Phonearl Good start, but then it gets ruined

MamaGravity good back-story, and good acting

Dorathen Better Late Then Never

Janae Milner Easily the biggest piece of Right wing non sense propaganda I ever saw.

doctorsmoothlove OK, let me again admit that I haven't seen any other Merchant Ivory (the distributor) films. Nor have I seen more celebrated works by the director, so my capacity to discuss Before the Rains outside of analysis of the film itself is mitigated. With that admittance, let me begin.Before the Rains is a different kind of movie that doesn't know which genre it wants to be. At first, it pretends to be a romance. In most romances, the protagonist falls in love with a supporting character, is separated from the supporting character, and is (sometimes) united with his or her partner. This movie's hero has already won the heart of his lover but cannot be with her. His name is Henry Moores and her name is Sajani, and they reside in southern India during the waning days of the Raj (British imperial rule). Henry has been away from London for a long time and has fallen in love with his married Indian maid, despite his legal marriage and child overseas. What could be better than that? They often sneak away for intimate afternoons until some children notice them. Word spreads to Sajani's husband who questions her involvement with Moores. She denies any contact with him, but Moores asks her to leave the area. Sajani refuses because of her devotion to him and commits suicide. Please take note that these events occur in the opening third of the film. The film changes tone and becomes a crime-drama in its final portions.Sajani's body is discovered right as Moores' family comes to visit. The alleged perpetrator is Moores's English-educated assistant T.K. T.K. knows of his master's affair but keeps silent until his life becomes threatened. Once he is declared innocent, he attempts to regain his honor by killing Moores. T.K. is too squeamish and leaves him in a dirt path as the rains fall.I want to warn you, this isn't a romance film. The DVD cover and theatrical posters show an Indian woman and Caucasian man embracing in an idealized tropic setting. This image is captured directly from the film's opening, but quickly disappears. Then it's over. It seems like an effort to capitalize on Western fixation on forbidden love. It isn't effective, at all. Not only is the movie not a romance, but its characters lack any personality. They are bundles of walking clichés. Moores is an arrogant white man who doesn't recognize his Indian friend, T.K.'s intelligence. T.K. is torn between his own heritage and his educative background. Sajani is a woman incapable of having a choice in her romantic life. Oh, and, of course, Moores' family is inquisitive into Sajani's death but still slightly racist to Indians. If the tone wasn't so serious, I would be willing to overlook these problems, but it isn't. The film is presented with a didactic overtone which highlights its poor character development.No, this film isn't terrible. Other than the laughable screenplay, it isn't poor. The actors are all experienced and perform well here. Nandita Das, who plays Sajani, was part of wonderful Indian drama Water. Even director Sivan has an impressive resume. He recently oversaw The Terrorist, which is part of Roger Ebert's "Great Movies" collection. What happened here? Why is this movie so bad? Well, Sivan mentioned how he was inspired to direct this film because of a short he viewed in Israel called Red Roofs. Apparently, the story was "timeless," and Sivan sought to create a similar experience set in 1930's India. I don't have any problem with that approach, but I think Sivan may have been too motivated this time. The actors, cinematography, and set design are acceptable but unless you share Sivan's aura, you'll probably not enjoy it. My recommendation is that you presume you aren't in accordance with him and watch something else. Final Consensus: *and ½ out of *****

vitaleralphlouis Before the Rains is a beautifully made drama set in south India in 1937. An engrossing story, it shows us what India was like and awakens our interest in foreign lands. But what stuck in MY mind was the extreme difficulty of having a sexual/romantic encounter in this time and place.Young people these days take their sex fast and casual. There is no way they can ever understand the restraints of the pre-1960 era (let alone 1937). And this was the case in India, or in the USA. With most women married well before their 18th birthday, with marriage being respected by society, with the remaining single people mostly being (obvious) born losers, non or extra marital sex was virtually impossible, and could lead to the serious and multi-complicated downfalls portrayed in this movie. Easy to say had the lovers handled things wiser or smarter their ultimate problems might have been easier. But wait, they DID handle their situation wisely......

TxMike British actor Linus Roache is Henry Moores, a wealthy Brit in India during the period when India was beginning to exert its intent to be free of England. The theme in this movie involves building a road such that he can farm herbs and get them to market. For this project a large number of workers is needed.But the real story is the relationship of his very loyal employee, India actor Rahul Bose as T. K. Neelan. (He is a dead ringer for American Hank Azaria, just with a darker complexion.) Plus his relationship to his domestic help, pretty India actress Nandita Das as Sajani, who works in his estate during the day and walks home to her family in the evening.Moores' wife is back home with their young son, but both return shortly.Interesting movie, good acting, but nothing greatly different from other, similar movies.SPOILERS: Moores and Sanjani have become more than just friends, their attractions for each other evolve into an intimate relationship. They say they love each other. However when some boys spot them at a secluded swimming hole, the news gets back to town, and Sanjani's husband wants to know everything. Moores sums up his choices by giving her money and sending her away. But she returns, sure that Moores will accept her. He can't, it would break up his family and destroy his business, so he tells her he doesn't really love her, she kills herself, they sink the body in a pool, it is later discovered, Moores loses everything anyway. Moral, don't cheat!

heyian Despite the mysteriously positive reviews and high rating, this is an awful movie. Awful enough, that l feel obligated to warn you how bad it is. The movie is set in the final period of the Raj, during the time of India's fight for independence. What follows in the ridiculous plot just fills me with disbelief. What the characters do and how they behave just does not persuade me that the characters exist in that era. For instance, would the young married Hindu housemaid from the local village have an affair with her married Englishman Master, knowing full well that discovery of the affair would likely mean utter social ostracization and shame if not mortal punishment? Unlikely, but still maybe. However, would the same young Hindu housemaid, in the conservative society of India of that era carry on like a half naked Britney Spears in heat, partake in hot outdoor sex during daylight in open view where they might be discovered at any moment? That is not only bloody unlikely, that is a retarded plot line.Such idiocies combined with the poor acting, drove me to leave the cinema an hour into the movie, so i did not watch the second half of the movie. One could only hope the ending is of more intelligence than what i saw in the first half.