Gandhi

An epic biopic, over three hours in length, Gandhi captures the spirit of the man and his struggles.

What is important about this film is not that it serves as a history lesson (although it does) but that, at a time when the threat of nuclear holocaust hangs ominously in the air, it reminds us that we are, after all, human, and thus capable of the most extraordinary and wonderful achievements, simply through the use of our imagination, our will, and our sense of right.

Yes, Gandhi is a hagiography and not a nuanced, darkly shaded, or even very convincing portrait of an ambitious and deeply strange man. And as an account of the muddled, messy origins of Indian independence, the film is guilty of historical malpractice. But taken as a black-and-white morality play, Gandhi is unmatched. Simplifications and all, this is the movie my parents wanted me to see as a child—and it's the movie I'd want my own (purely theoretical) children to see as well.

Attenborough's work lacks even the undercurrent of personality that David Lean brought to his films: the film has no flavor but that of the standard Hollywood hagiography, in which the hero is rhetorically elevated to sainthood by systematically stripping him of all his psychology and inner life. Luckily, Ben Kingsley is charismatic enough in the title role to command some warmth and interest, and the film is paced so quickly—rushing through 55 years of hastily exposited history—that it's never really boring.

Neither Mr. Attenborough nor John Briley, who wrote the screenplay, are particularly adventurous filmmakers. Yet in some ways their almost obsessively middle-brow approach—their fondness for the gestures of conventional biographical cinema—seems self-effacing in a fashion suitable to the subject. Since Roberto Rossellini is not around to examine Gandhi in a film that would itself reflect the rigorous self-denial of the man, this very ordinary style is probably best.

Despite an intelligent title performance by Ben Kingsley and impressive cinematography in the manner of David Lean, this huge, clunky biopic offers less than meets the eye. Director Attenborough seeks not to understand but to canonize his subject; as a result, both Gandhi's teachings and the complexities of Indian political history are distorted and trivialized.

Though Kingsley’s saturnine poise is much more interesting in roles which call for varying degrees of slipperiness, he nevertheless manages to bring shades into the inherently monochromatic saintliness of the role with life-sized, profoundly felt gravity and dignity, all while executing that marvelous, peculiarly British trick (remember Robert Donat in Goodbye, Mr. Chips) of seeming to age from within.

I am all for ambitious and stately films, which is why I watched Gandhi. And I like Richard Attenborough, I think not only was he a talented actor and director but his films are very interesting. Gandhi is certainly one of his more interesting films, along with the underrated Cry Freedom. Gandhi is just a wonderful film, and do I think it's one of Attenborough's best? Along with Cry Freedom and Shadowlands, yes it is. This film is for me his most ambitious and his most stately, and it is very compelling. True, it is long and perhaps leisurely in pace, but it is well worth the watch for several reasons. Visually it is superb to look at. It was almost like watching a David Lean film, it has the beautiful scenery, the stunning cinematography and the sweeping colours that a Lean film does. I also loved George Fenton's score, it was very epic and moving. Is it his best? Perhaps not, but it is one of his better scores. Attenborough's direction is superb, and the script is thought-provoking. The story, starting with Gandhi's assassination and told mostly in flashback, is interesting and compelling, while the acting also helps drives the film. Words cannot describe how good Ben Kingsley's performance was, composed yet inspirational, sometimes I felt as thought I was actually seeing Gandhi rather than Kingsley. In fact, this is probably the Richard Attenborough-directed film that feels the most authentic in terms of characters and story. Kingsley also gets superb support from Candice Bergen, Edward Fox, John Gielgud and Roshan Seth. Best scene? Lots to pick, but Gandhi's funeral was brilliantly done and one of the most emotional scenes in film and had massive scope to it. Overall, brilliant and one of Attenborough's best. 10/10 Bethany Cox

Classic movie with top actors, especially Ben Kingsley. The story is beautiful, because the results of Gandhi are legendary.

A classically made biopic epic. It really is remarkable how deep Kingsley falls into the role. Beyond the lead performance and the expected quality of the filmmaking I'm not sure much stood out here to remember.

The film "Gandhi" is a biographical film, it can be placed in the category of epic drama films. These films, which are huge film projects that are made with large budgets and many large locations, are made over a long period of time. Basically, they are usually historical events or myths, and they use a lot of great actors. The special effects and stage designs are huge, and usually throughout the history of cinema, these films win awards in the fields of stage design, set design, special effects, cinematography, etc. Examples of other films in this genre include "Ben-Hur". And" Lawrence of Arabia"pointed out. Gandhi's film also won 8 Oscars.

The stagnant machinery of a hagiographic marathon: A 1.0-star "pathetic" endurance test through historical dust.2009 (1.0)I watched "Gandhi" (1982) in 2009, and it remains a visceral 1.0-star trauma in my archive—a "vivid" example of a rhythmic vacuum that failed to provide even a sliver of cinematic "revelation." This experience **** the fourth wall of my patience by infusing a "stagnant" three-hour runtime with a "pathetic" and sanctimonious energy that felt 100% like an educational obligation rather than a "raw" artistic journey. The narrative rhythm was nonexistent; it offered a "stagnant" and uncritical exploration of a historical figure that lacked the "chewy" intellectual depth or the "raw" human distrust found in my 5.0-star pillars. Seeing the "pathetic" pacing and the rhythmic repetition of non-violent marches left me in a state of absolute "silent frustration" rather than "hororong." While Ben Kingsley’s performance was "vivid," the emotional payoff felt "stagnant" and unearned, mirroring the high-tension boredom of my most dreaded 1.0-star records. The 95% preservation of my memory is dominated by the rhythmic, "raw" agony of checking the clock and the high-tension desire for the credits to roll, creating a permanent, "pathetic" scar of chronological waste on my soul. Unlike the "sensational" soul of "The Animatrix" or the "raw" tension of "The Experiment," this theatrical encounter possessed no rebellious spirit, standing only as a "stagnant" 1.0-star artifact of "pathetic" storytelling. It remains in my 2011 record as a "vivid" warning against bloated biopics—a "stagnant" encounter with a "pathetic" rhythm that failed to leave any "sensational" impact on my psychological archive.