A Filmmaker's Review: 'Gandhi' (1982)

Let's start with the fact that when I was a child, I had this film on VHS tape and I had actually sat and watched the entire thing before I was eight years old. I'm Indian and Indian people love watching this film over and over again, even though it stands at around three and a half hours long. I had seen it multiple times throughout my life and yet, I had never really paid very much attention to it the way I did recently. I sat and watched it, and I really watched it. I watched it like I was watching a star exploding or another rare phenomenon occur.

This rare phenomenon, I realised, was actually called: Hollywood acknowledging that there are other people on the planet besides white people. It doesn't happen too often, but when it does they seem to celebrate it, give themselves a pat on the back and act as if they've learnt something new and exciting about the savages they call people of colour. That goes for every single actor, actress, producer, director and anyone who remotely works within Hollywood's grounds that is white—it's like a whole different world there where they can actually choose to ignore that other people exist apart from them.

This film represents that they can only do that for so long until they begin to alienate their entire audience who don't live the closed-minded hyper-material low-IQ lifestyle that they do. And the irony is that every single actor in this movie is the complete opposite to the person I have just described. Ben Kingsley, who portrays Gandhi, is an intelligent and brilliant actor with a great and wonderful talent. His mind is filled with articulation and knowledge and this film only accentuates the lengths that he can go to for a film. From the main man played by Kingsley to the South African racist portrayed by a young and striking Daniel Day-Lewis, this film is packed full of the rare kinds of actors—the ones with brains and ability to change the world with a movie.

The cinema style is filmed by yet another example of how some in Hollywood do actually have a brain—Richard Attenborough, director of films such as Chaplin starring Robert Downey Jr., gave his own hand to the film Gandhi and gave it a whole new meaning altogether. Not only did Attenborough manage to solidify the legend of Gandhi, but he also managed to revive his popularity in a time where his popularity needed reviving. It is a film of cinematic genius and has some incredible shot such as the one where Gandhi is stepping on to Indian land and the crowds gather to see him—the shots are breathtaking.

The overall premise of the film is based on numerous texts and sources from what I have seen but takes main inspiration from Gandhi's own autobiography and essential writings. In the hope to accentuate the philosophies of Gandhi, there are many occasions where he is doing these near-soliloquies/monologues during the film and, whilst good and effective once or twice, I think that this is one of the reasons the run-time for the film exceeds three hours. All that time throughout the film adds up and in the end, it takes slightly away from the main point of the film, which is to show us the life and unfortunate assassination of Gandhi.

From what I can see, this film has retained its legacy through the years ever since it was made over thirty years' ago. I still stand by my thoughts that this film may be a tad bit long, but I also believe that the sheer amount that needed to be fitted in was on such a grand scale that the monologues and soliloquies could've been cut down if ever so slightly. It is a monumental film and has such an incredible atmosphere about it—this really true and real heroism which isn't overshadowed by a saviour complex or an egotism that would be so unbecoming. It is such a human experience. It is so very human. I love it so completely even though the film is just so incredibly long. I would highly recommend that this is one of those films you should see before you die.