Sammy et Rosie s'envoient en l'air

Amazing this film has never been released on DVD and it deserves to be. Sammy and Rosie Get Laid is a remarkable and flawed film directed by Stephen Frears and written by Hanif Kureishi who worked together on My Beautiful Launderette. Thatcherism, the struggles of immigrants and oppressed races and Love are the main topics - chaos and excitement exist everywhere. Watching this film in 2021, the themes and scenes of riots and madness are as relevant today as they were in the mid-80's. The cast is great. The film will stay with you. It will haunt you. It will demand repeat viewings - as it has for me since.it's release in 1987. I was lucky enough to find a dvd-r bootleg which is serviceable but WHERE'S THE OFFICIAL DVD RELEASE???

This biting social/sexual satire from the same team responsible for 'My Beautiful Laundrette' may be too comprehensive for its own good, ranging far and wide over Margaret Thatcher's England but never quite achieving the kaleidoscopic effect it strives for. Racial tension, sexual revolution, recreational drug abuse, and inner city violence (complete with police brutality) are all part of the interchangeable backdrop for its two unlikable title characters: a swinging London couple whose marriage is less open than they'd like to believe. The arrival of Sammy's father, a Pakistani politician with a secret, fascist background, is the hook on which writer Hanif Kureishi hangs his colorful but didactic screenplay (his characters too often trade clever observations and aphorisms instead of credible dialogue). The style of the film certainly shows plenty of kinetic energy, and repeat viewings help bring out some of the depth and compassion in the story and characters. But the self-consciously hip and trendy attitude doesn't sit well with such an unreal depiction of counter-culture idealism: cuddly ragamuffins in a fairy tale, open-air commune.

I was turned onto this movie having loved this directors previous film "My Beautiful Lundrette" and this became no exception to S.Fears wonderful ability to create a surreal social climate around the films primary characters.

Sammy is the two timing adulterous husband and Rosie is the cheating wife. They both know of the others affair's yet still can't seem to break off their marriage (a prime example of loving someone but not being in-love) of the two, Sammy wants most for them to "Love each other a Little more" as he state after finding out she recently slept with some guy who mysteriously shows up at his house after saving his father from the middle of a riot.

Oh, the father is also an intricate part of the story. the father(Rafi) comes into S&R life on a whim, stating that "I have some past issues that I need to get away from". Wanting only to rekindle some kind of relationship with is estranged son, Rafi couldn't have come at a worse time. Amidst, a social revolt, a descending marriage and a past that haunts him in the form of a dead worker, that through Rafi's actions had a hand in killing. He becomes vital in the end of the movie (that I won't spoil) and teaches S&R that amongst all the problems they face, it's never to late to try to change and find the true meaning of love.

A great film filled with great dialog and engaging characters

This art film and commentary on England's severe adjustment pains after decolonization is at least interesting. It was purposely made to be a decentralized movie, but it seems that it could easily be argued that Rafi is the central character. This makes me wonder if the author's point actually was communicated accurately.

I agree that the sex scene was a bit much and very unnecessary (although I love how it was put sarcastically to a rag-tag chorus singing "My Girl"). However, other scenes make up for that relatively miniscule part of the movie (such as Sammy listening to "Erlking" while Rafi is scared for his life--one of the funniest and most intelligent scenes I have ever seen). The attraction to this movie is the imagery, cinematography, and writing. This movie has attracted a cult following amongst sociologists; they claim that the movie is arguing that postmodern identity formation is more fulfilling that modern identity (don't worry if you're not acquainted with these terms, it's all garbage and only fulfills their egos). Rafi is the most certain about who he is, but this results in him being the most ignorant out of all of the movie's characters. Whatever. I think that they are reading too much into the movie. To me, this movie is an exaggerated attempt to reveal what it is like to be a "former colonized" individual trying to live in your colonizer's country, as well as how the decolonized country (in this case Pakistan) ended up as brutal as the colonizers were (England). It was necessarily exaggerated and therein the absurd and violent scenes created hammers this point home. Would I reccommend the movie? Only if you haven't better things to do, like wash your dishes or play parcheesi. If you want to see some nifty camera work, by all means rent the movie. If you're looking to be easily entertained, forget about it.

OK, I'm predjudiced. I love English cinema. This might not be the best, but I"ve watched it a few times, and I like it better each time.

Hanif Kureishi the chronicler of Indians, Pakistanis, and their love/hate relationship with England, can't be blamed for all the confusion. Stephen Frears and his editor come in for some of the blame. And I wonder how the actors go about their jobs? I mean, we see the final print, and get some sense of what the writing and directorial team had in mind, But sometimes the actors get only their scene to learn; some later scenes are filmed first, probably to save money on certain location shots, and some of the actors are doing theatre gigs and are only available certain times. You think you have problems? This is basically your average bleeding heart liberal 60's/90's epic. The poor are pushed to violent revolution by an uncaring conservative government that sends them checks every week, so they can dress in garish costumes, march in parades, playing instruments they never bothered to learn... why trouble a child with lessons and practicing when all these hippy darlings want to experience, is the pure joy of a child the first time it is given an instrument? The cast is peopled with the great actors from India who would be better known if they had Anglicised names. I've seen these guys a lot and I apoligise to them, but there's no way my attention deficit mind can remember their names. Anyway, it's a beautiful mess that begins to make sense after two or three viewings.