TrueJoshNight Truly Dreadful Film

Matialth Good concept, poorly executed.

CommentsXp Best movie ever!

Brendon Jones It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

patlightfoot I loved the first series, however, it was no Jewel in the Crown, or Gandhi. I studied Rudyard Kipling's India at Uni. And the period of 1932-35, was a strange period. Certainly the British were trying to evolve brown Englishmen such as Nehru, and most of the Indian civil service were still holding mediocre positions. Being Parsees they (like the Sikhs) were in the minority, and after the Indian Mutiny, few Hindu's remained in the Indian Army as their cast taboos etc., But a Parsee marrying a Muslim. I doubt it. Or a Parsee civil servant, being seen with a British woman who came from quite an influential family. Right until independence, cast and interracial snobbery and racial intermarriage, and segregation were the norm. Anyway I was spellbound at first, but as the second series unfolded I found that it did not make much sense. But I did enjoy it. The British did treat the Indians roughly and growing resentment among the populace. To a point that there were massacres on both sides, and inter religious jealousy's and hatreds. Gandhi was for independence, eliminating the cast system and untouchables, and all Indians get on together irrespective of religious hatreds. It didn't work. Although I did love the first series, I felt the second was a bit disappointing. The second world war was about to erupt, and with Hitler stating the Aryan race, actually they came from North India centuries before, never Nordic.The acting flawless. I don't think a London accent would have been appreciated in the British polite society set then though. Or Cockney songs.And what happened to the young orphan lad who towed the explosives 'A gift for the King' and survived it? And his patron dying and leaving a widow and two sons. The British Raj were not that forgiving.

Lushlindy This series is simply awful. Even the cinematography is false because it wasn't even filmed in India. It's supposed to be about the heated up politics in the Raj before the Brits finally pulled out (or got kicked out) but my goodness, who the heck cares about dull old politics anyway? All the series cares about is the unnatural feelings Ralphie has for his sister and who's sleeping with whom and who's gone off their nutter and shot someone among a dizzying assortment of bizarre characters. None of it makes any sense anyway. The plot line is totally irrational. All I can say is no wonder the series has been canceled. It sure was no Jewel in the Crown which, even though that was made more than thirty years ago, depicted the politics of India pretty well and was even entertaining.

gtweston Being born and brought up in Simla, only a few years after the British left, I hated it!!! It was so hard to watch. Simla is at 7500 ft above sea level. Tropical foliage where there should have been majestic deodars or Himalayan Cedars. Why did they not film it in Scotland? The vegetation and topography is so much more like the Himalayas. The Raj was as much about Simla and its unique landscape and the way it influenced life and government as anything else. The whole concept of the Mall and Promenade every evening, the Gaiety Theater and Green Room, Bandstand not to mention A race course created on a small hill using local labor to flatten the ridge to create an oval space, defined Simla. I actually have a map of the houses of the British which enabled social activity without losing ones way.The producers, directors etc, just did not get it! The Indians consisted of many more levels of society...educated, refined and of illustrious families.....than just household retainers and clerks. The British Civil servants themselves, were generally competent and decent and their lives consisted of a lot more than socializing. A bad show, misinforming the viewers. So disappointed, PBS!

ssnedunuri As another reader pointed out, it seems in some way to just perpetuate the stereotypes - the stuffy, inconsiderate, haughty British, and the unpredictable natives - complete with the dark brown skin that is definitely not common in Shimla. So they imported South Indian actors speaking south Indian languages because the locals didn't fit the stereotype. Honestly I expected something more complex and better than this in 2015. Even the scenery is not very Shimla which is in the foothills of the Himalayas, so why make it look like the jungles of Bengal. Oh wait, why lose another opportunity to project yet another stereotype - India the land of jungles, when in fact the country stretches from a latitude of 38N down to about 7N so as you might expect, has a much greater range of scenery - from mountains to deserts to green hills, to scrub, to yes jungles!