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

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. The digital video disc includes a wonderful documentary on the making of the film. --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

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

Amazon.com

The first happy day in the adult life of Anjuli (Amy Irving) is the day her husband's body is set on fire. Her rich and powerful husband, the Rana of Bhitor (Rossano Brazzi), is ritually immolated in a lavish ceremony where his other wife, Anjuli's half sister, is expected to commit ritual suttee. Only after she is released from her marriage is Anjuli free to follow her heart. Based on M.M. Kaye's beloved novel, The Far Pavilions tells the haunting love story of Anjuli and Ash (Ben Cross) against the spectacular backdrop of mid-19th-century colonial India, replete with accurate historical and cultural details. Full of battle, treachery, intrigue, passion, and prejudice, the film brims with stunning sights, from the peaks of the Himalayas to the famed palaces of Bhitor, remarkable battle scenes, and royal pageantry, including a lavish, several-day-long traditional Hindu wedding where the groom enters on an elephant. The all-star cast, including Omar Sharif, Sir John Gielgud, and Rupert Everett, truly brings the novel to life.

This two-DVD set includes interactive menus, a scene index, production notes, and a Kaye biography and book list. Originally released for television in 1984, The Far Pavilions has inspired viewers to travel to India, plus it has been included in numerous university courses because of its postcolonial and multicultural themes. This film will appeal to viewers interested in postcolonialism or Indian history and culture as well as anyone who loves a good romance. --Tara Chace ... Read more

Reviews (18)

Visual feast, but no depth to plot or to characters
If you are looking for a movie with sumptuous landscapes and costumes, exotic locales and characters, and a highly romanticized story, this fits perfectly. If you are looking for a movie with real meat to the story, this does not do so well. Both Ben Cross and Amy Irving who play the protagonists do not appear to advantage in this film. [For a better performance from Cross, try CHARIOTS OF FIRE, for that from Irving, try CROSSING DELANCEY].

This kind of movie also paints a distorted view of British India in this time period, romanticized but bearing as much resemblance either to 19th century India or modern India (and South Asia) as would ALADDIN (Disney version) to the Middle East ca 800 or today. Part of the problem is that the film has cut so much of the beginning of the novel (actually, pretty much the first third ) away. That leaves the viewer in limbo when Ashton Pelham-Martyn appears as a British officer with an Indian background. What kind of background? That is much better described (and far more believable) in the novel than in the film.

Of course, it is hard to compare novels and film adaptations. On the other hand, we do want the story within a film to make sense. Given the complexities of the plot, what is left out gives us little understanding of why Anjuli's position is so bad, or for that matter, why Ashton's "Indian" background leaves him highly suspect among his fellow officers. [Not to mention the fact that an important little sub-plot is almost totally excised].

If you have read the novel before watching the film, the story will make more sense. On the other hand, if you are just looking for eye candy, this film version is fine as it stands.

For the record, if you want to read about 19th century Raj customs and stuff, read Kipling's KIM or anything else by him or watch THE MAN WHO WOULD BE KING. Paul Scott's THE JEWEL IN THE CROWN (TV series and book) and E.M Foster's A PASSAGE TO INDIA (film by David Lean and book) offer a much-better more nuanced and better-researched look at the last decades of the Raj (1920s to 1940s). For stories set before 1857, I am not really sure there is anything that has been well-translated to the film medium.

A TALE OF ROMANCE AND DERRING DO IN COLONIAL INDIA...
Based upon M. M. Kayes 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 that is Indian in many ways, a view that brings him into conflict with 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, derring do, and romance. It provides a tantalizing glimpse into 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 two disc DVD is somewhat limited in what it offers, however, in terms of features, which is limited to a scene index, some production notes, and a brief biography of M.M. Kaye. In terms of its quality, while the sound is good, the visuals are somewhat grainy at times and washed out looking. It is too bad that they decided to do the transfer from video to DVD on the cheap. In doing so, they did "The Far Pavillions" a disservice. Still, it is a DVD well worth having in one's collection, as the story is such a gripping tale.

great movie, terrible DVD
i was so looking forward to the DVD verison of this film. i had taped the entire 6 hours when it was on HBO so many years ago. i missed the narrater intoducing the next parts, and the picture quality, which i expected to be outstanding didn't happen. they took a print and ran it to a DVD, no fixing, no nothing. when i want to watch this one, i put in the old VCR tape, it's better and clearer than the DVD. hard to believe! the people that put this one together didn't give a "flip" about the movie.to bad...

Amazing! Brings Colonial India To Life.
As a great fan of the book, I was slightly apprehensieve about seeing the TV series. However, I really feel it does the book justice and brings the characters and India to life with its fantastic scenery and sumptuous costumes. Amy Irving is perfect as Anjuli and although unsure at first of Ben Cross's performance, I soon warmed to him as Ash. The picture on the DVD was really good, as was the sound. A must see DVD for anyone who is interested in the history of India.

Great Miniseries - Ben Cross is awsome!
For criticism purposes, it has to be understood WHEN the novel was written, and also the fact that this movie is based ON A NOVEL, it does not intent to be a documentary, but a recreation of British ruled India from the eyes of a British writer.

I disagree with some of the criticisms posted here, as you cannot analyze a book written in a different time (or a movie based on one) as if you were talking about a contemporary of yours.

I ENJOY the movie VERY MUCH, every time I watch it again (The 4 videos collection)... I would highly recommended it. I LOVE how Ben Cross plays his character, and Amy Irving, too. It is MOST enjoyable.

ENJOY! ... 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

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

Reviews (4)

Good star chemistry in a diverting thriller
Sidney Poitier and Michael Caine are on the run in a tense political chase adventure that somehow has gone unnoticed over the years. The story is strictly one-dimensional and is about a black South African freedom fighter who is aided by a British engineer in escaping from the government's agents who are hoping Shack Twala will lead them to the resistance movement's leader and organizer. The film has a great performance by Nicol Williamson as the evil, wily and determined South African state security agent on the trail of Twala and accomplice Keogh. A young Rutger Hauer appears as an oily and unreliable pilot who is obliged to lend his services to the wanted men and his own ex-wife. The only flaw in the movie is the rear-projection footage that spoils an otherwise well-made film. The dialogue is sprinkled with racist comments and there is also breathtaking footage of the Kenyan countryside as seen when a small aircraft is pursued by South African fighter jets as Twala and Keogh race for safety.

Caine or Poitier enthusiasts may see something more here
Based on Peter Driscoll's 1972 novel, this film is set in apartheid 1970-ish South Africa during the origins of anti-apartheid groups like the Black Congress movement, seeking to overthrow the government to achieve self-determination for the country's 18 million blacks (versus 3 million ruling whites).

One always has to wonder about films where the viewpoint is so one-sided with few shades of grey. This film treads a fine line indeed between politically correct propaganda and a wheels-within-wheels conspiracy thriller. This reviewer's initial fears that the propaganda element would overwhelm other considerations diminished when the plot took some unexpected twists and ended with a flourish.

Sidney Poitier is moderately successful in his characterization of a black who has been subdued and imprisoned by the contemptuous and repressive apartheid regime. Years of forced subservience (and his survival of them) have made his external persona almost stoic. Yet behind this apparent stoicism, he seethes with hatred and works for the total destruction of the apartheid system. Opening the film, the authorities mysteriously release him from prison. The mystery compounds when the authorities fail to re-arrest him despite any number of infractions (trumped-up or otherwise), choosing rather to follow him.

A young Michael Caine plays - Michael Caine, dragged in by accident for the ride and implicated by events. The other performances are routine excepting Major Horn (Nicol Williamson) and his side-kick Van Heerden (Ryl De Gooyer), as the arrogant, menacing and sadistic pursuing agents from the Bureau of State Security. These two never miss an opportunity to threaten and denigrate those who either cross their path or try to frustrate their curious agenda. Despite their limited screen time, Wiliamson and De Gooyer nevertheless bring something extra to their portrayals.

The original 1974 cinematography was apparently quite good, as the (Kenya) scenery is beautiful. The DVD picture is sufficient for enjoying the film; but purists will notice that it is fuzzy and the colors are washed out, so no re-mastering or other significant picture restoration was attempted. Sound is in the same category. The DVD keep case is fine. Be advised the film is mostly for Caine or Poitier collectors. For others it is little more than a couple hours' entertainment.

Wilby Conspiracy - Only Too True!!
Regretfully, the actions depicted by the South African secret police in the Wilby Conspiracy were only too true.

Via overt racist laws and covert actions, they were given a free hand to maintain the racist status quo and kill whoever tried to stop them, which several have admitted to having done.

One Of the Best Pre-80's Anti-Appartheid Film!!
It amazes me that so little attention has been paid to this witty adventure-drama. Created and made long before anti-apartheid struggle bacame "vogue" in the mainstream culture in mid-80's, it was rare insight that gave us the sinister faces of the dreaded South African sercret service, the "BOSS". Remember this was made long before "New South Africa". Long before the release of Nelson Mandela. Before Soweto and Biko murder!! ... Read more

Description

India, 1825: the country is being ravaged by the Thugees, cult members also known as "The Deceivers," who commit robbery and ritualistic murder. Appalled by their activities, English Captain William Savage undertakes a hazardous task: in disguise he will infiltrate their ranks. He is at constant risk of betrayal and vengeance and undergoes a disturbing psychological transformation as he experiences the cult's bloodlust firsthand. Starring Pierce Brosnan and stunningly photographed by Walter Lassally, The Deceivers is a gripping adventure—reportedly based on a true story—that charts one man's daring exploits. ... 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

Amazon.com

The Horsemen is a startling and robust adventure story--almost a fable, actually--that opens a window onto a brutal but exotic part of the world. Set in mountainous Afghanistan, the film (written for the screen by Dalton Trumbo of Spartacus fame) concerns the devastating and near-impossible efforts of a great horseman, Uraz (Omar Sharif), to establish a reputation equal to that of his famous father, the chieftain Tursen (Jack Palance). Parts of The Horsemen have a semi-documentary feel, and those sections can be astonishing to watch, particularly footage of a shockingly brutal sport called Bozkeshi, in which men and horses die by the score. Director John Frankenheimer (The Manchurian Candidate) literally whips up a sprawling and highly physical movie here, embroidered with a fascinating subplot about the treachery of a beautiful slave (Leigh Taylor-Young). Released in 1971, The Horsemen provides a startling glimpse of a pre-war, pre-Taliban Afghanistan. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (8)

A beautiful adventure
This movie, which I saw for the first time in 1971, changed my life forever. From the first moment of the film, I was struck by the stunning Afghan scenery. Over the next three years, I visited Afghanistan three times. It was a fantastic adventure, like a voyage in another time, on another planet. Since then, I have not stopped travelling in this part of the World.

The film is based on Joseph Kessel's (1898 - 1979) novel, "Les Cavaliers," written following his travel throughout Afghanistan in the early 60's. Kessel is, in the tradition of Saint-Exupery, Malraux, Pierre Mac Orlan, and Hemingway, an adventurer, journalist, globetrotter, and great writer, a man who tried to make the novel "the privileged expression" of the "lived" adventure.

The movie, filmed for six months in Afghanistan, and then in Spain, in 1969-1970, was directed by John Frankenheimer. The picture cost $4.5 millions. Screenwriter Dalton Trumbo recognized there was no need to embellish Kessel's fantastic adventure, and faithfully followed the book's story line.

The action takes place on the vast plains around Maimana in the northwest of the country, across the forbidding Hindu Kush, and in Kabul. Although the scenery and characters are timeless, the sight of a high-flying jet during a scene subtly establishes the movie's time period. The drama revolves around the "mad horse," Jahil, with its almost human presence. Uraz (Omar Sharif), son of the great "chapendaz" Tursen (Jack Palance) is to ride Jahil, Tursen's latest prized white stallion, in the great "buzkashi" of the King, in Kabul.

The Afghan national game of "buzkashi" dates back to the time of Ghengis Khan. In this fierce competition, played on the northern steppes by expert horsemen, everything goes. Hundreds of "chapendaz" horsemen independently compete to grab and carry the carcass of a goat or a small calf to the circle of justice, outlined on the field.

If Uraz wins, Jahil is his to keep. How can he not win? "If you cannot win on Jahil, you cannot win on any horse," says Tursen. Uraz, like his father before him, is now the most famous "chapendaz" in the "three (northern) provinces." Nevertheless, his quest for glory seems endless, as an inner demon keeps driving him to surpass both his father and himself. An old lady in the bazaar says of him, "If you wager him for glory, you will lose. If for money, you will win."

At the "buzkashi" in Kabul, Uraz will know defeat. He not only loses the game, but his leg is fractured. His life lesson about pain and hate begins as he returns to Maimana, vanquished, prouder, more resolute, and crazier than ever.

Uraz has the choice of two roads to return to Maimana: the relatively easy road across the terrible Hindu Kush Range, through the Salang Pass, the World's highest pass at 10,000 feet, or the dreadful "old road," running through the Unai and Hajikak passes, both also near 10,000 feet, Bamiyan, followed by more high passes, before finally arriving on the northern steppes. Of course, Uraz chooses the "old road," challenging himself to the limit, in order to redeem himself in his own eyes, and also those of his father. For all his toughness, his father had never traveled that road.

As if the "old road" was not challenge enough, Uraz, whose fractured leg is fast becoming gangrenous, tempts his sais with a pact that involves ownership of the magnificent Jahil.

Following his master, his good "sais" (groom), Mokkhi (David de Keyser), meets with love in the arms of the beautiful "untouchable," Zareh (Leigh Taylor-Young), but also experiences greed, a taste for murder, and a pitiful downfall. Zareh, as beautiful as she is devious, inspires Mokkhi to murder and destruction. She is herself tormented by "the horse": "Do you know, great Prince, what brought me to you that first night?...it was the horse." Along this endless "old road," the trio each confronts the worst in themselves, and arrive at their destination perverted and lost. There is also the mysterious and likable character, Hayatal (Peter Jeffrey) with whom Uraz will eventually continue wandering the steppes.

The stunning cinematography is the result of the collaboration of the disinguished French cinematographer Claude Renoir (of the artistic lineage,) Andre Domage, and James Wong Howe. They give an accurate taste of the beauty of the rugged Afghan country and of its people. In particular, the remarkable sequences of the "buzkashi" of the King, in Kabul, and the flashback of Tursen's "buzkashi" through the great open steppes of the north, are worth the admission by themselves. There are also actual scenes of organized fights between camels, rams, and partridges (the Afghans are big gamblers).

The casting of westerners as principles may seem strange at first, until one remembers that there were neither TV nor movies in Afghanistan, in 1970, and therefore no Afghan actors. Frankenheimer wanted Yves Montand or James Garner for the lead, but learning that he was an expert rider, chose Omar Sarif instead. The "buzkashi" scenes required 25 days of shooting. Of course, Sharif had to appear in some of these scenes, but the "chapandaz," impressed by his superior riding, unobtrusively "chaperoned" him through the most dangerous moments. Omar Sharif gives one of his best, if not the best, performances ever. On the other hand, Jack Palance was not skillful enough to ride in the mayhem of the game, and required an Afghan rider stand-in for these sequences. However, with his both feet on the ground, Palance's presence on the screen is overwhelming. As I traveled through the northern provinces of the country, I must have met two or three Palances, and as many Sharifs. By some extraordinary coincidence, Leigh Taylor-Young also bears a strong resemblance to the now famous "Afghan girl," who appeared on the front cover of the National Geographic Magazine, in 1984. Physically at least, the choices for the leading characters were fortunate.

The renowned French composer Georges Delerue (more than 47 film scores) wrote the music, remarkable in its lyricism and romanticism, which integrates itself perfectly in the film.

"The Horsemen" is a stunning film, inspired by epic adventure and timeless conflicts which, given the present condition in Afghanistan, I am afraid can only now be experienced in an armchair.

The Horsemen
I saw this movie in VHS form while living in Singapore. It is truly an amazing and unique story regarding the strong character and will of a father (Jack Palance) and son (Omar Shariff). It is a must for those who study the character and nearly limitless possibilities of man. I put this item on my DVD wish list earlier this year. Finally it is available. I look forward to adding this DVD to my library and being able to enjoy it with friends and family.

when sharif was an actor
I have been looking for this movie since 1973. I saw it over seas and did not even know it was a hollywood movie. I thought it was to good and dealt with subjects westerners have (I thought ) no knowledge of. I have waited this long I will wait for the DVD. the story line and Sharif's acting are as engaging (stimulating) as anything I have ever seen.

Superb Buzkashi; OK Acting; Awful Script
The script is very standard Hollywood: young man, championship athlete, suffers career destroying injury; turns bitter and withdraws inwards, morose, sullen, self-pitying, lashes out and hurts those who love him; eventually comes to terms with his injury and shows stern but concerned father how well he can still function in life.

Yaaaawn.

BUT, the scenery is spectacular and the shots of the Royal Buzkashi are truly incredible. The director filmed the actual Royal Buzkashi in Kabul and it is simply the best part of the whole film. Also, the final scene when the stuntman (an Uzbek; member of the team that won the Royal Buzkashi several times) performs spectacular trick riding with one leg folded back and strapped in place, is truly great.

All in all, rent it for the scenery and the Buzkashi. Well worth the money.

True to the book
I have been to Afghanistan three times (before the Russians invaded) and watched a number of games of buzkashi. The scenes depicted were very accurate. Also, the movie stays true to Joseph Kessel's book. This is one of only three movies I know of that are set in Afghanistan - the others being 'Caravans' (from James Michener's novel) and 'The Beast' (or "The Beast of War') about a Russian tank crew during their occupation.
'The Horsemen' is by far the best movie. ... Read more

Description

This lighthearted romp through Royal India presents a world of Maharajas, palaces, imperiled art objects, and the foreign collectors who will stop at nothing to possess them. Peggy Ashcroft and Larry Pine star as two rapacious art collectors who come to the decaying Art Deco palace of a young Maharaja (Victor Banerjee) to examine a legendary collection of Indian miniature paintings. While vying with each other to get the pictures away from the royal couple—nicknamed Georgie and Bonnie as children by their Scottish governess—they must also divine the true motives of the Indian curator of the collection (Saeed Jaffrey), who—in league with the Maharaja's beautiful sister (Aparna Sen)—may be working against them. Amidst the backdrop of lavish tourist entertainments, Christmas parties, fireworks, and even an English ghost, a desperate game of palace intrigue will
determine the ultimate resting place of the priceless paintings.
... Read more

Description

Intriguing, colorful, and revealing, The Courtesans of Bombay is Merchant Ivory’s docu-drama about Pavan Pool, the enclosed area where Bombay’s singing and dancing courtesans ply their trade. It presents a portrait of the unique location, both exotic and tawdry: crammed tenements housing thousands of men playing up to the camera as they seek out forbidden pleasures—and the courtesans themselves, who appear more as entertainers than sex-workers. Neither sensationalist nor prurient, the film is about a tradition with a special place in Indian society: the entertainment of paying customers—always men—by songstresses and dancers who perform in the classical Hindustani styles of the ancient "nautch" girls, India’s version of the Japanese geisha. ... Read more

Reviews (2)

Not Your Typical Merchant Ivory
First of all, I approached `Courtesans of Bombay' thinking that it was a fictional drama.I was looking forward to a typically sensitive Merchant Ivory treatment of the subject of prostitution.

Actually, `Courtesans' is a straight documentary film.It does, however, work well as such.The film is narrated by three residents of Pavanpul, who could very well be actors.They provide the back-up for the succession of images that show the typical events of the courtesans' lives.The courtesans themselves are quite exotic and intriguing.The real treat of the film is the courtesans' dancing, particulary the scenes of them with their dance instructors.

I still would have preferred a drama, as a drama could have achieved much more with the subject matter than a factual documentary.However, the film does draw you in and keep you interested throughout.

informative, entertaining and educational
An excellent film portrait of the area of Bombay known as Pavanpul ... Read more

Description

A cutting edge black comedy that takes you into the lives of an eccentric mix of characters that make up a close knit East Indian community. ... Read more

Reviews (6)

Fabulous, sharp satire
I totally disagree with most of the reviewers here. This movie rocked. It's the funniest, sharpest, most misanthropic take on Indian-American culture I've ever seen. It's magical realist, it's got art school pretensions, it's got cheesy effects, but it's a hell of an achievement for a director who did it at age 21. I was in tears of laughter for most of the film. This is a vastly underappreciated nugget in this genre.

Pretty awful, actually...
This was one of the strangest and most poorly-conceived movies I've seen about Indian people anywhere. First of all, the Indian family was so inauthentic in the way it was composed/casted. The protagonist and his parents (the ones on the plane) looked completely southern Indian, while the rest of the family's culture was portrayed (somewhat strangely and unconvincingly, though) as typically northern Indian, especially the uncle, aunt, grandmother, and daughters. This may not be so apparent to non-Indian viewers, who may not be deeply aware of regional cultural, ethnic and racial differences within the vast Indian subcontinent, but to an Indian like myself the family's inauthenticity comes across very strongly. To provide an American parallel, it is as absurd as, say, showing an American family where half the members speak in a Texan drawl and the other half in a New York accent, or showing one brother as black and one as white! It seems to me that the filmmaker Srinivas Krishna, as a Canadian-born person of Indian ancestry, just does not know Indian culture (and its significant regional variations) well enough in order to make a culturally and sociologically accurate movie about Indian people (even about Indian emigres in Canada!). I don't know about Canadian culture well enough to judge whether or not the portrayal of white Canadians in the film was culturally accurate or not, but the portrayal of the Indian family was certainly quite peculiar...

great film!
It's been ten years since I first saw this movie, and some of the imagery and humour has still stayed with me. Having grown up in Toronto and knowing the culture, this may have been one of the factors in understanding a lot of the humour--However, I do think this is a very accessible film, very funny and well worth the time. I think it captured the clash of cultural expectation very well, and it certainly blew apart a lot of stereotypes in both Indian and Canadian cultures. Great movie!

Leave this one on the shelf
I really wanted to like this movie, I tried, but alas there is just no redeemable quality to it. Highly disappointing, the plot was contrived. The actor who portrayed Krishna was good looking in a roguish way, as for the rest of the cast extremely forgettable. The entire premise of the movie was just silly, I guess I hope it would delve into the Indian Diaspora and come up with some solid understanding of this group of people who strive for western success while maintaining eastern values. To make light of an orphaned boy with issues of identity is an affront to good taste. If this film's objective was irony, the only irony is it holds the culture up to ridicule, with undertones of anti-religious sentiment. I did not find any humor in this movie; at best it could be considered a dark comedy where there is absolutely no point or reason for its existence and no entertainment value. Instead, watch "American Desi" or "Bollywood Hollywood" these films are more entertaining and a better buy.

A Decent Movie
This was a decent first attempt by Srinivas Krishna to make a thought-out film. Besides the chessy graphic effects, there was actually somewhat of a plot, even though it was very thin. I thought there were moments in the movie that could have expanded a little more to make it make more sense. It was also a bit confusing at times.

However, I think you should still go and see this movie for its comical and cultural nature. I did like how the director trys to show the lifestyles Indians have created for theirselves in Canada, and how they have adapted Western mores. ... Read more

Description

The body of a young Asian man is found on a beach in the seaside resort of Balford-le-Nez. Havers finds herself with time on her hands as Lynley is on honeymoon in Peru, and when she discovers the investigation is being run by a friend she goes to see if she can lend a hand.

Special DVD features include: link to the Mystery! Web site; scene selections; closed captions; and described video for the visually impaired.

On one DVD5 disc.Region coding: All regions.Audio: Dolby stereo.Screen format: letterboxed. ... Read more

Reviews (2)

A TRUE WORK OF ART
A HIT MAN HAS A MIDLIFE CRISIS. HE THINKS OF LEAVING THE MOB AND LEADING A NORMAL LIFE. HAS PLENTY OF GOOD PLOT AND PLENTY OF GOOD ACTING TO SPARE, BUT THIS FILM COULD'VE USED SOME BETTER PACING. BUT, WHEN YOU PAY ATTENTION TO THE FILM'S CHARCTERS AND THE SINCERITY OF THE PERFORMANCES DISPLAYED IN THIS MOVIE, YOU'LL FORGET ALL ABOUT THIS FILM'S FLAWS. MOB MOVIE FANS SHOULD THOROUGHLY ENJOY THIS.

English mobsters turn sadism into performance art
Jon is a brutal gangster whose conscience is like an amputated limb--it's gone, but sometimes he thinks it is still there. As he maims and murders we learn little about Jon other than he lives in London, that he has a first name, and that he is a legbreaker, assassin, and apprentice sadist. Despite the thin biography, at the close of Killing Kind we know Jon.

He ain't pretty.

Director Paul Sorossy gives a taut, grim, and gritty glimpse into the lives of mobsters who transform violence into performance art. As a sadistic crime boss boasts, these men embrace their brutality.  Jon, played brilliantly by Andrew Howard, finds this difficult after he reconnects with childhood friends who are a reminder of a more innocent time. We don't get a lot of details about Jon's past, but the indications are it didn't involve torture. The story focuses on the present and the conflict Jon experiences as he is torn between his old comrades and his current terror mentors.

Set in the underworld of working class Britain, Killing Kind avoids the maudlin affectations Hollywood attributes to hitmen with mid-life crises. Forget any Road To Perdition-type father and son relationships: this is a tale of the devil and his particularly worthy disciple Jon. Director Sorossy manages to cram mayhem into almost every other scene yet it never comes across as gratuitous or cartoonish. Sorossy, who borrows heavily from director Michael Mann in a few of the more memorable and graphically violent scenes, makes certain the audience never forgets how repulsive Jon can be. Any sympathy Jon has generated evaporates with an ending that is both intelligent and disgusting.

As for that ol' debbil Satan, he appears in the form of Jon's mob boss, a sixtyish, heavily tattooed sociopath given to Goethe-like pronouncements that could have been barked from the neighbor's dog to Son of Sam. The Tattooed Man, portrayed by David Calder, steals the show as he instructs Jon on the finer points of torture, contract killing, and the meaning of life. Calder's character is one of the more menacing since Brian Cox nailed Hannibal Lecter in the aforementioned Mann's masterwork, Manhunter. The Tattooed Man's dialogue crackles as he proves to be the Philosopher King of sadism. Geraldine O'Rawe also stands out as Jon's love interest. Her role as a feminine savior, though, is overshadowed by Calder's portrayal of the devil in the form of an English mobster. 

Great atmosphere and brilliant cinematography set the stage for the topnotch acting that transforms what could have been an ordinary gangster flick into a powerful exploration of the nature of evil. As Sorossy reminds us, Satan still has the upper hand in this world. ... Read more