Matcollis This Movie Can Only Be Described With One Word.

Softwing Most undeservingly overhyped movie of all time??

SpunkySelfTwitter It’s an especially fun movie from a director and cast who are clearly having a good time allowing themselves to let loose.

HottWwjdIam There is just so much movie here. For some it may be too much. But in the same secretly sarcastic way most telemarketers say the phrase, the title of this one is particularly apt.

DeadMan66 Movie was worth watching. Movie has excellent story and all the characters performance are appreciative. In the movie no one is in the lead character, every character has his own story to tell. Even the servant has his story.I liked the movie very much. These kind of movies should be promoted in Bollywood. Although the movie is somehow predictable but at end it is likable. It is a good movie so it is recommended in my opinion.

Terence Frederick Remember watching this movie young, but I paid no attention to the story or screenplay and watched it purely of its pornographic content, as it was the first Indian movie that shows lesbianism. Seeing this after 20 years, I feel, the movie projects the concept of "desire" in Indian Women. Indian women are mostly sub-servants and many believe that desire brings ruin for them. Deepa Mehta written and made a bold and awesome movie that was cleared twice by the Censor board and released after a huge opposition by the Shiv-Seniks in Maharashtra. All the actors in this movie gelled so well to the characters and my favourite is Shabana Azmis. ARR BGM from his previous movies esp. BOMBAY THEME adds spice to the screen.The mention of Women on FIRE in the title refers not just to the feelings of Radha and Sita in the movie but the directors' because of her flaming script and screenplay.

Magic Lamp Its a very sensitive portrayal of life with unquenched or constrained desires. What does one do with desire in a culture and society with rigid norms? One husband finds outlet with the immigrant - since immigrants don't belong or aren't accepted, they don't need to conform and dam their desires. The other husband looks for solace in spirituality and tries to evaporate his desire into nothingness. It fails - of course - and he breaks down in the last scene for multiple reasons. Sita still cared enough for him to find that moment to let him know that he is not responsible for her deviant outlet to her blocked desires. The mother in her still couldn't find the strength to destroy his myth. She sees him as a child who is glorifying himself in his lust-control but should she give him the opportunity to finally grow up? Both the wives find courage and togetherness through their shared rejection by their husband. But the final act of rejection was by the grandmother - she could not break free from her rusted mindset to accept Sita's desire. A decade and more of receiving care was not enough to break the shackles of her culture.Seems like it was easiest for the househelp to let his desires flow - since he's anyway damned by his culture - being at the bottom of the hierarchy. Since there is anyway no respect and expectations, might as well taste sin.

Dawn First of all, I love this movie. Mostly because I think sexuality is vague issue here, it's instead the idea of loyalty vs. personal fulfillment being explored. Yeah, I think the idea that a 'bad' husband drives a woman to another woman is a lie, but it did not hinder my enjoyment of this film simply because it's deeper than that. I saw sexuality being precisely hetro or homosexual challenged here. The friendship could have stayed an emotionally fulfilling friendship, but it doesn't. It matures into sexual attraction and a physical relation ship. Why? I do believe, with Sita at least, she never seemed satisfied with her husband. And only wanted to make the best of it because she seemed to just be trying to fulfill some idea in her head about how marriage should be (as she was raised to believe it should be at least). It doesn't help that her husband's true love (or is it true lust?) remains in his life, but I still never felt like there was ever any real love or attraction between them, unlike Sita's relationship with Radha. Yes, Sita was a lesbian from the beginning and at the beginnings of a sexual awakening. In her rigged upbringing she was able to repress those feelings, but the closer she gets to Radha - the harder it becomes. She wants that genuine connection to become more because it's a real genuine emotional and physical attraction. Radha on the other hand is a more complex character to figure out sexually, she loves her husband (it seems), but suffers from neglect because of a vow her husband took once it was clear children would not result from a continued physical relationship between them. But he seems to have taken this role to the next level, cutting off the emotional relationship along with the physical one. She remains loyal, as she feels she should, until Sita takes their friendship to the next level. As there are bisexual people who can fall in love with one person at a time, and that person can be either male or female So why can't Radha be bisexual? And that's what I find interesting about Radha, she fell in love with someone else and it was that simple. I found Radha, in particular, touched me as a character. Especially her confrontation with her husband before she can make the choice she makes in the end. So I think all in all, it's a beautiful love story. But maybe I suffer from seeing things simply. I also found the characters believably flawed. Everyone made mistakes in their relationships here, including the women. This is a story about two women who married into bad situations. That doesn't mean I believe their are no healthy family situations in India.