this movie hasnt aged well at all...that part where they kick the guys out of the window one by one and do their cheesey little introductions is just terrible. nowadays you see that native guy who was hiding the trumpet up his ass and you say "that guy is so gonna die" and boo hoo he did...maybe in 1939 this was the *beep* but now its like total dollar bin late night re run garbage. poop.
shareBigBudgetPlease, I'd like to introduce you to my friends: Grammar and Punctuation. Now, why not run along and play in the road?
"Someone has been tampering with Hank's memories."
I agree that this movie is terrible. It is by far one of Cary Grant's worst roles. The plot was boring and uneventful. The character of Gunga Din was portrayed as a halfwit. The ending didn't seem serious or genuine. I can't imagine for the life of me why this movie received such a high rating on IMDB.
shareBecause it's a damn good classic action film to myself
and alot of other IMDB film fans,
The action scenes were memorable and the humor was handled well,
Especially with the way it played up Valentine and his quandry of wheither to stay in the service or get married and go into the tea business,
(if you don't get at least a chuckle from that you're dead IMHO)
Gunga Din wasn't portrayed as a genius granted but a movie about the British in India would be rather difficult
to be made PC back then,
You didn't like the ending I thought it worked just fine for this film,
Different strokes for different folks.
[deleted]
It's very simple. It is a CLASSIC. VERY well-acted, the script was terrific, and the storyline very easy to follow.
Now. Run along and have mommy put a Barney tape in for you before your bedtime.
Growing up in the 50's and 60's, this was like our Star Wars. I have not seen it for many years and can't tell how well it has aged because of that. I prefer to keep in memory how great this movie was.
Allow any movie enough time and it WILL age to the point of "blows" for those not able to judge a movie for its merits in the context of what was going on in the world when it was made or "where" everyone was then.
Haha I should probably say here that I only started this topic because its my best friends favorite movie and was hoping to find his IMDb name since he won't tell me. I actually enjoyed the film quite a bit, although truthfully, I think its quite dated.
Let me first say that I LOVE this movie. I wanted this move to come out on DVD more than any other movie. Someone up above mentioned that if you grew up in the 50s and 60s, it was our Star Wars. Well, I grew up in the 60s and 70s and while it wasn't MY Star Wars, it was a hell of a fun time. I remember waiting eagerly all week long for Sunday afternoon. In New York City, on Sunday, they would play THE BIG MOVIE. And they would play it 4 or 5 times in a row. King Kong. Gunga Din. Beau Geste. The Maltese Falcon. My mom (God take her and hold her and rest her soul) would make some amazing Betty Crocker treat for us...mind you, I know I am reminiscing here, and I know I am idealizing the time, but, hey, this is my 2 cents. hehe
As for this movie "blowing", please stop and consider the source and timeframe from which this movie comes. It was made in 1938, released in 1939. The depression had crushed world economies. War was looming in Europe and raging in Asia. If you think that Hollywood executives live in a vacuum, you couldn't be more wrong. They KNEW war was coming, and I will bet a dollar to a mountain of dog poo that they KNEW we were going to go in on the British side. The British would soon be fighting for their lives against both Hitler and Tojo. Remember, the UK had a VAST Empire in Asia, and it needed a LOT of military power to defend it. With Europe turning into a powder keg, it was most likely that the USA was going to go in and help the UK win the war. Those in power in Hollywood knew we needed to know who our friends were, and they were going to damn well make sure that our friends were NOT "crazy little militant Asian men seeking to carve out a pocket empire". That quote is from a film profesor I had back in grad school. Our friends were going to be handsome, fun-loving, brawling BRITISH, WHITE MEN.
So there you have my rambling 2 cent response. Ciao
H.A.L. + 1 = I.B.M. Arthur Clarke is a scary man.
Well the OP did say he liked the film and that it didn't blow. But the notion that a film made in 1938 being dated is sadly true with any number of viewers and a lot of IMDB posters. I've read some posts that decry b&w and silent films !!! No sense of history, so no real perspective on film in general.
Gunga Din, King Kong, Maltese Falcon, La Strada, The General, The Third Man... classics that still entertain, involve the viewer and never should be relegated to the dust bin.
~LjM
Step on it! And don't spare the atoms!
IMO this film did blow...King King is great, Maltese Falcon is great, Casablanca is great, treasure of sierra madre is great, nosfaratu (silent film) is great...this film...sucks...It has nothing to do with it being in black and white or anything like that. The characters are just stupidly corny and the action sequences are terrible.
This film might have entertained children back in the late 30s but it is nothing more than a generic action movie. It should have been forgotten years ago just like the generic movies of today will be and the other generic movies back then were forgotten.
Haven't you ever heard the expression, "It's so bad, it's good?" This is a strictly for fun movie. The American remake, "Sergeant's Three" with Sinatra, Martin, and Lawford, with Sammy Davis Jr. in the Gunga Din role, set in the American West in the 1870s, was just as dumb, and just as much fun.
share. . . please stop and consider the source and timeframe from which this movie comes. It was made in 1938, released in 1939.
And loosely inspired by a poem written in 1892.
The British would soon be fighting for their lives against both Hitler and Togo.
Togo is a country in West Africa. The Japanese prime minister was Hideki Tojo.
All the universe . . . or nothingness. Which shall it be, Passworthy? Which shall it be?
I remember the words Gunga Din being popped by my grandfather when talking about his favourite films when I was a kid. So I went and rent it to see why it was so great.
I didn´t like it. I love classics, but this is a comedy that didn´t make me laugh and all the action scenes although very well crafted by Stevens did not save the movie for me.
This movie didn´t age well enough for me.
The plot was boring and uneventful.
I disagree with the opinion that the plot was boring or uneventful, in my opinion the narrative has a mixture of comedy and tension. From the antics of Cutter and Mac at the party to Gunga Dins climb to the top of the temple which built up tension within me as a viewer, the film was eventful from beginning to end.
"I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not".
And the OP reveals that he is a troll.
share[deleted]
How could it age well? It was an apologia for British imperialism.
Because of all the censorship imposed by the studio, it lacks the subtleties you can find in Rudyard Kipling stories like 'Drums of the Fore and Aft' in which a regiment flees and leaves its drummer boys alone in the path of an Afghan charge.
No, this is conflict without casualties among the white leads or any hint of cowardice among British troops.
ok, so tell us "What movie do you think YOU consider a CLASSIC? and holds up after many years?
shareI'm under the opinion that the OP can't tell the difference between Gunga Din, shot in the 1930's and Kiss Kiss Bang Bang....Possibly its because "special effects" amounted to a few mirrors and gunshots recorded in a canyon....Consider the movie for what it is and the classic its become...
shareThe OP and others who did not enjoy Gunga Din are of the generation that "watch" movies.
Not enough foul language and special effects to hold their attention,they wind up listening half hearted.
This film has 3 future Oscar winners,maybe 4-not sure Fairbanks won.