I am all for ambitious and stately films, which is why I watched Gandhi. And I like Richard Attenborough, I think not only was he a talented actor and director but his films are very interesting. Gandhi is certainly one of his more interesting films, along with the underrated Cry Freedom.

Gandhi is just a wonderful film, and do I think it's one of Attenborough's best? Along with Cry Freedom and Shadowlands, yes it is. This film is for me his most ambitious and his most stately, and it is very compelling. True, it is long and perhaps leisurely in pace, but it is well worth the watch for several reasons.

Visually it is superb to look at. It was almost like watching a David Lean film, it has the beautiful scenery, the stunning cinematography and the sweeping colours that a Lean film does. I also loved George Fenton's score, it was very epic and moving. Is it his best? Perhaps not, but it is one of his better scores. Attenborough's direction is superb, and the script is thought-provoking. The story, starting with Gandhi's assassination and told mostly in flashback, is interesting and compelling, while the acting also helps drives the film. Words cannot describe how good Ben Kingsley's performance was, composed yet inspirational, sometimes I felt as thought I was actually seeing Gandhi rather than Kingsley. In fact, this is probably the Richard Attenborough-directed film that feels the most authentic in terms of characters and story. Kingsley also gets superb support from Candice Bergen, Edward Fox, John Gielgud and Roshan Seth. Best scene? Lots to pick, but Gandhi's funeral was brilliantly done and one of the most emotional scenes in film and had massive scope to it.

Overall, brilliant and one of Attenborough's best. 10/10 Bethany Cox

Films do not come any better than this. The impact of this singular life is still being felt in the world. This man of peace who toppled a mighty empire and caused it to leave his country. Many study his teachings, most importantly the Reverend Martin Luther King for the civil rights movement in America, not enough follow them, especially in Gandhi's own corner of the world. His monument is now a growing and prosperous India that is slowly eradicating poverty form its borders. Gandhi would approve of that, he was not just for independence for the sake of independence, he was deeply interested in the kind of society that would result after the British left India. India's growing prosperity would please him, the religious and ethnic struggles still prevalent in that part of the world would not.

The problem in discussing a film like Gandhi is that discussions will overlap into the life of the subject as opposed to the quality of the film. Richard Attenborough having lived a lot of his life during the time when these events took place remembered them well. He's got an eye for the sweep and grandeur of the story, but the life of Gandhi here is never overwhelmed by the spectacle of the film. And Ben Kingsley's Gandhi dominates the film, no wonder he received his Oscar for Best Actor. Ironically enough one of his competitors was Paul Newman who got a nomination for The Verdict which I consider his best performance and my personal favorite of his films. For me to say Kingsley deserved it over him is quite an admission.

Gandhi was a devout Hindhu, but he was a man of vision who saw some of the injustices of fundamentalist and exclusionary religious beliefs. Born in the Brahmin caste, he fought against the caste system where social status was stratified by religion in ancient times and people could not rise from it. He was a believer in a land of opportunity, careers that were open to talent. He also was against male domination and treated women as equals. Note that scene where after he's arrested the British soldier offers to take Mrs. Gandhi to shelter, but says she will make the same seditious speech her husband intended to make and they might as well arrest her too.

Of the many varied roles in the film by British and Indian players and a couple of Americans as well, the one that really stands out was Edward Fox as General Dyer. Some of the violence during our civil rights struggles in the American south was nothing compared to the Amritsar massacre when as the British commander he opened fire on a peaceful rally and slaughtered hundreds of men, women, and children. We put Nazis to death for atrocities committed in World War II, yet little happened to Dyer except he was put on the shelf and buried like an embarrassment which he certainly was. Fox in that small role captured the haughty military mind and cold blooded ruthlessness that one has to be born with.

The ironic thing is that after India did send troops to fight in various theaters in World War I the Indians, Moslems, Hindus, et al, expected independence. They thought it would be peaceful, but Amritsar made revolutionaries of a lot of people. And the sentiment in the British population was for independence. But some politicians like Winston Churchill and press barons like Lord Beaverbrooke whipped up a lot of fear in the Tory ranks for granting independence. It was a stupid and incredibly shortsighted opinion that we still feel the effects of today.

Gandhi won several Oscars besides Kingsley's including Best Picture for 1982 and Best Director for Richard Attenborough. The best review I can give Gandhi is that the film is great and worthy of the great man in portrays.

The movie starts with the assassination of Gandhi (Ben Kingsley) in 1948. In 1893, Gandhi faces racism in South African. He tries non-violent protest against the pass laws and gains notoriety. In 1915, he arrives back in Indian as a national hero. He supports the war and travels the country to reconnect with his homeland. The rest of the independence movement expect little from the little man but he quickly gains supporters. He urges for non-violence in a campaign for independence.

At first glance, it's a bit racist to cast Ben Kingsley as Gandhi but it is an impressive performance from a brilliant actor. Richard Attenborough has made a grand epic of human power. The great thing about Kingsley is that he is able to harness that power. It is a superior movie in almost every way. As in most historical biopics, there are some glossing over and some simplification which is to be expected. I can see some real hate for Gandhi and some who like to point out every flawed statement in his life. It's always a concern but it's nothing too egregious in this case.