Gandhi to Hitler

Well, as emphatic as the name sounds, Gandhi To Hitler is nothing but a sheer act of lunacy. The idea is taken from a popular stage play and the limitations of the concept show on the big screen. The film comes across as nothing more than a cheap elementary school's staged version of Der Untergang (2004). Some scenes (almost everything shot in Hitler's bunker) are a straight lift from the German original. The sets look cheap and why on earth were Indians wearing SS uniforms? It seems the filmmakers really didn't want logic to be part of the film. Performances at best can be called hamming. This is a real sham of a film if I ever saw one.

The attempt might have been a novel one, but trust me if ever execution of a film went wrong this was it. It's one of the worst films I've seen in a long long time.

This Indian movie is an absurd, ultra low budget unofficial remake of the German movie Downfall, about the last days of Hitler (despite the title, Gandhi appears only briefly in this film).

Since Britain came out very weakened after World War II and very soon had to give out her empire, I understand why some Indians might feel some indirect sympathy for Nazi Germany. But still, it's not clear to me why this remake was filmed, though it provides some amusing scenes in their ludicrousness (because it has some entertaining value, I did not give it a bottom rating).

None of the terrible actors looks German, which is quite obvious since they are all Indian. Some of the scenes in Downfall, especially those set in the Fuhrer Bunker, are copied almost verbatim in this film. And it is quite funny how a massive battle like the battle of Berlin (which resulted in 200,000 dead, 500,000 wounded, 500,000 prisoners) is acted with just a few extras. Or how outdoor scenes that are set in Europe were clearly filmed in India. Some viewers might be offended as well that the crimes of National Socialism are not mentioned in the movie, and Hitler is portrayed as an honorable patriotic German, a very angry guy but not an evil person (the scene where "Hitler" dictates his testament is outrageous in this respect). Also, I don't get why the actress playing Eva Braun speaks in English in this movie while the other characters speak in Hindi, is speaking English a sign of superficiality/snobbishness in India?

It could be "so bad it's good" like "Samurai Cop" or "The Room" except the subject is too serious to be presented as such distasteful schlock.

This movie is like a very poorly acted Der Untergang mixed with soft core Holocaust denialism. Hitler is portrayed as simply a pigheaded and overly ambitious warlord, whom a caricature version of Gandhi is hopelessly trying to teach some pacifist ideas.

Everybody on the "German" side is so miscast the picture would almost pass for a real life "Springtime for Hitler" adaptation but then again there's this realistically looking Gandhi dispensing his epistolary nuggets of wisdom narrated in the cringiest and most long winded ways.

GANDHI TO Hitler – the title was very intriguing, the posters were even more impressive and the subject was the first of its kind never ever tried before in Hindi Cinema. But that was what I had in mind before watching it.

And now after having seen this bio-pic, I can only say that it's a highly amateurish attempt by its director in absence of any particular aim or vision to showcase the conflict between the contrasting ideologies of these two Historical stalwarts. In few words, there is nothing exciting, provoking or impactful in the whole film revolving around its world famous characters and in fact it's a big disappointment for the viewers who were expecting something great in it as suggested by its well thought of Title.

Now where the movie actually fails? First of all the film never clearly talks about the individual ideologies of either Gandhi or Hitler. In real terms, the Title of the film itself is wrong as there are very few scenes of Gandhi writing his two letters to Hitler and Hitler reacting on them in his own style. So if you wish to see anything related to that then there is nothing in it for you.

Actually the film's title should have been "The Last Days of Hitler" since the script mainly focuses on this subject more than the publicized one. Frankly speaking, in my opinion it was only the last day Marriage & Suicide episode in Hitler's Life which might have excited the makers and they just thought of making a film over it. Now as only Hitler would not have worked in India, so they brought in Gandhi too in the script to give it an Indian feel and started making it with all this confused vision. And the result is right there in front us, which doesn't really move the viewer even once.

Secondly, the film doesn't have a fixed focus on its subject. Like, I couldn't understand What was the purpose of showing a parallel track of Indian soldiers fighting on foreign land, with such a long screen time interrupting other proceedings. Along with that What were the songs (including a Holi Track) doing in such intense movie based on a dark subject?

Thirdly, this is not the movie which will make any sense to the viewers who don't know anything in details about Hitler and have just heard some facts about his rule vaguely. The film never portrays the real cruel and powerful persona of the person and neither it talks about the HOLOCAUST anywhere in its script. So it overall starts with an assumption that the viewer already knows everything about Hitler which is a big drawback.

Lastly, the film fails completely in its Casting department (with only a few exceptions). Taking Indian actors for the role of Hitler and his team of Officers and Soldiers was indeed a very funny decision. The biggest mistake remains taking Raghuvir Yadav for the role of Hitler himself which falls flat. Its not the case that Raghuvir hasn't done well, but it's the case of his Established Comic Identity in the mind of Indian viewers which restricts them to accept him as Hitler. In simple words, at time he more looks like Chaplin in his short height (as was Hitler) and Charlie moustaches, which works a big hindrance in making a solid impact on the audience. As I feel, the role should have been given to some unknown actor who doesn't have any fixed image of his own. Even Anupam Kher would have failed in this particular role, had he accepted the film as per the early reports.

Avijit Dutt as Mahatma Gandhi is pretty ordinary and Aman Verma as the Indian Soldier is another miscast in the film who really doesn't seem like fighting for his country. Actually I seriously feel that it becomes difficult to accept an actor in a particular role who is active both on the Small Screen (T.V.) as well as the Big Screen at the same time. At times the small screen image interferes heavily in the film, which lessens the overall impact of a performance. In the female lead, Neha Dhupia as Eva Braun, remains one of the few watchable and glamorous elements in the film, with a bit overdone make up. Though she doesn't get a good backing from the writers but in spite of that Neha very well manages to make an impact with her talking eyes, particularly towards the climax.

So, Is there nothing to see in GANDHI TO Hitler? Yes in a broader sense there is nothing. But it does have a well worked upon Cinematography with a fine colour correction as its merit. Plus if you don't know anything about Hitler's end and his last day marriage with the mysterious lady Eva Braun, then you can give it a chance only to have some visual information about the man. Otherwise don't expect it to be even anywhere close to the western films made on the aura around The Great Dictator.

I absolutely love this film - it is brilliant .... totally bizarre - an Indian actor plays Hitler .... WOW! This has to be seen to be believed!