Mangal Pandey: The Rising
- 2005
- Tous publics
- 2h 30min
NOTE IMDb
6,5/10
11 k
MA NOTE
Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueThis is a film about the leader of the 1857 mutiny and his fight against the British rule.This is a film about the leader of the 1857 mutiny and his fight against the British rule.This is a film about the leader of the 1857 mutiny and his fight against the British rule.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Récompenses
- 1 victoire et 7 nominations au total
Habib Tanvir
- Bahadur Shah Zafar
- (as Tanveer Habib)
Varsha Usgaonkar
- Rani Laxmibai
- (as Rani Lakshmibai)
Dibyendu Bhattacharya
- Krupashankar Singh
- (as Dibiyendu Bhattacharya)
Avis à la une
I went to see this movie with a friend of mine from India. I was going because of her, expecting to be bored to death. I was wrong! The Rising is one of these movies that are larger, bigger than life. The amazing powerful music sets the tone to a legend of a great folk hero for Indians. The acting, in most cases, was haunting. The cinematography was breathtaking and the songs, and I am not a big fan of people singing and dancing in movies, were magical and helped move the story along. Of course, it was a big history lesson form me (though the producers warn you that some of this is fictionalized), but I have a better understanding of the Indian culture now. I finally get to see Toby Stephens\playing a role that doesn't involve him being mean, a villain or plain evil.
What is the definition of a good movie? Has there been any movie ever made that satisfies everyone's definition of a good movie? Perhaps not.
My definition of a good movie is something that commands my attention from start to end and that helps me exercise my intellect. A good movie makes me feel good when I talk about it.
A good movie can belong to any genre and can definitely have its own style (sometimes completely original). The Rising did not have a focus on the character development of all of its lead roles, like a typical movie, but that seems to be intentional. It was a little frustrating to see some movie experts dwelling on that issue.
The rising is about the character transformation of an idealistic but confused man called Mangal Pandey. It shows how he realized the true meaning of freedom and how it was passed on to an oppressed nation. The minute details of his personal life did not need any depiction in the movie. That could stir up even more controversy especially for some people in our subcontinent who need so little to feel offended and create chaos. The movie also shows the genuine remorse of a great soul like Captain Gordon who constantly tried to bring balance between rule and fairness. Hundred years old history became alive in the remarkable performances of the crew and the cast in this movie.
The movie is a masterpiece in almost all aspects. I sincerely have not seen many Indian movies of this standard. The only criticism I would have is the placement of the holy festival which could have been discarded in favor of showing more development of mutiny preparation, politics of the Indian kings and above all some more drama. The last 15-20 minutes seemed to have hasted a bit. The dance sequence of the two gypsy girls also felt a bit out of place.
Overall, I must say that I felt deeply satisfied after watching this movie.
My definition of a good movie is something that commands my attention from start to end and that helps me exercise my intellect. A good movie makes me feel good when I talk about it.
A good movie can belong to any genre and can definitely have its own style (sometimes completely original). The Rising did not have a focus on the character development of all of its lead roles, like a typical movie, but that seems to be intentional. It was a little frustrating to see some movie experts dwelling on that issue.
The rising is about the character transformation of an idealistic but confused man called Mangal Pandey. It shows how he realized the true meaning of freedom and how it was passed on to an oppressed nation. The minute details of his personal life did not need any depiction in the movie. That could stir up even more controversy especially for some people in our subcontinent who need so little to feel offended and create chaos. The movie also shows the genuine remorse of a great soul like Captain Gordon who constantly tried to bring balance between rule and fairness. Hundred years old history became alive in the remarkable performances of the crew and the cast in this movie.
The movie is a masterpiece in almost all aspects. I sincerely have not seen many Indian movies of this standard. The only criticism I would have is the placement of the holy festival which could have been discarded in favor of showing more development of mutiny preparation, politics of the Indian kings and above all some more drama. The last 15-20 minutes seemed to have hasted a bit. The dance sequence of the two gypsy girls also felt a bit out of place.
Overall, I must say that I felt deeply satisfied after watching this movie.
Ketan Mehta perhaps wanted to make a lavish 'Braveheart' with 'The Rising: Ballad of Mangal Pandey'. Well, the end result is far from it. The depiction of the rebellion and the pursuit for revolution was very bleak. I can understand that Mehta wanted to make a lavish epic-type movie about an Indian hero but there is just too much exaggeration for the story to resonate. So much is spoon-fed to the viewer while it fails at telling a proper story. There are so many sequences that are unintentionally funny. Forget historical accuracy, even the characters (with the exception of a few) felt one-dimensional. Even the title character was poorly developed.
The mutiny preparation was rushed. While each and every one of the songs are beautiful, the holy song could have been left out as it doesn't add to the story and only slackens the pace. Even the romance between Jwala and William looked forced (this track shouldn't have been included at all).
Mehta does introduce some interesting issues that have not been depicted on screen earlier. Such as the Indian nanny breastfeeding the British baby while she struggles to feed her own child. His cinematographer does a superb job in capturing the picture with his camera. The art direction is eye candy.
A.R. Rahman's score deserves special mention. It is of an eclectic mix with a variety of songs, all of which have been beautifully visualized. I especially liked how 'Rasiya' and 'Vari Vari' were executed. Rani Mukherjee dances wonderfully. Many have made unfair comparisons to that of Madhuri Dixit's 'mujra' in 'Devdas'. Madhuri's character was a trained dancer while Rani's Heera had just been sold to the brothel and her primary task was to seduce. Back to Rahman's music, his background score is highly effective. It remains consistent and always contributes well to the scene (sometimes it's the only thing that works in a scene).
Aamir Khan makes a comeback after four years. However, this is far from his best work. He looks uninterested and wooden in most places and is easily overshadowed by Toby Stephens. He does seem to enjoy playing with his fake moustache. Stephens has the best character and he does full justice to it with a remarkable performance. Rani Mukherjee acts with full guns blazing. Whether her character is relevant or not to the movie, the actress is sensual, spontaneous and natural on screen and that's always great to watch. Amisha Patel has a few fits of hyperventilation (even though her character wasn't supposed to be someone sick with asthma).
'The Rising: Ballad of Mangal Pandey' is a lackluster film. It has very little to offer whether in the form of entertainment, enlightenment or engagement.
The mutiny preparation was rushed. While each and every one of the songs are beautiful, the holy song could have been left out as it doesn't add to the story and only slackens the pace. Even the romance between Jwala and William looked forced (this track shouldn't have been included at all).
Mehta does introduce some interesting issues that have not been depicted on screen earlier. Such as the Indian nanny breastfeeding the British baby while she struggles to feed her own child. His cinematographer does a superb job in capturing the picture with his camera. The art direction is eye candy.
A.R. Rahman's score deserves special mention. It is of an eclectic mix with a variety of songs, all of which have been beautifully visualized. I especially liked how 'Rasiya' and 'Vari Vari' were executed. Rani Mukherjee dances wonderfully. Many have made unfair comparisons to that of Madhuri Dixit's 'mujra' in 'Devdas'. Madhuri's character was a trained dancer while Rani's Heera had just been sold to the brothel and her primary task was to seduce. Back to Rahman's music, his background score is highly effective. It remains consistent and always contributes well to the scene (sometimes it's the only thing that works in a scene).
Aamir Khan makes a comeback after four years. However, this is far from his best work. He looks uninterested and wooden in most places and is easily overshadowed by Toby Stephens. He does seem to enjoy playing with his fake moustache. Stephens has the best character and he does full justice to it with a remarkable performance. Rani Mukherjee acts with full guns blazing. Whether her character is relevant or not to the movie, the actress is sensual, spontaneous and natural on screen and that's always great to watch. Amisha Patel has a few fits of hyperventilation (even though her character wasn't supposed to be someone sick with asthma).
'The Rising: Ballad of Mangal Pandey' is a lackluster film. It has very little to offer whether in the form of entertainment, enlightenment or engagement.
I saw it. I was lucky enough to find the ticket. As for the movie goes...if you are expecting a Lagaan (I mean the flair) its not there BUT B U T BUT its a really well made movie. Cinematography is excellent, it meets the Hong Kong Film industry standard in every sense(Hong Kong has become better than Hollywood in cinematography lately). Music is not bad at all Mangal Mangal song is really good and there is one Banjara(Gypsi) song which is really FRESH. Choreography is as always good ....the best in the world. One thing that surprised me was the improved special effects. A technically well made movie in every sense..no issues on that.
Acting...you get what you expect of him... you know who I mean. Toby was really good but if compared quarter as good as him. Rani..not much scope...but she ended up creating an impact...every other character was good..the women in the role of KAMLA i think her name is MONA did a really good job (she was really good in that two bit role..thats what i call to make an IMPACT).
How I personally judge a movie is by its impact over me when i leave the hall. And there was an IMPACT. As per my movie experience goes this is a kind of movies that will grow on any one after every subsequent viewing.
Acting...you get what you expect of him... you know who I mean. Toby was really good but if compared quarter as good as him. Rani..not much scope...but she ended up creating an impact...every other character was good..the women in the role of KAMLA i think her name is MONA did a really good job (she was really good in that two bit role..thats what i call to make an IMPACT).
How I personally judge a movie is by its impact over me when i leave the hall. And there was an IMPACT. As per my movie experience goes this is a kind of movies that will grow on any one after every subsequent viewing.
This epic tale of the first Indian uprising (mid 19th century) has so much going for it, it's hard to know where to begin. Firstly, it documents a period of history that tends to be airbrushed under the carpet in British history lessons. Germany and Japan are still constantly reminded of the atrocities their countries committed, but we have to go back a bit earlier to look at the British East India Company - the most successful business enterprise in history, controlling one fifth of humanity, and having its own army. The value of being reminded brings a certain sense of humility. It maybe even helps to explain some of the feelings one can sense just walking about Delhi today as a white person.
It's also a rare treat to have an epic of this scale, told from an Indian point of view, in English (or mostly in English). It successfully merges factual history with cultural norms, mythology, song and dance, grand battle scenes, touching romance and heroism.
The British East India Company was subject to the uprising or 'mutiny' largely because of a failure to understand and respect local customs (from a purely military point of view, George Bush should consider bringing more or better historians to the White House). Having been subjected to abominations and still helping the Company fight wars, Indians rallied over a deeply held religious insult and attacked the British rulers.
It is a great credit to the filmmakers that the British have not been demonised. There is no dwelling on the greatest excesses and neither are the Indians portrayed as flawless. For instance, we see a British soldier preventing a local (forced) sacrifice of a young wife at the burning of the corpse of her 60yr old husband, and the excesses of the British depicted are those common in most armies where power has led to degeneracy. We see not only the forced cultivation of poppies, but shady dealings with the resultant drugs and the Indians always coming out the losers. We see houses of prostitution set up to 'keep the troops healthy'; Indian soldiers treated as second class citizens with brutal punishments for minor slips handed out by self-important British officers.
But whenever it gets too grim to watch, it springs the Bollywood trick of bursting into song and dance. The only other genre that routinely manages such a happy switch is grand opera. The slave courtesans sing joyously with double edged lyrics about being a slave to love. The spectacle of glorious colour and wonderful dancing spectacle entrances us.
Many great conquerors have been also ruthless and uncaring to those they abused. The British East India Company was perhaps no different, and at worst should perhaps be judged more by the morality of the time than present day international law. But that way of thinking is a get-out. Invading another country is almost always for selfish reasons, glossed over in one way or another according to the double-talk of the day. History usually sides with the victors.
The Rising will not get the marketing it deserves in the UK: many will avoid it because of the Indian songs. But it is a film well worth catching.
My main quibble is that India is constantly portrayed in movies (including this one) as incredibly clean. I have never found this so, except in 5 star hotels enclaves. There is a great water shortage and most streets are pretty unhygeinic by Western standards. If Calcutta was the paradise of colour and good health depicted in The Rising, then it's gone backwards, whatever the improvements in basic freedoms and human rights. But realism it not Indian cinema's forte.
It's also a rare treat to have an epic of this scale, told from an Indian point of view, in English (or mostly in English). It successfully merges factual history with cultural norms, mythology, song and dance, grand battle scenes, touching romance and heroism.
The British East India Company was subject to the uprising or 'mutiny' largely because of a failure to understand and respect local customs (from a purely military point of view, George Bush should consider bringing more or better historians to the White House). Having been subjected to abominations and still helping the Company fight wars, Indians rallied over a deeply held religious insult and attacked the British rulers.
It is a great credit to the filmmakers that the British have not been demonised. There is no dwelling on the greatest excesses and neither are the Indians portrayed as flawless. For instance, we see a British soldier preventing a local (forced) sacrifice of a young wife at the burning of the corpse of her 60yr old husband, and the excesses of the British depicted are those common in most armies where power has led to degeneracy. We see not only the forced cultivation of poppies, but shady dealings with the resultant drugs and the Indians always coming out the losers. We see houses of prostitution set up to 'keep the troops healthy'; Indian soldiers treated as second class citizens with brutal punishments for minor slips handed out by self-important British officers.
But whenever it gets too grim to watch, it springs the Bollywood trick of bursting into song and dance. The only other genre that routinely manages such a happy switch is grand opera. The slave courtesans sing joyously with double edged lyrics about being a slave to love. The spectacle of glorious colour and wonderful dancing spectacle entrances us.
Many great conquerors have been also ruthless and uncaring to those they abused. The British East India Company was perhaps no different, and at worst should perhaps be judged more by the morality of the time than present day international law. But that way of thinking is a get-out. Invading another country is almost always for selfish reasons, glossed over in one way or another according to the double-talk of the day. History usually sides with the victors.
The Rising will not get the marketing it deserves in the UK: many will avoid it because of the Indian songs. But it is a film well worth catching.
My main quibble is that India is constantly portrayed in movies (including this one) as incredibly clean. I have never found this so, except in 5 star hotels enclaves. There is a great water shortage and most streets are pretty unhygeinic by Western standards. If Calcutta was the paradise of colour and good health depicted in The Rising, then it's gone backwards, whatever the improvements in basic freedoms and human rights. But realism it not Indian cinema's forte.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesHugh Jackman turned down the role of Captain William Gordon.
- GaffesWhen the opening credits roll, a coin can be seen on which there are the following words "Victoria Empress". The events of the film are set in 1857, but Queen Victoria becomes Empress of India by the decision of the British Parliament only in 1876 and this is announced in India in 1877, 20 after the story of the film. It is important, because the Mughal Emperor (Bahadur Shah II), still alive in 1857, is also shown in the film, and the British Queen gets this title long after his deposition in 1857 and his 1862.
- Citations
Mangal Pandey: What is "company"?
Captain William Gordon: In your Ramayana there was one villain "Ravana" who had ten heads, company has a hundred heads and they're all joined by the glue of greed.
- ConnexionsFeatured in The Story of India: Freedom (2007)
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Mangal Pandey?Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
Box-office
- Budget
- 340 000 000 ₹ (estimé)
- Montant brut aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 954 108 $US
- Week-end de sortie aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 531 018 $US
- 14 août 2005
- Montant brut mondial
- 8 142 076 $US
- Durée
- 2h 30min(150 min)
- Couleur
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 2.35 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant







