input: At last - I've finally got round to it and managed to see a "clean" copy of Pakeezah! Up until now I've only had a mangled scratchy jerky version taped off Dubai TV sometime in the '90's, with quirky English subtitles, dizzying widescreen coverage and a fluid colour with a mind of its own. Having thought the world of such a poor (and short) copy I find the decent one was well worth the wait and the full 140 minutes even more of a pleasure than I thought possible.

This was the lovely Meena Kumari's film from start to finish, and I believe was planned by her from 1958 on, finally realising it in 1971. What a shame it was that chronic alcoholism finally killed her soon afterwards, and in fact that she was too ill to perform in some of the scenes in Pakeezah, necessitating a body double. In some scenes the strain definitely shows in her face.

The story of Purity versus Adversity I can only treat as fiction having no experience of anything remotely close to it, but I'm led to understand that it faithfully depicts a world now gone that must have been common at one time in India. It's a sparkling and colourful film with a simple relentless epic message, an intense romantic tragedy which is somehow simultaneously feelgood too. But to me it's the peerless golden music by Ghulam Mohammed as sung by the incomparable Lata Mangeshkar - especially Thare Rahiyo - and its part in the unfolding of the story that makes this film so outstanding. I've seldom heard such serious, beautiful, poetic, wondrously sung and played songs on any movie soundtrack. Singin' In The Rain may be my favourite musical film but Pakeezah has my favourite music - yet Lata said that the songs themselves meant nothing special to her. The only pity is that the also unique Mohammed Rafi only had the one song in here, albeit a classic duet with Lata.

Because of all this but not blind to its faults, Pakeezah is my favourite Indian movie, filmed at a time when the Westernisation of India was gathering pace and watched now when Western values seem to be state sponsored and de rigueur. At the very least watch Pakeezah for a taste of what Indian "pop" music had to offer the world before it was all jettisoned for drum machines, the Bollywood Beat and bhangra.

Is the sentiment of this review positive or negative?

pos/neg ans: positive

input: Imagine that in adapting a James Bond novel into a movie, the filmmakers eliminated all the action and suspense in order to make it kid-friendly. Or if a television producer told Chris Rock he couldn't cuss so that his specials could be rated PG. In the same way, the director of the movie "Something Wicked This Way Comes" took out the excitement and gore in favor of melodrama for younger audiences. This created a monotonous plot without the complications of the book. In trying to make the story of "Something Wicked This Way Comes" easier for children to follow, the filmmakers eliminated the theme of good and evil both existing in everyone, and good always prevailing over evil. This is apparent in Will's character transformation, Charles Halloway's rescue of Jim, and the carnival's defeat.

Will's transformation into a more adventurous boy has been muted in the movie. The scene in which the Dust Witch visits Will's house in a balloon has been cut from the film. Instead, a green mist follows Jim and Will home and gives them the same bad dream about the Witch and her spiders. The balloon attack shows us that Will has begun to conquer his fear of doing things on his own. He gets on top of a neighbor's roof and tears the balloon with a bow, defeating the Witch. "Sorry, Dad, he thought, and sat up, smiling. This time it's me out, alone," Will decides as he prepares to face her (147.) Removing this scene from the movie prevents us from understanding that Will is becoming more adventuresome. The film shows us many examples of Will being afraid to follow Jim, but never growing curious like his friend. In the book, Will has both a good, quiet side and an "evil," daring side like his Jim. In the movie, each boy only has one mode of thought, which destroys Bradbury's theme of both good and evil being present in each person.

In the book, Will saves Jim because of their friendship, but, in the movie, Charles Halloway saves Jim to repay Jim's father. Will pulls Jim off the carousel in Bradbury's novel because he doesn't want his best friend to grow up without him. It is the good in Will, the fact that he cares about his friend, that saves Jim from the evil curse of the carnival. On the carousel, Jim "gestured his other hand free to trail on the wind, the one part of him, the small, white, separate part that still remembered their friendship" (269.) This shows that there was good left inside of Jim, which has the potential to still defeat evil. But when Charles Halloway saves Jim in the movie, he does it to repay the debt he owes Jim's father, who saved Will when he was a little boy. By changing the motivation for saving Jim, the filmmakers have ruined Bradbury's original idea that it takes good to win against evil.

In the end of the movie, the carnival is defeated by a tornado and lightning instead of smiles and laughter. When the book ends, Mr. Dark turns himself into a little boy and Charles Halloway smiles and laughs at him so much that he can't stand it and evaporates. In Bradbury's world, evil people feed off fear and can only be defeated by happiness and love. His message is that good will always prevail over evil, but only if that goodness is expressed outwardly. "Good to evil seems evil," says Charles Halloway as he holds the dying Mr. Dark. "So I will do only good to you, Jed. I'll simply hold you and watch you poison yourself" (275.) In the movie, Mr. Dark is the only one left on the carousel when lightning hits it, and he dies. By eliminating the weapon of laughter and smiles, the filmmakers imply that bad weather is the most effective way to defeat evil, as if lightning only strikes those who are bad. This takes away the major theme of Bradbury's book, which is that doing "good" toward others wards off evil.

Good may always triumph over evil, but trying to make movies more kid-friendly will always force filmmakers to leave out some of the themes from the books they are based on. In the movie, "Something Wicked This Way Comes," Will does not transform, Will's friendship does not save Jim, and smiles and laughter do not defeat the carnival. As a result, the filmmakers have left out too many of Bradbury's main points. The process of adapting a book to a movie too often ruins the world the author has established. In the case of this story, Bradbury's frightening world of opposing forces of good and evil has been reduced to a tamer, simpler version of itself.

Is the sentiment of this review positive or negative?

pos/neg ans: negative

input: After seeing all the Jesse James, Quantrill, jayhawkers,etc films in the fifties, it is quite a thrill to see this film with a new perspective by director Ang Lee. The scene of the attack of Lawrence, Kansas is awesome. The romantic relationship between Jewel and Toby Mcguire turns out to be one of the best parts and Jonathan Rhys-Meyers is outstanding as the bad guy. All the time this film makes you feel the horror of war, and the desperate situation of the main characters who do not know if they are going to survive the next hours. Definitely worth seeing.

Is the sentiment of this review positive or negative?

pos/neg ans:
positive