Change Your Image
kstuart
Reviews
The Cook, the Thief, His Wife & Her Lover (1989)
The Adolescent, the Adolescent, His Adolescent, Her Adolescent
It's interesting to note that if a dozen monkeys typed randomly on a dozen typewriters for a few weeks, you could put it all together as a screenplay that reviewers would give four stars to - and then each of those reviewers would say it means something entirely different.
This movie is the peak of the "urine in a glass is art" movement.
All you have to do as a filmmaker is to hire good actors, an excellent costume designer, an innovative cinematographer (even if he only has one innovative idea), and a musical score composer who is instantly identifiable because any 10 seconds of his score is identical to any other 10 seconds, and then people will think - "there must be some profound idea here". It just has to look "artsy".
Well, I'm sorry, but as someone who has seen a majority of the more well known "art films" (and some of which are excellent), I haven't the slightest doubt that there is nothing going on here, except an adolescent being allowed to make films.
The small skeleton of a plot is stolen from "Born Yesterday (1950)", except that here the gangster's wife is not uplifted by her association with her lover - in fact, there is no evidence that any of the characters, or the filmmaker himself for that matter, has a clue what "uplifted" means.
For a more substantive review that I agree entirely with, see below the review that starts:
" Jim Nygaard Saint Paul, MN Date: 6 September 2000 Summary: Simply vile"
The Guru (1969)
Fictionalized version of George Harrison's first visit to India
This is based loosely on George Harrison's (of the Beatles) first visit to India in September 1966 to study with Ravi Shankar.
I'm pretty sure that all the interactions of the main characters are fiction, including the entire Jennifer character.
But the overall framework is mostly accurate (he first stayed in a hotel in Bombay, he did have a famous girl friend named "Patty" ,not "Patsy", and note the passing motorist who says "It's All Too Much"). And all the minor characters and scenes of India are incredibly accurate and authentic.
All the locations in India are filmed exactly as stated - I've been in most of them! (The Ganges boat ride gave me a strong sense of deja vu, as I've done exactly that trip.)
Michael York in one of his first roles, is good as the Beatle, albeit a trifle too low-key, although that perhaps may be part of the direction or the times.
The soundtrack is excellent and is written and performed by perhaps the best sitarist in India, Ustad Vilayat Khan.
The film's lack of success is probably due to the fact that it was too artsy for Average Joe, but too elementary for those Westerners who were already interested Indian music, culture or philosophy. Perhaps, in 1969, it reached a segment of the younger audience who were just becoming interested in the concept of being a hippie...