Tag Archives: Saeed Jaffrey

1985 Films, Daniel Day-Lewis, Drama, Gordon Warnecke, LGBTQ+ Drama, LGBTQ+ Films, LGBTQ+ Romance, Romantic Drama, Roshan Seth, Saeed Jaffrey, Shirley Anne Field, Stephen Frears

My Beautiful Laundrette-1985

Leave a comment

My Beautiful Laundrette-1985

Director Stephen Frears

Starring Gordon Warnecke, Daniel Day-Lewis

Scott’s Review #1,451

Reviewed November 10, 2024

Grade: A-

My Beautiful Laundrette (1985) is an early LGBTQ+-themed British film directed by Stephen Frears. He would later become well-known for directing The Queen (2006).

Though the film is choppy and contains several stories, the LGBTQ+ story is one of the few in the genre that represents a satisfying and hopeful ending. Later, and admittedly, more defined films, like Brokeback Mountain (2006) and Boy’s Don’t Cry (1999), were harsher and more realistic.

The British flavor, interracial pairing, and class differences make My Beautiful Laundrette a lovely watch. But, it’s also all over the place.

In a seedy corner of London, a young Pakistani, Omar (Gordon Warnecke), is given a run-down laundromat by his affluent uncle Nasser (Saeed Jaffrey), who hopes to turn it into a successful business.

Soon after, Omar is attacked by a group of racist punks but realizes their leader is his former lover, Johnny (Daniel Day-Lewis). The men resume their relationship and rehabilitate the laundromat together, but various social forces threaten to compromise their success.

Omar’s father is an unhappy former left-wing journalist, who has turned to alcohol. Nasser’s daughter, Tania, is meant to be Omar’s future bride, while Nasser is in love with his mistress, Rachel (Shirley Anne Field).

Besides these storylines, there is a complicated relationship between brothers Nasser and Hussein, and a drug smuggling storyline.

While every story has some intrigue and shapes the structure, the male romance is not front and center enough to be completely developed.

Omar and Johnny hold interest because despite differences they connect and are truly in love. Politically, Omar is left-wing, and Johnny is right. Omar is upper class while Johnny is working class. Omar is Pakistani while Johnny is British.

Being 1985 and early in the LGBTQ+ genre, Frears focuses mostly on their romance and less on their differences. There is a brief sequence where Omar treats Johnny as a lowly employee but for the most part, they are in love.

It takes a long time to showcase Omar and Johnny making My Beautiful Laundrette only marginally an LGBTQ+ effort.

There is no mention of the A.I.D.S. epidemic which would have made it a different kind of film.

The romance between Nasser and Rachel is marvelous. They are a couple the audience shouldn’t root for but do anyway. Rachel is the other woman, merely a mistress, but why is she so appealing? Why do Nasser and Rachel connect so well?

Shirley Anne Field pours kindness and empathy into her character while Saeed Jaffrey relays his love for Rachel to Nasser. Yes, he is married but the marriage is traditional and his wife is Pakistani. We know that at another time Nasser and Rachel would have a chance.

When Tania snaps at Rachel and accuses her of being a woman who so easily lives off a man, Rachel reminds her that she does too. Rachel is from a different generation where opportunities for women are scarce.

Field makes the scene her own and wins over the audience which could have been against her.

The Rachel/Nasser romance parallels the Omar/Johnny love story. Both couples live secret lives, hidden from the world and shrouded in secrecy.

This is evident in a powerful scene when the two couples are simultaneously romantic in the laundrette. Neither sees each other at first but the audience sees both couples. This mirrors their mutual love and it’s a beautiful sequence.

While sometimes there is too much to follow, most of the material is poignant and relevant making My Beautiful Laundrette (1985) a film to recommend.

It has an LGBTQ+ presence but is not restricted to that genre offering other nice stories to the experience.

It also leaves one feeling hopeful which is sometimes needed in cinema.

Oscar Nominations: Best Original Screenplay

1982 Films, Ben Kingsley, Biography, Candace Bergen, Daniel Day-Lewis, Drama, John Mills, John Ratzenberger, Martin Sheen, Political Drama, Richard Attenborough, Roshan Seth, Saeed Jaffrey

Gandhi-1982

Leave a comment

Gandhi-1982

Director Richard Attenborough

Starring Ben Kingsley

Scott’s Review #1,189

Reviewed October 30, 2021

Grade: A

Ben Kingsley delivers an astonishing performance as Mahatma Gandhi,  the steady-handed lawyer who stood up against British rule in India and became an international symbol of nonviolence and peaceful understanding until his tragic assassination in 1948.

Entitled simply Gandhi (1982) the film is directed by Richard Attenborough who has created masculine offerings such as The Great Escape (1963) and The Sand Pebbles (1966) before.

Calmly, the director creates a grandiose epic but one that is thought-provoking and introspective in its humility.

I was incredibly affected by this picture.

As beautiful as the cinematography and other such trimmings are the message is what stands out to me most. One man’s spirit and thirst for fairness and human equality are beyond inspiring decades after the film was made.

Thanks to Kingsley, the biography infuses an infectious channeling of what being a human being is all about and how human decency is the desired goal.

The film belongs to Kingsley. Despite hosting a cast of literally thousands he is the only name worth mentioning. He is that superior.

Attenborough, who teams with screenwriter John Briley presents major events in the life of Mohandas Gandhi (Kingsley). The film starts suddenly in January 1948, when an elderly Gandhi is on his way to an evening prayer service and is shot point-blank in the chest in front of a large number of dumbfounded greeters and admirers.

His state funeral is shown, the procession attended by millions of people from all walks of life, with a radio reporter speaking beautifully about Gandhi’s world-changing life and projects.

The film then returns to decades earlier when Gandhi, a young man, has a violent and racist experience. He vows to dedicate himself to the concept of nonviolent resistance. Initially dismissed, Gandhi was eventually internationally renowned, and his gatherings of passive protest moved India towards independence.

Gandhi has been criticized for its extraordinary length with a running time of three hours and ten minutes. A suggestion is to watch the film in multiple sittings though the best recommended approach would be to see it on the big screen.

Unfortunately, I didn’t but fantasize about the massive sequences and how gorgeous they would appear at the cinema.

The story, acting, production, and pretty much everything else about Gandhi is a ravishing spectacle.

It’s worth its weight to sit back and watch Kingsley completely immerse himself in the role. The actor deservedly won the Best Actor Academy Award and despite his oodles of other film roles is best remembered for this one.

I’m half surprised that it didn’t typecast him since he is so identifiable in the role.

I’d like to mention two aspects that some might not notice as much as others but that is simply astounding. The cinematography of the deserts, towns, and cities of India is plush with detail and accuracy. If one cannot go on a trip to India the next best thing is to watch this film instead. You’ll get a good dose of realism.

South Africa is also featured.

The costumes brilliantly showcase Indian flair and culture so well that I felt that I had been to an interesting country at the time that the film portrayed the events and felt nestled amid the luxurious colors and good taste.

Post-1982, the film genre of the epic exists rarely if ever anymore.

Long gone are the days of brilliance like Gone With the Wind (1939) or Lawrence of Arabia (1962) which are truly a delight to simply lay one’s eyes on.

Gandhi deserves to be appreciated as much as those other films despite being released in less than an artistic decade in cinema.

Gandhi (1982) is a wonderfully tragic film and leaves the viewer feeling sad but also inspired to carry the torch picked up by one brave man.

A history lesson it’s also as much a lesson in humanity and the courageous fight that one man fought. Military power is not the way to achieve change in the world.

Oscar Nominations: 7 wins-Best Picture (won), Best Director-Richard Attenborough (won), Best Actor-Ben Kingsley (won), Best Screenplay-Written Directly for the Screen (won), Best Art Direction, Best Cinematography (won), Best Costume Design (won), Best Film Editing (won), Best Makeup, Best Original Score, Best Sound

1984 Films, Alec Guinness, David Lean, Drama, E.M. Forster, Epic, Judy Davis, Peggy Ashcroft, Period Drama, Roshan Seth, Saeed Jaffrey

A Passage to India-1984

Leave a comment

A Passage to India-1984

Director David Lean

Starring Judy Davis, Peggy Ashcroft

Scott’s Review #971

Reviewed December 24, 2019

Grade: A-

David Lean, famous for his sweeping, masterpiece epics including Lawrence of Arabia (1962) and Doctor Zhivago (1965), returns with his swan song, a grandiose and lavish film, A Passage to India (1984).

Though not quite on the same level as the two other mentions, the brilliant cinematography alone makes this one a winner.

The story is compelling with a mystery and he said/she said rape story that deepens, exploring racism and religion, assuredly switching viewer allegiances between characters.

A Passage to India is based on the famous E.M. Forster novel from 1924. Along with A Room with a View (1908) and Howards End (1910), the three make up a series that examines class differences and hypocrisy among the British.

All three are set at least partially in England and were all adapted to film with immeasurable success. While the film is potent and meaningful, it is the least brilliant of the three, but only by a hair.

Set in the 1920s, the British had control over India causing some tensions in the air. Adela Quested (Judy Davis) sails from England to India with Mrs. Moore (Peggy Ashcroft), the mother of her intended bridegroom, whom they plan to see when they arrive at their destination.

The women have a wonderful relationship and excitedly anticipate their adventure.

After Mrs. Moore meets the kindly Dr. Aziz Ahmed (Victor Banerjee), becoming enamored and enraptured, the women accompany him to an exploration of ancient caves, along with a guide.

When Adela and Ahmed are left alone, she suddenly appears frantic, accusing the Indian Doctor of attempted rape, setting off a blistering scandal that causes public debate and divides the townspeople, culminating in a trial.

The story is naturally the focal point of the film, but not the strongest part. At first left aghast at the accusations hurled at Aziz, by all appearances a wonderful man, the intention is for the viewer to be unclear of what transpires when Aziz and Adela are alone. The events, if any exist, take place off-screen, so we only see a disheveled Adela flee the caves in panic.

The rest is left to the viewer’s imagination and to wonder what happened. As the truth is eventually revealed, we wonder about the intended motivations and the ramifications the accusations will have on the central characters.

The film is successful at interestingly discussing racism and assumptions, leading major characters to disagree. Adela and Mrs. Moore wind up at odds after the events, with Moore refusing to believe Aziz did anything wrong.

This is a bold stance to take as the women are good friends and we would assume one would support the other. While Moore is liberal and open-minded, Adela is conservative and buttoned-up, making the ideological differences clearer.

Did Adela imagine the attack? Did somebody else attack her?

The cinematography is brilliant and the pure excellence of the film is. The plentiful exterior scenes are delectable and simmer with beauty within each frame. Since many of them take place in the grandiose mountains or caves the results are exquisite.

One can easily sit back and revel in the majestic sequences and many scenes are still and quiet which enhances the effects. As with other Lean epics, it advisable is to see this film on the biggest screen known to mankind.

At one-hundred and sixty-four minutes, the film is hardly non-stop action, but rather slightly laborious and lumbering. Some parts are a tad too slow, but the payoff is mighty and there is a measure of intrigue throughout, especially once the cave incident occurs.

I hate to say the film drags, but perhaps fifteen to twenty minutes could have been shaved off. When Lean is at the helm, a hefty running time is a guarantee.

A Passage to India (1984) is a film by a respected director that culminates a lengthy and inspired career boldly. While not his best film, this should not detract from the excellent experience the film provides.

Grandiose sequences and sophisticated style make the film able to be viewed more than once, a marvel for a film released in the lackluster 1980s.

Oscar Nominations: 2 wins-Best Picture, Best Director-David Lean, Best Actress-Judy Davis, Best Supporting Actress-Peggy Ashcroft (won), Best Screenplay Based on Material from Another Medium, Best Original Score (won), Best Sound, Best Art Direction, Best Costume Design, Best Cinematography, Best Film Editing

1978 Films, Agatha Christie, Angela Lansbury, Bette Davis, George Kennedy, Jane Birkin, Lois Chiles, Maggie Smith, Mia Farrow, Olivia Hussey, Peter Ustinov, Saeed Jaffrey, Thriller

Death On The Nile-1978

Leave a comment

Death On The Nile-1978

Director John Guillermen

Starring Peter Ustinov, Mia Farrow, Bette Davis

Scott’s Review #714

Reviewed January 14, 2018

Grade: B+

Death On The Nile is a 1978 British thriller that follows up the successful 1974 offering, Murder On The Orient Express- both films based on the fabulous Agatha Christie novels of the 1930s.

This time around, Belgian detective Hercules Poirot (Peter Ustinov) investigates a string of deaths aboard a luxurious steamer carrying the lavishly wealthy and their servants.

The film is a good, old-fashioned whodunit, perhaps not on the level of storytelling as its predecessor-the murder mystery contains not the oomph expected- but features exquisite Egyptian historical locales- worth its weight in gold.

Featuring a who’s who of famous stars and tremendous actors of the day, Death On The Nile carves a neat story right off the bat in such a way that the murder victim is fairly obvious right away- most of the characters have reason to celebrate her demise.

Rich and reviled heiress, Linnet Ridgeway (Lois Chiles), has stolen best friend Jacqueline’s (Mia Farrow) beau, Simon, sparking a bitter feud between the women. While honeymooning in Egypt, the newlyweds are continually taunted by angry Jacqueline.

Once the cruise ship departs with all on board, Jackie is the prime suspect when Linnet is murdered.

Poirot must find the killer as numerous other suspects all with grudges against Linnet, begin to emerge.

Death On The Nile serves up a stellar cast including legendary Bette Davis in the role of Marie Van Schuyler- an eccentric American socialite with an eye for Linnet’s necklace. The casting of Davis is reason enough to watch the film, though the character is not center stage but rather a supporting role.

The lead female honor is held for Farrow, who has the meatiest and most complex role in the film.

Jackie’s unstable actions make her the most likely to commit the deed, but the fun is to figure out the “whys” and the “hows” of the murder. Is there more than one killer? Are they working in cahoots or independently? As the body count increases these questions begin to resonate more and more.

The costumes and sets are gorgeous and it is no wonder the film won the Oscar for Best Costume Design. At a ball, the women are dripping with jewels and gorgeous gowns.

Along with Davis, boozy author Salome Otterbourne, hilariously played by Angela Lansbury, is granted the prize of wearing the most luxurious and interesting of all the costumes. She drips with jewels and, with a cocktail always in hand, is the film’s comic relief.

Director John Guillermin makes the film an overall light and fun experience and, despite the murderous drama, does not take matters too seriously.

Offering humorous moments, this balances nicely with the inevitable murders.

The fun for the audience is deducing whodunit- most of the characters have the motive and the cast of characters is hefty.

I had memories of the famous board game Clue- Was it Jackie in the ballroom with the revolver? You get the idea. The film makes for a good, solid game of mystery.

Comparisons to 1974’s Murder On The Orient Express cannot help but be drawn, especially in the lead casting of Hercules Poirot.

Truth be told, Albert Finney’s portrayal in “Murder” is superior to Peter Ustinov’s Poirot in “Death” and I am not sure what purpose Colonel Race (David Niven) as Poirot’s friend offers other than to be a loyal sidekick and present a character that Poirot can explain events to- think what Watson was to Sherlock Holmes.

Regardless, Finney is the superior Poirot as he musters more strength and charisma than Ustinov does.

How lovely and historic to witness the wonderful Egyptian locales- the Sphinx and the Great Pyramids are featured amid an attempt on the life of the romantic pair by way of falling rocks- this sets the tone for the perilous cruise about to be embarked upon.

Perhaps a perfect film for a Saturday stay-at-home evening with friends, complete with a serving of quality wine and cheese, Death On The Nile is a sophisticated, yet fun, British mystery film, fantastic to watch in a party setting where the audience can be kept guessing until the nice conclusion and the big reveal of who killed whom and why.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Costume Design (won)