborough's 1982 multiple-Oscar winner (including Best Picture, Best Director, and Best Actor for Ben Kingsley) is an engrossing, reverential look at the life of Mohandas K. Gandhi, who introduced the doctrine of nonviolent resistance to the colonized people of India and who ultimately gained the nation its independence. Kingsley is magnificent as Gandhi as he changes over the course of the three-hour film from an insignificant lawyer to an international leader and symbol. Strong on history (the historic division between India and Pakistan, still a huge problem today, can be seen in its formative stages here) as well as character and ideas, this is a fine film. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (108)

BEN KINGSLEY'S FINEST HOUR ON DVD
Richard Attenborough's "Gandhi" is a masterfully told, massively mounted epic motion picture, depicting the life and times of Gandhi, a benevolant crusader for peace, whose shocking assassination rocked the world. Ben Kingsley rightfully took home the Oscar for his subtle but stunning transformation into the title role. WARNING: This is a slow paced movie but well worth the three hour plus investment of your time.
Columbia Tristar has given us a very beautiful print of the film. Colors are rich, bold and vibrant. Contrast levels are good. Although black levels are not always at their darkest, this is relatively forgivable, since most of the film takes place during the day. Shimmering, aliasing and edge enhancement are all present but in extremely minute amounts, leaving one with nothing to do but admire the visual presentation in all of its breathtaking cinematography. The soundtrack is 2.0 surround but well represented. Some of the audio has a tendancy to appear thin or strident but, again, considering its dated fidelity and the source material, it is remarkably well represented. No extras - disappointing for a big time Oscar winner like this. Perhaps we'll get a special edition eventually.

Excellent movie about a 'mover' in this world
Every once in a while this world produces an exceptional human being whose presence makes it a much better place to live in. Such a person was Mahatma Gandhi; the Indian 'radical' whose teachings about non-violent resistance lead to the eventual independence of India from British colonial rule. His teachings have inspired other such movements in the world and his life has been looked up to as a standard which others have tried to emulate.

Every once in a while those responsible for the academy awards have chosen deserving films. This is one of them. Ben Kingsley gives a grand performance as Gandhi, from his youth to his death. The impersonation is spot on; everything from the accent to the gait is so convincing that one could swear Kingsley was Gandhi.

If you are looking for a biography of this man on film, this movie is an excellent source. Condensing Gandhi's life into a few hours is such a great feat, especially when there is so much of this man that could be explored. The movie was filmed in India, with 300,000 extras, so if you like epic films you will definitely enjoy this one. The scenery is authentic and the characters have a reality about them so often lacking in 'hollywood' films. No 'eye-candy' version of a historical event, this is a real movie about a real person.

The DVD extras were ok for a film this old. There is some original newsreel footage which is quite short but still worth watching to see the real Gandhi as he was. Kingsley also gives a talk about how it was being Gandhi, there is also some of the sayings of Gandhi; great candidates for those memorable sayings we all try to memorize to motivate ourselves. All in all a great DVD, the movie is a timeless classic about a great man of the modern world.

Movie does not do justice to the person
Richard Attenborough's movie "Gandhi" was a movie of epic proportion. Mohandas Gandhi was probably the most influential person of modern day India. If one reads any of his biographies or his autobiography, one would find that he was a very complex person. The movie was well directed and showed some of the important parts of the freedom struggle starting from his initiation in South Africa. However, for the sake of marketing, the movie concentrates largely on the european angle and sidetrakes the Indian angle completely.

Gandhi was a person who started a new line of thinking that inspired people like Martin Luther King, Nelson Mandela, and Dalai Lama. He was a complex person who right from childhood was afraid of ghosts and speaking in public. He was a disaster as a lawyer initially. The transformation happened when he saw the injustice happen to him in Pietermaritzburg in South Africa. I wish that the movie had shown the transformation in the person. This was an important catalysis. Most of the people shown in the movie were not important in Gandhi's life, though they were decent actors, such as Candice Bergan and so on. The Indians who associated with him such as Patel, Nehru, Azad and so on are given minor importance.

Some of his important speeches were left out, which are thought provoking. Recently Time magazine had Salman Rushdie write a piece about Gandhi. Granted there is freedom of speech, but I had never seen a more badly written piece about Gandhi than that. Rushdie should stick to fiction - well he is losing his touch in that too. Gandhi had his faults like any human, some of his ideas may not apply in the present day world. But his positives far outweigh his negatives. The sad part is that he is largely forgotten in India itself. Most people in India do not take the trouble to read and know about the real person, what he stood for, his ideals. In fact, I am ashamed to say that South Africa remembers him more than India, even though his is the father of India. Even in the last elections in South Africa, he was used as an icon. However, in India, he is slowly ebbing away.

A soul-conquering fine work of art
Never before have I seen such a powerful work of art. It made me forget the finesse of the technological masterpiece, an advanced Macintosh computer running MacOsX, which delivered the breath-taking scenes in vibrant colors with soul-stirring sound effects. Instead all that stood in my mind was the movie and movie alone. This was a radical change in thought for a person like me who is a avid technology enthusiast. Never before have I been so involved in the scenes of a movie. Every scene and every peice of sound hits the nail right on its head with a powerful strike of the hammer. I must appreciate the dedication of the team and their quest for perfection. Years of their work has produced this masterpiece which mankind can cherish for the eons to come. This certainly is one of the best creations of collective human intellect of superlative degree. The story of the life of a great soul in a soul-conquering work of art.

gandhi-whats the point?
i mean he wasnt that great was he? there are plenty of annorexic people out there. plus its not healthy. throughout that whole movie i was yelling, " GIVE THAT MAN A SANDWICH!" he needs to eat something. I cant tell the difference between mahatma gandhi and paris hilton. in closing WHO LET THE DOGS OUT
WHO WHO WHO WHO.
who let the dogs out-good tune
gandhi-OK flick

i give it ***

GO GANDHI! he is my favorite linebacker in san diego chargers history ... Read more

Amazon.com

This adaptation of E.M. Forster's mysterious tale of British racism in colonial India turned out to be master director David Lean's final film. Subtle and grand at the same time, Lean's adaptation is faithful to the book, rendering its blend of the mystical and the all-too human with exquisite precision. Judy Davis plays a young British woman traveling in India with her fiancé's mother. While visiting a tourist attraction, she has a frightening moment in a cave--one that she eventually spins from an instant of mental meltdown into a tale of a physical attack that ruins several lives. Lean captures Forster's sense of awe at the kind of ageless wisdom and inexplicable phenomena to be encountered in India, as well as the British tendency to dismiss it all as savage, rather than simply different. --Marshall Fine ... Read more

Reviews (35)

Last Passage
Director David Lean created some of the most visually stunning and brilliant films in movie history. The final film of his illustrious career was 1984's A Passage To India. The film is again a marvel to look at as Mr. Lean captures the Indian landscape with all its mystical splendor. Judy Davis is alluring as a young woman who travels to India with her perspective mother-in-law to visit her fiancé who is a magistrate there. On a cave exploring trip, she involved in a mix-up with Victor Banerjee's Dr. Aziz that leads to a court case and the revealing of the racial divide between the natives of India and the British who rule the country. Peggy Ashcroft won an Oscar as the all-knowing Mrs. Moore and long time Lean collaborator Maurice Jarre won an Oscar for his score. Alec Guinness appears in one of the most bizarre roles of his career as an Indian professor (complete with an Indian accent and dispensing of mystical preachings). A Passage To India is a strong closing film in the career of a respected and revered filmmaker.

ANOTHER CLASSIC IN THE LEAN (AND FORSTER) CANON.
In his brilliant exploration of the question he ultimately posed in HOWARDS END (who shall inherit England?), E. M. Forster gifted us with A PASSAGE TO INDIA. The novel, and the movie, provide deceptively simple characters to carry Forster's views along...the arrogance of a British-dominated culture meddling where it once again does not belong; the impossible melding of certain classes and/or temperaments; and the ultimate sacrifice or tragedy that must occur in order for the madness to cease. Into the mix Forster adds (as he did with Ruth Wilcox in HOWARDS END) the mysterious female entity (the enigmatic Mrs Moore) who seems to be in touch with all elements, earthly and spiritual. Director David Lean could not have done better in casting Dame Peggy Ashcroft as this luminous woman; she becomes the movie's triumphant center, its moral conscience and all-seeing eyes, and at the same time leaves us with one of the most memorable performances in recent cinema. Excellent support also comes from the brilliant Judy Davis (in a nearly impossible part to play, Davis succeeds almost frighteningly well) as the hysterical Miss Quested, dashing Victor Banerjee as the harried Dr Aziz, and James Fox as the character caught between two clashing worlds (much the same way Margaret Schlegel was in HOWARDS END).

David Lean has created so many memorable films and setpieces it seems almost redundant to objectify them, but let it be said the sequence here with the visit to the ominous Marabar Caves is one of his best--beautifully choreographed, perfectly timed, and with just enough mystery to inspire as much discussion as the novel. How often does that happen?

It may not be a rousing action epic, but it will leave the discerning viewer with much to think about and should inspire several viewings to take in all the levels of meaning. A most rewarding film experience.

Worst garbage ever filmed
For starters I remember when I first was this film when it aired on cable tv in the mid 1980's- I remember devoting serious concentration to this film only to be floored halfway through the film when I discovered the entire film is about a rape that happened to someone somewhere sometime ago.
Now get this straight- I have a B.A. in literature and was forced to read an EM Forster novel once, and it was the worst most boring piece of pretentious British trash ever invented, the absolute worst novel on the planet- this author is TEN times worse than Henry James. You want to waste your time? Then buy this trash and watch it, youll be sorry, I promise you. One reviewer below is also dead on- EM Forster is just a really bad author.

A Passage to India
This is the last film David Lean directed. (David Lean is of "Lawrence of Arabia" and "Bridge on the River Kwai" fame.) Based on the classic novel by E.M. Forster, this movie tells of a story of British racism in India during the early 1900's. A young woman, Adela Quested, travels to India to visit her fiance. Traveling with her is her fiance's elderly mother, Mrs. Moore. Mrs. Moore is utterly astonished at how the British treat the Indians, and even shows shame at her own son's ill treatment towards them. Her son is the magistrate. Mrs. Moore and Miss Quested befriend an Indian doctor, Aziz Ahmed. Aziz is overwhelmed at how friendly Mrs. Moore and Miss Quested are towards him and in his excitement he plans a day trip to the mysterious Marabar caves with them, to help show them around India. While there, inside the mystifying caves, something happens to Miss Quested and Aziz is accused of raping her. What follows is a court battle as well as a battle for the inner personal truth. Synopsis aside, I was horrified at how the British treated the Indians. I had never really thought of it until watching this movie. For shedding some historical light, even if it is historical-fiction, I give this movie two thumbs up, as well as give it four stars for completely weaving me into the story. In the beginning, I was slightly wary that it might turn out to be a boring historical-fiction film, but quite the contrary. I was glued to the "tube" in my anticipation to find the fate of the characters in this movie. The movie was completed in 1985 and it took over 30 years to see it completed. In the beginning, Forster did not want to sell the screen rights to the play for fear the movie would be seen as either pro-British or pro-Indian. I will admit that while watching it I despised the British's treatment of the Indians so perhaps it wasn't as objective as Forster had hoped, but what is there to be objective about in unfairness?

A LEAN DAVID
I am an Indian. I adore the way Forster wrote about India, and the way in which directorial stalwarts like Merchant-Ivory captured that vision on 8mm. For anyone who's followed David Lean's movies in the chronological order, The Passage to India is almost a criminal gyp, for it does not have a strong (or any) storyline to brag about, nor does it capture the glorious vistas of natures as Lawrence of Arabia or Dr Zhivago had managed.

Somehow, a true sense of India, either as a place or as a people, fails to come alive. While non-Indian viewers may enjoy the mild research that may have gone into the set and the props, it is really nothing special for anyone who knows what India must have looked like. For all the genius that David Lean was, he too fell for the standard shrinkwrapped clichés about India that any western director indulges in. For insatnce, the music that one hears at the market is frequently south Indian (Madras Presidency at that time), but in reality this would NEVER have been heard within 1000 miles of Bombay.

The (mis)casting of non-Indians for most of the Indian characters -- a fact that other reviewers have noted too -- is not simply a sore point, it is practically gross. Case in point: an atrocious Alec Guinness trying to pass off as a Brahmin Professor, while Victor Banenerjee struts about absurdly over-eager in the key role of Dr. Aziz. Why this was necessary is beyond me.

Then, the plot, or lack thereof. Really, very little happens during the course of the movie. The narrative is super-turtle, lacking the zing with which Merchant-Ivory have brought other books of Forster to life. The story to me was not about Adela's sexual conflicts; it was about an appreciation for the raw energies of India and how it transforms our very souls. I don't feel Lean's screenplay gives us the chance to discover Forster's India.

The film picks up a click towards the ending, which is full of the subtleties one expects of a writer of Forster's cadre, though there remains an absence of crucial detail about what should be the key event of the story. Peggy Ashcroft is great, but one can't help but wonder whether an Indian director could have made more from the same material.

Overall, the movie is borderline idiotic, watchable once perhaps (if your history professor forces it down your throat) otherwise there's a lot better to learn about India from: "Shakespeare Wallah", "Bombay Talkie", "Heat and Dust" etc etc. ... Read more

Reviews (59)

My all-time favorite movie!
In my opinion, this is the most beautiful movie ever made. The mixture of humor and drama truly make it relative to real life. To watch Larry, a man on a journey to discover, not only himself, but also the meaning of Life, is what makes this movie special. What is remarkable is that the tragedy that Larry must face at the end is what actually leads to his final understanding of what the gift of life really is. I highly recommend this movie to anyone who appreciates the beauty that can be found in life, even during dark times.

Literature that sweats
Remember all of those tiresome books you were REQUIRED to read - and read in Cliff's Notes - if at all? The ones with characters that seemed so odd - not really real? Totally removed from anyone you personally knew? Bill Murray took a lot of heat for doing this movie (the backstory is wonderful), but I think it's his best work. His portrayal of Larry Darrell is filled with vitality and authenticity. Somerset Maugham may not have mentioned the fact that Larry was occasionally known to scratch in public; Murray plays Darrell in a way that convinces me that the man was fully human, itches and all. Bill entertained in other movies; in this one, he proved he was a good actor. Everyone shines in this movie, but Bill Murray is the surprize. Add in the story, and the occasional engaging character, and you have a worthy addition to your movie library. (OK, here's the backstory: apparently, Murray bought the rights to "The Razor's Edge" - and then couldn't get a studio to make it. Then a studio offers to make the movie, if he'll appear in one they want him for - a movie he turns down twice, but finally accepts - a little thing called "Ghostbusters".)

Who are we? Why are we here??
I am of Irish-German heritage, raised Catholic, now studying Hinduism. I can say this movie has profoundly impacted my life and recommend it to anyone looking for an entertaining and serious adventure that embraces the search for self-realization.

This has to be my favorite movie of all time. I've seen this movie, repeatedly, beginning in 1986 at the age of fifteen. I didn't know what its messages were back then but I continued to rent it off-and-on as I grew older in hopes I could realize more of the movie's riddles that caught my attention from the start. Especially, when Murray's talking with the Dhalai Lama and asks, "Is it true? That it's easier to be a monk on the top of a mountain?" And the Dalai Lama responds, "It is true that living a spiritual life is like walking on a razor's edge."

Bill Murray's dramatic performance was compelling for me because he took a risk stepping outside of his comedic role-playing (his career stereo-type) to portray a character searching for the meaning of life--Siskel & Ebert identified this as the reason the movie didn't score well at the box office in 1984.

I've seen Seven Years in Tibet with Brad Pitt, and I have to say that my opinion of the movie was biased because I found myself returning to The Razor's Edge as a gauge for comparison--even though both movies were based on non-fictional characters.

Although the content of The Razor's Edge may be heavy, you won't walk away disappointed. In fact, I'm buying a copy from Amazon.com for my own library so I don't have to try and find it at the video store next month :)

A Quest for Wisdom
There's no need to go into a long synopsis of this movie, or to analyze Bill Murray's performance. This is a movie about a regular guy that suddenly has his world shattered, and so he sets off on a quest for wisdom. As for Murray's portrayal of the central role, Larry Darell, I thought it was perfectly fitting that a man most of us see as a kind of big-hearted clown is here cast as a spiritual adventurer. After all, must these two types by very different from each other? The movie works very well if you don't try to typecast Murray or go into the story with preconceptions about what kind of character Larry Darell is supposed to be. In fact, a big message in the story is about not being trapped by preconceptions about the way things are "supposed to be".

Some of the images in this movie are stunning, and there are times when I get the feeling that I'm looking at one of those Asian landscape paintings in which the tiny figure of a man sits in silent meditation among great mountains, a broad sky, and placid valleys. Without beating you over the head with it, the camera work constantly reminds you that life is bigger than you and that the world is full of wonders. The story reminds us that such wonders can be either beautiful or ugly, with many of them being both at the same time.

The reason I don't give it 5 stars? It left a lot of character development unaddressed, and the viewer simply had to fill in the blanks for many of Larry's challenges and realizations. If you don't find it tugging at your heart, and if you don't find yourself solemnly nodding at some of its poignant observations about life, and then laughing at some folly we all share, then it's not due the movie's shortcomings.

Poor Acting, Poor Editing
First off, I like Bill Murray. Unfortunately he simply doesn't have the acting talent to play this role. He tries, but he does not have the dramatic or emotional depth required of the role. One would be better off reading the book. ... Read more

Description

An archaeologist travels to the Egyptian pyramids to search for treasure and finds herself embroiled in a murder mystery. ... Read more

Reviews (10)

Wonderful
Of course, in consideration of Egyptology, this story does have some vague accurate references to Egyptian history. Also the base line of the story about the antiquity black market can only be the tip of the iceberg. But the story itself is a good one. Frank Langella's character is intense and very appropriate for his stature and persona. Lesley Anne Down also plays her role well, but I've often wondered if they picked her for that role because she screamed well. The cinematography is very well done. The sights of Ancient Egypt are very awe-inspiring. The props used for the scenes are some of the best remakes of antiquities that I've ever seen. The movie made me want to jump on a plane to Egypt immediately. I thoroughly enjoyed this movie. END

A well done and good paced mystery.
There is murder and intrigue in Egypt. You can not tell the good guys from the bad. Lesley-Anne Down as Erica Baron is right in the middle of things and she won't "stay in the car". Frank Langella is convincing as Ahmed Khazzan the Egyptian authority and friend of those that are legal.

This is one of those movies that you will be compelled into repeated viewing.

Good story, great scenery...
I really enjoyed the movie. A red-haired Lesley-Anne Down put in a great performance among some of the most striking scenery. Well worth seeing...

I love this movie, but where is the DVD?!
I saw this movie a long time ago on British TV and have often wondered if I had just imagined how good it was. But, seeing it again on cable it has all the magic that I remember and also the gorgeous Lesley-Anne Down. Where, oh where is the DVD?! Please release this fun movie on the format.

Beautiful movie
This is a great movie. I won't embellish on the other reviews...except where's the dvd!!!? ... Read more

Reviews (108)

BEN KINGSLEY'S FINEST HOUR ON DVD
Richard Attenborough's "Gandhi" is a masterfully told, massively mounted epic motion picture, depicting the life and times of Gandhi, a benevolant crusader for peace, whose shocking assassination rocked the world. Ben Kingsley rightfully took home the Oscar for his subtle but stunning transformation into the title role. WARNING: This is a slow paced movie but well worth the three hour plus investment of your time.
Columbia Tristar has given us a very beautiful print of the film. Colors are rich, bold and vibrant. Contrast levels are good. Although black levels are not always at their darkest, this is relatively forgivable, since most of the film takes place during the day. Shimmering, aliasing and edge enhancement are all present but in extremely minute amounts, leaving one with nothing to do but admire the visual presentation in all of its breathtaking cinematography. The soundtrack is 2.0 surround but well represented. Some of the audio has a tendancy to appear thin or strident but, again, considering its dated fidelity and the source material, it is remarkably well represented. No extras - disappointing for a big time Oscar winner like this. Perhaps we'll get a special edition eventually.

Excellent movie about a 'mover' in this world
Every once in a while this world produces an exceptional human being whose presence makes it a much better place to live in. Such a person was Mahatma Gandhi; the Indian 'radical' whose teachings about non-violent resistance lead to the eventual independence of India from British colonial rule. His teachings have inspired other such movements in the world and his life has been looked up to as a standard which others have tried to emulate.

Every once in a while those responsible for the academy awards have chosen deserving films. This is one of them. Ben Kingsley gives a grand performance as Gandhi, from his youth to his death. The impersonation is spot on; everything from the accent to the gait is so convincing that one could swear Kingsley was Gandhi.

If you are looking for a biography of this man on film, this movie is an excellent source. Condensing Gandhi's life into a few hours is such a great feat, especially when there is so much of this man that could be explored. The movie was filmed in India, with 300,000 extras, so if you like epic films you will definitely enjoy this one. The scenery is authentic and the characters have a reality about them so often lacking in 'hollywood' films. No 'eye-candy' version of a historical event, this is a real movie about a real person.

The DVD extras were ok for a film this old. There is some original newsreel footage which is quite short but still worth watching to see the real Gandhi as he was. Kingsley also gives a talk about how it was being Gandhi, there is also some of the sayings of Gandhi; great candidates for those memorable sayings we all try to memorize to motivate ourselves. All in all a great DVD, the movie is a timeless classic about a great man of the modern world.

Movie does not do justice to the person
Richard Attenborough's movie "Gandhi" was a movie of epic proportion. Mohandas Gandhi was probably the most influential person of modern day India. If one reads any of his biographies or his autobiography, one would find that he was a very complex person. The movie was well directed and showed some of the important parts of the freedom struggle starting from his initiation in South Africa. However, for the sake of marketing, the movie concentrates largely on the european angle and sidetrakes the Indian angle completely.

Gandhi was a person who started a new line of thinking that inspired people like Martin Luther King, Nelson Mandela, and Dalai Lama. He was a complex person who right from childhood was afraid of ghosts and speaking in public. He was a disaster as a lawyer initially. The transformation happened when he saw the injustice happen to him in Pietermaritzburg in South Africa. I wish that the movie had shown the transformation in the person. This was an important catalysis. Most of the people shown in the movie were not important in Gandhi's life, though they were decent actors, such as Candice Bergan and so on. The Indians who associated with him such as Patel, Nehru, Azad and so on are given minor importance.

Some of his important speeches were left out, which are thought provoking. Recently Time magazine had Salman Rushdie write a piece about Gandhi. Granted there is freedom of speech, but I had never seen a more badly written piece about Gandhi than that. Rushdie should stick to fiction - well he is losing his touch in that too. Gandhi had his faults like any human, some of his ideas may not apply in the present day world. But his positives far outweigh his negatives. The sad part is that he is largely forgotten in India itself. Most people in India do not take the trouble to read and know about the real person, what he stood for, his ideals. In fact, I am ashamed to say that South Africa remembers him more than India, even though his is the father of India. Even in the last elections in South Africa, he was used as an icon. However, in India, he is slowly ebbing away.

A soul-conquering fine work of art
Never before have I seen such a powerful work of art. It made me forget the finesse of the technological masterpiece, an advanced Macintosh computer running MacOsX, which delivered the breath-taking scenes in vibrant colors with soul-stirring sound effects. Instead all that stood in my mind was the movie and movie alone. This was a radical change in thought for a person like me who is a avid technology enthusiast. Never before have I been so involved in the scenes of a movie. Every scene and every peice of sound hits the nail right on its head with a powerful strike of the hammer. I must appreciate the dedication of the team and their quest for perfection. Years of their work has produced this masterpiece which mankind can cherish for the eons to come. This certainly is one of the best creations of collective human intellect of superlative degree. The story of the life of a great soul in a soul-conquering work of art.

gandhi-whats the point?
i mean he wasnt that great was he? there are plenty of annorexic people out there. plus its not healthy. throughout that whole movie i was yelling, " GIVE THAT MAN A SANDWICH!" he needs to eat something. I cant tell the difference between mahatma gandhi and paris hilton. in closing WHO LET THE DOGS OUT
WHO WHO WHO WHO.
who let the dogs out-good tune
gandhi-OK flick

i give it ***

GO GANDHI! he is my favorite linebacker in san diego chargers history ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

A grandly entertaining, old-fashioned adventure based on the Rudyard Kipling short story, The Man Who Would Be King is the kind of rousing epic about which people said, even in 1975, "Wow! They don't make 'em like that anymore!" When director John Huston (The Maltese Falcon, The Treasure of the Sierra Madre, The African Queen) first started trying to make the film, with Gable and Bogart, the project was derailed by the latter's death. It was a few decades before Huston was able to finally realize his dream movie--and with an unimprovable cast. Sean Connery and Michael Caine are, respectively, Daniel Dravot and Peachy Carnahan, a pair of lovably roguish British soldiers who set out to make their fortunes by conning the priests of remote Kafiristan into making them kings. It's a rollicking tale, an epic satire of imperialism, and the good-natured repartee shared by Caine and Connery is pure gold. In today's screen adventures, humor is usually imposed on the material by a writer or director trying to make some kind of cleverly self-aware comment ("Hey, we know it's a movie!"), but that sort of jokiness can create so much ironic distance that it pushes the audience right out of the picture. Huston lets the humor emerge naturally from the characters, for whom we wind up caring more deeply than we ever expected. --Jim Emerson ... Read more

Reviews (82)

Some Movies Stand The Test Of Time
Some movies due to the fashion and other elements grow rapidly out of date but this is not one of them. This movie was made in 1975 and you do get a sense that it is not up to the current Hollywood standard in terms of special effects, Dolby surround, computer animation, and things of that nature. Despite this the movie still stands the test of time because of excellent performances, a good storyline, and a healthy dose of humor.

First off it is based off a story by Rudyard Kipling and takes place in the hinterlands of India. Two former English soldiers (Connery and Caine) who are basically scoundrels set out to set themselves up with fame and fortune.

They set out to the where no white men have been seen before and convince he locals they are gods. But look out anything that is too good is probably too good to be true or to last!

Connery and Caine complement one another in this film very well I thought and again this is not a special effects flick this is shot with real backgrounds etc for the most part. If you were ever curious to get a sense of Kipling without the book this might be a good film to check out! It is also not terribly inappropriate for younger viewers, for example they make a promise to one another not to drink or chase women while on their quest.

It is a period piece set in the late 1800s and depicts the railroads and remote countryside of colonial India in a day when might made right and individual adventurers could achieve glory and fortune. Or so legend would have it....

What's with the flipping?
First, this is a remarkable movie with Sean Connery, Michael Caine, and Christopher Plummer. The Kipling story is one of his best and the acting, directing, sets, music, and all other aspects of this movie are first class. Any fan of "Gunga Din" or the "The Four Feathers" will love it.

Our story starts out with Michael Caine, playing Peachy Carnehan, stealing Christopher Plummer's, playing Rudyard Kipling, watch. When he realizes the gold charm attached to it shows him to be a Free Mason he tries to return it. It is interesting how that little Free Mason charm changes the lives of Sean Connery, playing Daniel Dravot, and Peachy.

Daniel and Peachy seek their fortune in a small country across deserts and mountains from India. No one has made the journey and survived to tell about it. They decide they will be kings and not drink or be familiar with women until they have reached that goal. They ask Kipling to witness their contract before their departure.

Once the two set off with a couple pack animals and some guns and ammunition, the adventures and dangers the two encounter are amazing. The sprawling landscapes and cultures they see keep us mesmerized. It is not what they expected and so it also is not predictable what will befall them. A wonderful adventure worth seeing.

Second, can someone explain why there are a handful of DVDs like this that require you to flip them over halfway into the movie? I absolutely hate that. Fortunately I only have a couple movies that require me to do that but it needs to changed.

There is no excuse for it as far as I can see since I have many movies that are longer that do not require me to flip them over. Furthermore neither of those I own give you any warning that you need to flip them, they just stop and the screen goes black. Consider boycotting this method of releasing movies. I know I intend to write the studio about it.

I WILL PUT IT SIMPLY
BUY THIS MOVIE

I will give you three reasons why:
1) Sean Connery: one of the best actors. Period.
2) Michael Caine: another of the best. And he looks good in that hat.
3) Kipling: you just can't beat that for a writer.

ARE WE CLEAR?

Best Epic ever
This is the best historical fiction story ever, Michael Kane and Sean C at their very best

A Terrible film!
This is a terrible movie! I can't believe that a director as respectable as the great John Huston would make something this ridiculous. This film is the epitomy of the idea of "The White Man's Burden." This film shows Eastern cultures to be cruel, uncivilized, and lack intelligence. I went into this film thinking it would be a great adventure. Instead, at the end I felt like vomiting! Being an Indian and an American; I felt very offended that they were basically glorifying Alexander the "Tyrant" as a "god." I fail to understand why a man like Rudyard Kipling is considered a great writer. I wish I could give this NO STARS. John, I'll pretend you never made this film. ... Read more

Description

Paul Scott's STAYING ON This delightful drama, based on the award-winning novel by Paul Scott (The Jewel in the Crown), reunites the magnificent Trevor Howard and Celia Johnson for the first time since their appearance in the classic 1947 romance, "Brief Encounter." Retired Indian Army colonel Tusker Smalley and his wife Lucy made the decision to stay on in India after the British withdrew in 1947. While most of their friends returned home, Tusker decided to continue in military service. Now retired, he and Lucy are the only remaining British residents in the once-busy hill station of Pankot. Residing peacefully in a bungalow annex of the run-down Smith's Hotel, aided only by their long-suffering servant Ibrahim, their peace is about to be disturbed by the hotel owner, Mrs. Bhoolabhoy, whose plans for the hotel - and their bungalow - will permanently change one corner of India that had remained forever England. Stunningly filmed at the hill station of Simla at the foot of the Himalayas, a once-popular retreat for the British in India, STAYING ON is a memorable dramatization of this acclaimed novel, which perfectly captures a place, a time, and two timeless performances from Trevor Howard and Celia Johnson. ... Read more

Reviews (1)

Excellent Sequel to Jewel in the Crown.
This is an excellent rendering of Paul Scott's book Staying on, which is in itself a sequel to the Jewel in the Crown Quartet also writen by Paul Scott and also made into a TV Drama by Granada the same British compny that made the Jewel in the Crown sereis.
Staying on is a double success, it is an excellent rendering inhnto film of the book itself and in acting and dialogue it does not fall below the excellent TV series the Jewel in the Crown.
The story is set in post independent India, COL Tusker Smalley of the British Indian Army decides to stay on after India gains independence. He stays on as COL of his regiment.
Yes these things happened many British officers stayed on in the Indian Army and many British civil servants stayed on also. They were kept on by the Indian Government. The plot is set some 10 years after Independence when Smalley in his late sixties or early seventies is already pensioned off and living in a small cottage.
The film captures all the poignancy of the end of Empire and how it affected the British and Indians on an individual basis and above all it shows that despite claims to the contrary British Rule was not over resented by the Indians. They wanted Independence yes but the British were rather liked. ... Read more

Description

At the close of the 19th century, the British branded the Hmar people of northeast India as "the worst headhunters." It was a label well deserved at the time. But in 1910, a single copy of the gospel of John came into this village and changed the course of history for the Hmar people. Throug h that single copy of John's Gospel, Chawnga, the father of Rochunga Pudaite, was introduced to a revolutionary "new life in Christ." He and a few tribesmen "forsook all and followed Christ." Chawnga believed that Rochunga was God's chosen instrument to bring the Scriptures to the entire Hmar tribe in their own language. This is the story of Rochunga's personal pilgrimage. It is an unforgettable saga of his dedication to a vision and of the Lord's direction in his life. Filmed in India, Hawaii, Scotland and America, this beautiful film will be enjoyed by the entire family. ... Read more

Reviews (82)

Some Movies Stand The Test Of Time
Some movies due to the fashion and other elements grow rapidly out of date but this is not one of them. This movie was made in 1975 and you do get a sense that it is not up to the current Hollywood standard in terms of special effects, Dolby surround, computer animation, and things of that nature. Despite this the movie still stands the test of time because of excellent performances, a good storyline, and a healthy dose of humor.

First off it is based off a story by Rudyard Kipling and takes place in the hinterlands of India. Two former English soldiers (Connery and Caine) who are basically scoundrels set out to set themselves up with fame and fortune.

They set out to the where no white men have been seen before and convince he locals they are gods. But look out anything that is too good is probably too good to be true or to last!

Connery and Caine complement one another in this film very well I thought and again this is not a special effects flick this is shot with real backgrounds etc for the most part. If you were ever curious to get a sense of Kipling without the book this might be a good film to check out! It is also not terribly inappropriate for younger viewers, for example they make a promise to one another not to drink or chase women while on their quest.

It is a period piece set in the late 1800s and depicts the railroads and remote countryside of colonial India in a day when might made right and individual adventurers could achieve glory and fortune. Or so legend would have it....

What's with the flipping?
First, this is a remarkable movie with Sean Connery, Michael Caine, and Christopher Plummer. The Kipling story is one of his best and the acting, directing, sets, music, and all other aspects of this movie are first class. Any fan of "Gunga Din" or the "The Four Feathers" will love it.

Our story starts out with Michael Caine, playing Peachy Carnehan, stealing Christopher Plummer's, playing Rudyard Kipling, watch. When he realizes the gold charm attached to it shows him to be a Free Mason he tries to return it. It is interesting how that little Free Mason charm changes the lives of Sean Connery, playing Daniel Dravot, and Peachy.

Daniel and Peachy seek their fortune in a small country across deserts and mountains from India. No one has made the journey and survived to tell about it. They decide they will be kings and not drink or be familiar with women until they have reached that goal. They ask Kipling to witness their contract before their departure.

Once the two set off with a couple pack animals and some guns and ammunition, the adventures and dangers the two encounter are amazing. The sprawling landscapes and cultures they see keep us mesmerized. It is not what they expected and so it also is not predictable what will befall them. A wonderful adventure worth seeing.

Second, can someone explain why there are a handful of DVDs like this that require you to flip them over halfway into the movie? I absolutely hate that. Fortunately I only have a couple movies that require me to do that but it needs to changed.

There is no excuse for it as far as I can see since I have many movies that are longer that do not require me to flip them over. Furthermore neither of those I own give you any warning that you need to flip them, they just stop and the screen goes black. Consider boycotting this method of releasing movies. I know I intend to write the studio about it.

I WILL PUT IT SIMPLY
BUY THIS MOVIE

I will give you three reasons why:
1) Sean Connery: one of the best actors. Period.
2) Michael Caine: another of the best. And he looks good in that hat.
3) Kipling: you just can't beat that for a writer.

ARE WE CLEAR?

Best Epic ever
This is the best historical fiction story ever, Michael Kane and Sean C at their very best

A Terrible film!
This is a terrible movie! I can't believe that a director as respectable as the great John Huston would make something this ridiculous. This film is the epitomy of the idea of "The White Man's Burden." This film shows Eastern cultures to be cruel, uncivilized, and lack intelligence. I went into this film thinking it would be a great adventure. Instead, at the end I felt like vomiting! Being an Indian and an American; I felt very offended that they were basically glorifying Alexander the "Tyrant" as a "god." I fail to understand why a man like Rudyard Kipling is considered a great writer. I wish I could give this NO STARS. John, I'll pretend you never made this film. ... Read more

Reviews (2)

A TALE OF ROMANCE AND ADVENTURE IN BRITISH COLONIAL INDIA...
Based upon M. M. Kaye's best selling novel of the same name, this film is well acted and absorbing. It is a story set during the time of the British Raj in India. The two characters central to the film are Ash (Ben Cross), an Englishman who spent the formative years of his life believing that he was Indian, and Anjuli (Amy Irving), a half-caste Indian princess. Ash and Anjuli spent a portion of their childhood growing up together, until palace intrigues forced Ash and his Indian foster mother to flee. As a prepubescent youth, he is informed of his English heritage and sent to England for his education and Anglicization.

Returning to India many years later as a young man, Ash becomes a part of a British regiment called the Guides. He has some difficulties adjusting, as he is not an Englishman comfortable in his own skin, as he also feels Indian in many ways, a view that brings him conflict due to the way the native Indian population is viewed by the British. Meanwhile, Anjuli has continued living as a half-caste Indian princess. She and Ash have not seen each other since he and his foster Indian mother fled, and she has no idea that Ash is not Indian, but British.

The film is an amazing cornucopia of adventure and romance. It provides a tantalizing glimpse into British colonial India. All of this, however, merely serves to propel the story towards the uniting of Ash and Anjuli, as the film is, first and foremost, a love story set against the romantic and lush backdrop of colonial India. When the paths of these star crossed lovers intersect, it is under a most unusual set of circumstances. It is a story that will keep the viewer riveted to the screen. I, myself, was unable to tear myself away from the screen and was riveted for the full five hours that it took for this mesmerizing tale of adventure, love, and treachery to unfold.

With a star studded cast that includes the likes of Omar Shariff, Christopher Lee, Sir John Gielgud, and Rossano Brazzi, this is a film what will capture the viewer's imagination. I read and loved the novel upon which this film was based, and while it is not a faithful adaptation of that wonderful book, the film stands on its own considerable merits. It is meant to entertain and that it most certainly does. This is a film worth having in one's collection, as it is such a gripping tale.

Excellent picturization and impressive acting
I loved 'Far pavillions' the book. I got myself the video after I read the book from end to end. The good thing about the movie is that the picturization is perfect. Like all other Ishmail Merchant movies, Far Pavillions is finely done with lots of attention paid to the details. My only complaint is that the director did not spend much time on Ash's (the hero's)childhood and just showed bits of it during the titles. Ash's grown up life has a lot to do with the childhood that he spent at Gulkote. None of that is shown. There are times when it feels as though the film maker is trying to fast forward things. I know that this is a 5 hour film, but then it is based on a book that is at leat 1000 pages long and took 14 years to complete. Why not give the author some credit for her work. I like the way india has been depicted and both the lead actors (Ben cross) and the lady who plays Anjuli did a great job. The cast also includes some famous Indian and Holywood actors like Saeed Jaffery, Omar Sharief, Rossano Brazi etc. If you love the book, you will probably love the film. The only problem is that you will feel it is all on fast forward. ... Read more

Reviews (8)

underrated classic
THE DECEIVERS is a surpisingly captivating film, seducing us as well as the main character -- before any of us know it, we're all caught up in the Thuggee world. The movie wisely underplays its hand, eschewing narration and letting us follow Captain Savage's descent into near-madness. The movie also deserves plaudits for not giving us a cut-and-dried "happy ending," making the film far more haunting than if the filmmakers had left things neat and tidy.

Pierce Brosnan turns in a sterling performance as Captain Savage, capturing every nuance of his situation. Some reviewers have singled out Brosnan's performance for faint praise or outright disdain, but I can only figure that they're reacting to the "Bond" image rather than actually viewing Brosnan's performance (or bothering to truly evaluate and understand his career, which is punctuated with many challenging roles and first-rate performances, from a bit part in THE LONG GOOD FRIDAY to THE FOURTH PROTOCOL to THE TAILOR OF PANAMA). Make no mistake, Brosnan's is a great performance, and THE DECEIVERS may be my favorite of his films.

The great game & the enchantress Kali
This is a Merchant/Ivory film before they became masters of their craft, nonetheless this is a worthwhile film for those interested in the secret society of Kali worshipping assassins known as Thugs(pronounced Tugs), a society which some historians believe began as a pagan cult in ancient times. What makes the Thugs so dangerous is that they are consummate actors and so able to pass themselves off as respectable citizens and thus befriend their victims. Furthermore the cult is impenetrable to the British who seek to flush them out because even those non-thug Indians who know of the thugs existence either fear reporting them or tolerate them because they serve a goddess.
Captain Savage is a soldier who at the beginning of the film finds himself attracted to an Indian woman about to commit sati. In an attempt to save her he 'goes native'. This Indian woman has captured his desire more than his new wife. As we get to know him we can see he is particularly vulnerable to the mysterious allures of the land he is in. In the Indian disguise which he takes great pleasure in wearing he begins to uncover the secrets of the Kali sect but as he uncovers the secrets of their strangely sensual form of murder he also becomes attracted to it for the pleasure of serving Kali it is said elicits the greatest bliss.
In a moment of deep delirium Captain Savage now in deep cover and a member of the sect he is investigating goes over to the other side....or does he?
The film leaves no doubt just which side Captain Savage comes out on but I won't spoil it for you. The film is admittedly as gaudy as the subject matter, nowhere near the majesty of later Merchant/Ivory productions, but it is a fascinating study of the strangely malleable nature of colonial identity.
The best acting here is done by the Indian actors, the English parts are all played by mere mediocrities. Brosnan plays the lead and, well, he does an adequate job. An actor with a believably dark side would have been better suited to take this perilous journey.

A BIRD'S-EYE VIEW OF A MURDEROUS CULT...
This is an interesting exploration of the Thuggee cult of India, as it existed in the mid nineteenth century. Members of this cult worshipped the goddess, Kali, and were called "Thugs". Known to each other through secret phrases and rituals, the Thugs, who were an organized group of professional robbers, had a most interesting modus operandi. They would kill innocent travelers by garroting them with a weighted scarf, relieve them of their worldly goods, and then bury them so that they would seem to have vanished off the face of the earth. During their existence, members of the Thuggee cult were estimated to have killed over two million people, before being wiped out by the British, with the cooperation of the existing Indian government of that time.

This film, based upon a book of the same name by John Masters, explores this ancient, secret society. It features Pierce Brosnan as a British officer, William Savage, who comes upon this cult in action. He further investigates, but his efforts prove futile, until he manages to infiltrate this cult, disguised as a native of India. He does this with the aid of a Thug, who believes that the goddess Kali has turned her back on him.

As the film progresses, Gophal, as William Savage now calls himself, becomes enmeshed in the activities of the cult. So great is his involvement, that he is in danger of losing himself to its tenets. It is as if he were undergoing a personal psychosis. It is not until his Thug informant realizes what is happening to him and tries to assist him, resulting in British troops coming to the rescue, that Gophal/William snaps out of his role playing. It is William's infiltration of the Thuggee cult, however, that is the catalyst for subsequent action taken to wipe out this evil and murderous society.

This film, shot entirely in India, is well acted, for the most part. The only problem is Pierce Brosnan, who, in the lead role, is decidedly miscast, though he does a more than passable Indian accent. He is simply not a good fit for the role. Nonetheless, this is still an intriguing film that deals with a little known, though fascinating, segment of Indian history and worth watching.

The Deceivers
This film describes in detail the Indian Thugee cult and how one British officer fought to destroy it. The cast are very good and the locations are excellent.

Deceivers- an exceptional true adventure
I am both a fan of John Masters (author of the historical novel, "The Deceivers") and a professional anthropologist dealing with the cultures of India. This film is an undiscovered masterpiece! It is faithful to the written version in a rare way; but, it also portrays India, its culture, its peoples, and its history during the Rajput era in a manner that remains unexcelled by documentary films more explicitly tailored toward so doing. I recommend this movie to anyone seeking a good mystery; a good adventure; or a worthwhile excursion into Rajput era India. It is a shame that it has not been reissued. P.S.- Brosnon is at his own very best in this film! ... Read more

Reviews (82)

Some Movies Stand The Test Of Time
Some movies due to the fashion and other elements grow rapidly out of date but this is not one of them. This movie was made in 1975 and you do get a sense that it is not up to the current Hollywood standard in terms of special effects, Dolby surround, computer animation, and things of that nature. Despite this the movie still stands the test of time because of excellent performances, a good storyline, and a healthy dose of humor.

First off it is based off a story by Rudyard Kipling and takes place in the hinterlands of India. Two former English soldiers (Connery and Caine) who are basically scoundrels set out to set themselves up with fame and fortune.

They set out to the where no white men have been seen before and convince he locals they are gods. But look out anything that is too good is probably too good to be true or to last!

Connery and Caine complement one another in this film very well I thought and again this is not a special effects flick this is shot with real backgrounds etc for the most part. If you were ever curious to get a sense of Kipling without the book this might be a good film to check out! It is also not terribly inappropriate for younger viewers, for example they make a promise to one another not to drink or chase women while on their quest.

It is a period piece set in the late 1800s and depicts the railroads and remote countryside of colonial India in a day when might made right and individual adventurers could achieve glory and fortune. Or so legend would have it....

What's with the flipping?
First, this is a remarkable movie with Sean Connery, Michael Caine, and Christopher Plummer. The Kipling story is one of his best and the acting, directing, sets, music, and all other aspects of this movie are first class. Any fan of "Gunga Din" or the "The Four Feathers" will love it.

Our story starts out with Michael Caine, playing Peachy Carnehan, stealing Christopher Plummer's, playing Rudyard Kipling, watch. When he realizes the gold charm attached to it shows him to be a Free Mason he tries to return it. It is interesting how that little Free Mason charm changes the lives of Sean Connery, playing Daniel Dravot, and Peachy.

Daniel and Peachy seek their fortune in a small country across deserts and mountains from India. No one has made the journey and survived to tell about it. They decide they will be kings and not drink or be familiar with women until they have reached that goal. They ask Kipling to witness their contract before their departure.

Once the two set off with a couple pack animals and some guns and ammunition, the adventures and dangers the two encounter are amazing. The sprawling landscapes and cultures they see keep us mesmerized. It is not what they expected and so it also is not predictable what will befall them. A wonderful adventure worth seeing.

Second, can someone explain why there are a handful of DVDs like this that require you to flip them over halfway into the movie? I absolutely hate that. Fortunately I only have a couple movies that require me to do that but it needs to changed.

There is no excuse for it as far as I can see since I have many movies that are longer that do not require me to flip them over. Furthermore neither of those I own give you any warning that you need to flip them, they just stop and the screen goes black. Consider boycotting this method of releasing movies. I know I intend to write the studio about it.

I WILL PUT IT SIMPLY
BUY THIS MOVIE

I will give you three reasons why:
1) Sean Connery: one of the best actors. Period.
2) Michael Caine: another of the best. And he looks good in that hat.
3) Kipling: you just can't beat that for a writer.

ARE WE CLEAR?

Best Epic ever
This is the best historical fiction story ever, Michael Kane and Sean C at their very best

A Terrible film!
This is a terrible movie! I can't believe that a director as respectable as the great John Huston would make something this ridiculous. This film is the epitomy of the idea of "The White Man's Burden." This film shows Eastern cultures to be cruel, uncivilized, and lack intelligence. I went into this film thinking it would be a great adventure. Instead, at the end I felt like vomiting! Being an Indian and an American; I felt very offended that they were basically glorifying Alexander the "Tyrant" as a "god." I fail to understand why a man like Rudyard Kipling is considered a great writer. I wish I could give this NO STARS. John, I'll pretend you never made this film. ... Read more

Reviews (82)

Some Movies Stand The Test Of Time
Some movies due to the fashion and other elements grow rapidly out of date but this is not one of them. This movie was made in 1975 and you do get a sense that it is not up to the current Hollywood standard in terms of special effects, Dolby surround, computer animation, and things of that nature. Despite this the movie still stands the test of time because of excellent performances, a good storyline, and a healthy dose of humor.

First off it is based off a story by Rudyard Kipling and takes place in the hinterlands of India. Two former English soldiers (Connery and Caine) who are basically scoundrels set out to set themselves up with fame and fortune.

They set out to the where no white men have been seen before and convince he locals they are gods. But look out anything that is too good is probably too good to be true or to last!

Connery and Caine complement one another in this film very well I thought and again this is not a special effects flick this is shot with real backgrounds etc for the most part. If you were ever curious to get a sense of Kipling without the book this might be a good film to check out! It is also not terribly inappropriate for younger viewers, for example they make a promise to one another not to drink or chase women while on their quest.

It is a period piece set in the late 1800s and depicts the railroads and remote countryside of colonial India in a day when might made right and individual adventurers could achieve glory and fortune. Or so legend would have it....

What's with the flipping?
First, this is a remarkable movie with Sean Connery, Michael Caine, and Christopher Plummer. The Kipling story is one of his best and the acting, directing, sets, music, and all other aspects of this movie are first class. Any fan of "Gunga Din" or the "The Four Feathers" will love it.

Our story starts out with Michael Caine, playing Peachy Carnehan, stealing Christopher Plummer's, playing Rudyard Kipling, watch. When he realizes the gold charm attached to it shows him to be a Free Mason he tries to return it. It is interesting how that little Free Mason charm changes the lives of Sean Connery, playing Daniel Dravot, and Peachy.

Daniel and Peachy seek their fortune in a small country across deserts and mountains from India. No one has made the journey and survived to tell about it. They decide they will be kings and not drink or be familiar with women until they have reached that goal. They ask Kipling to witness their contract before their departure.

Once the two set off with a couple pack animals and some guns and ammunition, the adventures and dangers the two encounter are amazing. The sprawling landscapes and cultures they see keep us mesmerized. It is not what they expected and so it also is not predictable what will befall them. A wonderful adventure worth seeing.

Second, can someone explain why there are a handful of DVDs like this that require you to flip them over halfway into the movie? I absolutely hate that. Fortunately I only have a couple movies that require me to do that but it needs to changed.

There is no excuse for it as far as I can see since I have many movies that are longer that do not require me to flip them over. Furthermore neither of those I own give you any warning that you need to flip them, they just stop and the screen goes black. Consider boycotting this method of releasing movies. I know I intend to write the studio about it.

I WILL PUT IT SIMPLY
BUY THIS MOVIE

I will give you three reasons why:
1) Sean Connery: one of the best actors. Period.
2) Michael Caine: another of the best. And he looks good in that hat.
3) Kipling: you just can't beat that for a writer.

ARE WE CLEAR?

Best Epic ever
This is the best historical fiction story ever, Michael Kane and Sean C at their very best

A Terrible film!
This is a terrible movie! I can't believe that a director as respectable as the great John Huston would make something this ridiculous. This film is the epitomy of the idea of "The White Man's Burden." This film shows Eastern cultures to be cruel, uncivilized, and lack intelligence. I went into this film thinking it would be a great adventure. Instead, at the end I felt like vomiting! Being an Indian and an American; I felt very offended that they were basically glorifying Alexander the "Tyrant" as a "god." I fail to understand why a man like Rudyard Kipling is considered a great writer. I wish I could give this NO STARS. John, I'll pretend you never made this film. ... Read more

Reviews (15)

Touching story about class and cultural differences
People made a huge deal out of this movie because of the gay content. It's really very minimal (two kisses, a lick on the neck and one very tasteful yet erotic scene and another little kiss later) Maybe a total of 3 or 4 minutes of the film (ok, though that turned into a half hour by all the replaying I did of those scenes - and yes, I'm a straight girl and still can't get enough of DDL's passionate kisses) It's very touching because it's so natural and a complete non-issue. No one dies of AIDS, no one makes a big drama scene about coming out of the closet, no one demands attention and acceptance for being gay(though *of course* gay people should be accepted) the film just really goes out of its way to show there's *nothing* deviant or strange to homosexuality. You could even see it as a symbolic point, that it's the one thing Omar and Johnny share that does not fit into either of their cultural equations.

My two other favorite characters were Omar's father and Tanya. This Pakistani family reminded me of my family. I am not Pakistani but the issues are the same. The dad was very poignant in the way he wanted better for his son, how he couldn't let go of his upper class background and how he looked down on the Johnny's sort but was kind and wanted better for him too. He reminded me of my grandparents. And then there was Tanya. I loved how she sort of bonded with Johnny in their way. What a great performance she gave. This film has so many threads and nuances and Omar's character balances it all with so much grace, respecting his culture and keeping close to his family but being true to himself at the same time by staying involved with Johnny.

I *love* Daniel Day Lewis!

"My Beautiful Laundrette" Delivers the Goods
I've been waiting a very long time to be able to add Stephen Frears' wonderful, independent film "My Beautiful Laundrette" to my DVD collection. I'm overjoyed to once again view this well written, 'slice of life' comedy/drama. The movie casts a sharp and critical, socio-political, eye on Margret Thatcher's England of the 1980's.In the film we meet Omar (Gordon Warnecke) a young man, who is a poor relation to a wealthy Pakistani family, living in England.Omar's rather unscrupulous, Uncle (Saeed Jaffrey)decides to do him a favor and take him into the family business.He allows Omar to make a go of an old, broken down, laundrette, which is blithley described as a "toilet".At first Omar seems quiet, polite and attenative. But as the film goes on we find out, that he is quite a character. He isn't one to just push a broom around and watch the laundrette fail.He has big dreams for both the establishment and his financial future.Omar enlists the help of his white, working class, pal and gay lover, Johnny (brilliantly played by a young, Daniel Day-Lewis)to make the future happen now.Together the two craftily (and illegally) finance and fix up, what can only be described as the 'Disneyland' of Laundrettes.Director,Stephen Frear's movie humoursly presents Omar's speedy rise into the business world.But it is also rather melancholic in tone and touches on a variety of serious subjects, which includes everything from politics to race relations to economic policy. The cast of the movie is fantastic and the standouts include Saeed Jaffrey as Omar's amoral, Uncle Nasser and Roshan Seth as his socialist, alcholic father. Daniel Day-Lewis is superb in his star making, nuanced performance as a gay, working class, tough guy.The DVD remaster of the film is adequate, but has little in extras. It is a movie that is just begging for a director's commentary!"My Beautiful Laundrette" is a wonderfully entertaining film, which leaves the viewer with plenty to think about. Highly recommended!

Perfect slice of Thatcherite Britain oh! And a fab gay roman
A classic film in my book, My Beautiful Laundrette is the story of Omar, a young restless Asian man caring for his alcoholic father in Thatcherite London. Escape comes in the form of his uncles many and varied business ventures,...

Anyone who experienced anything of life in '80's Britain will recognise the craving for instant financial success. Similarly I am sure Asian viewers will recognise the struggles inherent in finding an identity in a country which is your home but which can never feel quite like your real home.

Omar dreams of success so works to achieve it...along the way he meets up with old school-friend Johnny, who has betrayed him by falling in with a group of neo-nazi's. Omar soon has Johnny working for him and his uncle. Turning the tables on him as he is made to rely on the very people he has been taught to hate. The chemistry between Omar and Johnny is palpable and their relationship handled totally matter-of-factly. About the only part of the film not trying to score any political points is the gay relationship. There is a "so-what" attitude and no-one comes out at any point. And why should they?

Tension in the film is far more the result of socio-economic and racial inequalities. The whole thing is handled with grace, charm and wit. Anyone remotely familier with British film in particular will note the starry casting of supporting roles, though Danial Day Lewis is - now - the biggest star of the show. Here he shows the real substance behind his fame - more so than in any other film of his seen to date. The cast is universally excellent and the unique shooting, pacing and dialogue, quite quite brilliant.

Some of the shots in this film could be used as a template for brilliance...An unexpected kiss in a dark alley is easily the most erotic single shot I have seen in a film.

Despite a few reviews I have read claiming otherwise, I don't believe you need to be gay or Asian to get something out of this picture. Living in Britain may help, though it's a lot less than essential.......

And hey! Wouldn't you love to throw your knickers into the washing machines of a neon-lit music-filled laudrette from heaven run by two insatiably young and energetic lovers?

Well I would anyway! Pass the detergent this way please!

True to its name, a beautiful film
I've seen few films with such intensity, humour and heartache all rolled into one. The scenes flowed onto each other seamlessly, the plot complex yet perfectly led, and the Acting was just superb.

Daniel Day Lewis was unforgettable as the rough street punk Johnny, while Gordon Warnecke was equally engaging as Omar, the Pakistani boy with big ambitions. Another stand-out was Roshan Seth, playing a drunken disgruntled Pakistani father, with no hope, no future, and little life left in his alcohol weakened body. Seth stole the scene wherever he appeared, and not just because of the hair, seriously.

The fact that this film is partly about the relationship between two men had absolutely no influence on me as an audience. To the people watching, it is as natural to them as it is for the two main characters on the silver screen.

At times, it is heartbreaking to watch the hatred and misunderstanding between two races living on the same land. But what do 2 boys with a beautiful laundrette care anyway, for them, each day is a brand new day isn't it?

A Satiric Movie
I think ¡§My Beautiful Launderette¡¨ is a pretty satiric movie. Back in 1980s, Pakistan people were being discriminated by the British. However in the movie, Nasser, a Pakistan businessman, owned a launderette which earns money from the British instead of the other way round. Satirically, Nasser also has a mistress, named Rachel, who is a British instead of a Pakistan. Tanya, daughter of Nasser who later on found out Rachel , tell Rachel that she does not mind her father having a mistress and use her father¡¦s money.

Omar, niece of Nasser, who worked in the launderette as a manager, met Johnny one night when he was being disturbed by a group of racist gang. Johnny is a British young man who actually belongs to the gang, he knew Omar because they were old school friends. Omar asked Johnny to help in the launderette. The most satiric part of the movie is that Omar and Johnny are homosexual lovers. Homosexuality was considered to be unacceptable in those days. Other than that Omar and Johnny are different in race.

The film shows the audiences two groups of people. First is the people who reject the British community, second is the people who accept the British community. The first group of people have traditional, conservative, and stubborn mind. Omar¡¦s father belongs to this group. He is a journalist and political activist. He thinks that he doesn¡¦t belong to Britain and he hated Britain. He lives in poverty and lie on the bed all day doing nothing.

Nasser and Omar belong to the second group. Nasser adapted himself into the British society and learned to live with it. He then became a successful businessman who owned a launderette and a car cleaning service company. Omar chose to follow Nasser to involve in the business field instead of being what his father wanted him to be, which was to get into college. He convinced Nasser to let him redecorate the launderette and he succeeded in attracting more customers. ... Read more