AVALIAÇÃO DA IMDb
6,5/10
11 mil
SUA AVALIAÇÃO
Adicionar um enredo no seu idiomaThis 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.
- Direção
- Roteiristas
- Artistas
- Prêmios
- 1 vitória e 7 indicações no total
Habib Tanvir
- Bahadur Shah Zafar
- (as Tanveer Habib)
Varsha Usgaonkar
- Rani Laxmibai
- (as Rani Lakshmibai)
Dibyendu Bhattacharya
- Krupashankar Singh
- (as Dibiyendu Bhattacharya)
- Direção
- Roteiristas
- Elenco e equipe completos
- Produção, bilheteria e muito mais no IMDbPro
Avaliações em destaque
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.
I am amazed at the negative comments about this film, especially from India. I'll address those criticisms later after providing a summary of the film.
Set in 1857, the film tells the story of Mangal Pandey, a sepoy (private) in the 34th Native Infantry regiment of the Bengal Army (the army of the Presidency of Bengal, governed by the British East India Company and recruited largely from upper caste UP and Bihar stock). Mangal is depicted as an ordinary soldier who is offended by the introduction of the new Enfield rifle cartridges which were greased with pig and cow fat (the former anathema to Muslims and the latter sacred to Hindus). The movie shows him changing from a loyal Company sepoy who saved a British officer's life, to one who ends up questioning the logic of British rule. Other themes include his friendship with the same British officer, the officer's rescue and subsequent romantic relationship with a sati - a widow expected to burn herself on her husband's funeral pyre,and a prostitute who exclusively services the English brothels but falls for Pandey. The movie brings opium cultivation, corruption within the Company, the growing distance between English and Indians, as well as backward, traditional Indian attitudes into sharp focus.
All in all, the film is highly entertaining, a good story - well told, with powerful performances by the main characters. Aamir Khan is in his element, living the character of Pandey and conveying a fantastic portrayal of the soldier who realizes, bit by bit, that his loyalty to a foreign army makes him as "untouchable" as the low-caste man or prostitutes he scorns. Toby Stephens performance as the outsider in British India (Scottish, poor schooling, too fraternal with the natives) was brilliant and his chemistry with Khan was the high mark of the film's dramatic impact. The music by AR Rahman is louder than usual and some of the beats are frankly out of sync with the times ( the lesbianish gypsy dance number was a bit much!!).
The strength of the film was in conveying a sense of the time period - costumes,hair-styles, sets, manners ( the English officer's "Koi Hai"), were exactly what one could expect. The historical background was fairly accurate (sati was outlawed, opium cultivation was forced, the Company was beset by corruption, the English did have European only brothels) though the exact interpretation of events may have not been supported by history.
Which brings me to the criticism of the film. these seem to be of two variants - one, the film was not entertaining enough, and two, the anguished howl of the historians who decry its historical illegitimacy in the hope that no one may turn nationalist by seeing this film.
I will dismiss the first criticism, since that may be a matter of taste - certainly, desi (Indian) audiences raised on simpler story lines and poorer production values (see Asoka and n number of Indian period dramas) may find The Rising a bit heavy to digest.
Historically, the film may be inaccurate in the sense that Mangal Pandey may not have been the nationalist as portrayed, the relationships with the English officer and the prostitute are probably fictitious. But are they impossible? NO. The film has a paragraph disclaimer about inaccuracy at the beginning but this does not satisfy the history lobby. Why is it not possible that the official version about Pandey - that he was under the influence of bhang ( a hallucinogen) when he shot and killed an officer and then tried to shoot himself - is dressed up to cover the Company's stupidity in introducing the greased cartridges? Its not as if such "doctoring" of history has not taken place - witness the designations of "Mutiny" on the British side and "First War of Indian Independence" on the Indian side - when it was something in between? Secondly, why is The Rising being targeted when virtually every Indian film plays merry with historical events and characters? Akbar and Salim did not go to war over a dancing girl (Mughal-e-Azam), Shah Jahan was not the devoted son depictd in Taj Mahal but an ambitious usurper, one hopes that Ashoka was not the ghastly caricature depicted in Shahrukh Khan's film, and certainly India was not administered by ARMY officers as shown in Lagaan b ut by a civil ICS administration.
Similarly, Hollywood glosses over the fact that getting the German Enigma machines in WW2 was a purely British affair (U-571 shows us otherwise), and of course America won the war (no mention of UK/Common wealth forces, or more importantly - Soviet forces).
What I am saying is that films always distort history a bit - and so long as they are not conveying a completely different story - that should not matter. A purist on the matter of history myself, I am surprised by the vehemence of the historical community's attack on the film. My guess is that they do not want a false sense of nationalism to emerge on the basis of the Mangal Pandey story. They are a hundred and fifty years late in stopping the myth from taking hold.
In the end The Rising is a great film, a great story, well shot, with a few excusable omissions.
Set in 1857, the film tells the story of Mangal Pandey, a sepoy (private) in the 34th Native Infantry regiment of the Bengal Army (the army of the Presidency of Bengal, governed by the British East India Company and recruited largely from upper caste UP and Bihar stock). Mangal is depicted as an ordinary soldier who is offended by the introduction of the new Enfield rifle cartridges which were greased with pig and cow fat (the former anathema to Muslims and the latter sacred to Hindus). The movie shows him changing from a loyal Company sepoy who saved a British officer's life, to one who ends up questioning the logic of British rule. Other themes include his friendship with the same British officer, the officer's rescue and subsequent romantic relationship with a sati - a widow expected to burn herself on her husband's funeral pyre,and a prostitute who exclusively services the English brothels but falls for Pandey. The movie brings opium cultivation, corruption within the Company, the growing distance between English and Indians, as well as backward, traditional Indian attitudes into sharp focus.
All in all, the film is highly entertaining, a good story - well told, with powerful performances by the main characters. Aamir Khan is in his element, living the character of Pandey and conveying a fantastic portrayal of the soldier who realizes, bit by bit, that his loyalty to a foreign army makes him as "untouchable" as the low-caste man or prostitutes he scorns. Toby Stephens performance as the outsider in British India (Scottish, poor schooling, too fraternal with the natives) was brilliant and his chemistry with Khan was the high mark of the film's dramatic impact. The music by AR Rahman is louder than usual and some of the beats are frankly out of sync with the times ( the lesbianish gypsy dance number was a bit much!!).
The strength of the film was in conveying a sense of the time period - costumes,hair-styles, sets, manners ( the English officer's "Koi Hai"), were exactly what one could expect. The historical background was fairly accurate (sati was outlawed, opium cultivation was forced, the Company was beset by corruption, the English did have European only brothels) though the exact interpretation of events may have not been supported by history.
Which brings me to the criticism of the film. these seem to be of two variants - one, the film was not entertaining enough, and two, the anguished howl of the historians who decry its historical illegitimacy in the hope that no one may turn nationalist by seeing this film.
I will dismiss the first criticism, since that may be a matter of taste - certainly, desi (Indian) audiences raised on simpler story lines and poorer production values (see Asoka and n number of Indian period dramas) may find The Rising a bit heavy to digest.
Historically, the film may be inaccurate in the sense that Mangal Pandey may not have been the nationalist as portrayed, the relationships with the English officer and the prostitute are probably fictitious. But are they impossible? NO. The film has a paragraph disclaimer about inaccuracy at the beginning but this does not satisfy the history lobby. Why is it not possible that the official version about Pandey - that he was under the influence of bhang ( a hallucinogen) when he shot and killed an officer and then tried to shoot himself - is dressed up to cover the Company's stupidity in introducing the greased cartridges? Its not as if such "doctoring" of history has not taken place - witness the designations of "Mutiny" on the British side and "First War of Indian Independence" on the Indian side - when it was something in between? Secondly, why is The Rising being targeted when virtually every Indian film plays merry with historical events and characters? Akbar and Salim did not go to war over a dancing girl (Mughal-e-Azam), Shah Jahan was not the devoted son depictd in Taj Mahal but an ambitious usurper, one hopes that Ashoka was not the ghastly caricature depicted in Shahrukh Khan's film, and certainly India was not administered by ARMY officers as shown in Lagaan b ut by a civil ICS administration.
Similarly, Hollywood glosses over the fact that getting the German Enigma machines in WW2 was a purely British affair (U-571 shows us otherwise), and of course America won the war (no mention of UK/Common wealth forces, or more importantly - Soviet forces).
What I am saying is that films always distort history a bit - and so long as they are not conveying a completely different story - that should not matter. A purist on the matter of history myself, I am surprised by the vehemence of the historical community's attack on the film. My guess is that they do not want a false sense of nationalism to emerge on the basis of the Mangal Pandey story. They are a hundred and fifty years late in stopping the myth from taking hold.
In the end The Rising is a great film, a great story, well shot, with a few excusable omissions.
I liked the whole atmosphere of the movie and the professional outlook. There should be more movies like this rather than the same soapy mushy mushy romantic movies.
The story built up nicely, from the point where Mangal (Aamir Khan) was just a normal soldier to the point of him fighting for freedom and leading from the front. The Foreign cast in the movie such as Toby also did a great cast in making the movie professional rather than a joke.
Heera(Rani Mukherjee) and Amisha did a good job although their roles were small. But it was needed since the emphasis was not them but Mangal.
All in all, a worthwhile movie. Although many dispute its originality and historical facts, with the amount of historical facts available, the movie was well directed and shot. Inspiring and the ending made my heart heavier .
The story built up nicely, from the point where Mangal (Aamir Khan) was just a normal soldier to the point of him fighting for freedom and leading from the front. The Foreign cast in the movie such as Toby also did a great cast in making the movie professional rather than a joke.
Heera(Rani Mukherjee) and Amisha did a good job although their roles were small. But it was needed since the emphasis was not them but Mangal.
All in all, a worthwhile movie. Although many dispute its originality and historical facts, with the amount of historical facts available, the movie was well directed and shot. Inspiring and the ending made my heart heavier .
Kudos to Aamir Khan for the dedication he put into the production of The Rising, an unfairly over-hyped film, that sets out to deliver the story of Mangal Pandey.
The fact that Aamir took 4 years to make this film complete with growing his locks and that awesome moustache along with tons of research is an anomaly in the Bollywood film industry. Films are churned out 3/day at the last estimate, but Aamir being the professional he is, waited years to make this movie after the unprecedented success of his Oscar nominated Lagaan.
Without a doubt Aamir carries the film on his shoulders. There were many naysayers about the fact that Aamir may have been a bit lacking in the height department for the role of a freedom fighter, but when you see his towering performance on screen, his small frame is all but forgotten.
The man is Indian Cinmas answer to Edward Norton from Hollywood. A great actor for his generation who is going to continue to bring Indian cinema (not bollywood masala flicks) to the international audience....i think it's his calling. Amitabh Bachchan seems to have chickened out of this task of elevating Indian cinema to an art rather than a mockery that it usually is.
Without a doubt another actor who comes close to stealing the film away from Aamir is British actor Toby Stephens... i was under the impression that his role would be quite small. Instead he has a fully fledged three dimensional character who is in the entire movie. And on top of that, he acts the entire movie in Hindi. A best supporting actor nod is in order.
This film could theoretically get an Oscar nod (unfortunately a win maybe a hard sell). The songs are probably distracting for a Western audience, but they'll have to live with them.
The film does fall short of being an all time classic. But i think we may have to wait for the initial hype to settle down, because the movie is without a doubt the best one of 2005.
The film is slow to start, with the first half being an introduction of all the characters. But pre-interval, the story and Aamir Khan rev into the 6th gear, getting ready for the inevitable Rising post interval.
Get this. I think the movie could have been a bit longer. A little more development was needed with some of the glossed over aspects of British rule.
But, all in all, a magnificent effort from all involved, especially Aamir Khan and Toby Stephens.
8/10
The fact that Aamir took 4 years to make this film complete with growing his locks and that awesome moustache along with tons of research is an anomaly in the Bollywood film industry. Films are churned out 3/day at the last estimate, but Aamir being the professional he is, waited years to make this movie after the unprecedented success of his Oscar nominated Lagaan.
Without a doubt Aamir carries the film on his shoulders. There were many naysayers about the fact that Aamir may have been a bit lacking in the height department for the role of a freedom fighter, but when you see his towering performance on screen, his small frame is all but forgotten.
The man is Indian Cinmas answer to Edward Norton from Hollywood. A great actor for his generation who is going to continue to bring Indian cinema (not bollywood masala flicks) to the international audience....i think it's his calling. Amitabh Bachchan seems to have chickened out of this task of elevating Indian cinema to an art rather than a mockery that it usually is.
Without a doubt another actor who comes close to stealing the film away from Aamir is British actor Toby Stephens... i was under the impression that his role would be quite small. Instead he has a fully fledged three dimensional character who is in the entire movie. And on top of that, he acts the entire movie in Hindi. A best supporting actor nod is in order.
This film could theoretically get an Oscar nod (unfortunately a win maybe a hard sell). The songs are probably distracting for a Western audience, but they'll have to live with them.
The film does fall short of being an all time classic. But i think we may have to wait for the initial hype to settle down, because the movie is without a doubt the best one of 2005.
The film is slow to start, with the first half being an introduction of all the characters. But pre-interval, the story and Aamir Khan rev into the 6th gear, getting ready for the inevitable Rising post interval.
Get this. I think the movie could have been a bit longer. A little more development was needed with some of the glossed over aspects of British rule.
But, all in all, a magnificent effort from all involved, especially Aamir Khan and Toby Stephens.
8/10
Você sabia?
- CuriosidadesHugh Jackman turned down the role of Captain William Gordon.
- Erros de gravaçãoWhen 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.
- Citações
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.
- ConexõesFeatured in The Story of India: Freedom (2007)
Principais escolhas
Faça login para avaliar e ver a lista de recomendações personalizadas
- How long is Mangal Pandey?Fornecido pela Alexa
Detalhes
- Data de lançamento
- Países de origem
- Central de atendimento oficial
- Idiomas
- Também conhecido como
- Mangal Pandey
- Empresa de produção
- Consulte mais créditos da empresa na IMDbPro
Bilheteria
- Orçamento
- ₹ 340.000.000 (estimativa)
- Faturamento bruto nos EUA e Canadá
- US$ 954.108
- Fim de semana de estreia nos EUA e Canadá
- US$ 531.018
- 14 de ago. de 2005
- Faturamento bruto mundial
- US$ 8.142.076
- Tempo de duração
- 2 h 30 min(150 min)
- Cor
- Mixagem de som
- Proporção
- 2.35 : 1
Contribua para esta página
Sugerir uma alteração ou adicionar conteúdo ausente