Gandhi was released byColumbia Pictures in India on 30 November 1982, in the United Kingdom on 3 December, and in the United States on 8 December. It was praised for its portrayal of the life of Gandhi, the Indian independence movement and the deleterious results of British colonisation on India.
It was considered to have maintained a reasonable level ofhistorical accuracy, although many separate events were amalgamated, such as historical meetings with individual people being combined into single fictionalized scenes for narrative pacing.[5] Several events were exaggerated or invented, such as Gandhi being thrown off a train, or being beaten by police while burning registration certificates.[5] The chronology of Gandhi's early activism was altered, and certain historical figures (e.g.C.F. Andrews andMohammad Ali Jinnah) were considered to have been portrayed inaccurately.[5] The film was praised for conveying Gandhi's core principles of nonviolence and human dignity effectively, offering audiences an accessible introduction to his life and message.[6]
On June 7, 1893, in theColony of Natal, young lawyer Mohandas Gandhi is forcibly expelled from a whites-only train carriage inPietermaritzburg despite possessing a valid first class ticket, subsequently campaigning for Indian equality in the Colony of Natal and theCape Colony. Dada Abdullah, president of theNatal Indian Congress,[7] notices his campaign and invites him to a demonstration where he burns his pass. After theSecond Boer War, the British colonial government then attempts to enact a law where Indians will be fingerprinted, akin to criminals. Gandhi responds with numerous peaceful demonstrations against the new law's unjust nature, along with the British colonial officer and formerBoer general,Jan Smuts, eventually orders his arrest. Later, the British colonial government releases Gandhi and relents by granting some rights to Indians, fulfilling his short-term goal. Anglican clergymanCharles Freer Andrews joins his mission. Vince Walker, an American journalist from theNew York Times, takes special interest in him. Gandhi's work is at his ashram, where many figures associated with him include Andrews,Hermann Kallenbuch, and laterMadeleine Slade, whom Gandhi names Mirabehn.
Gandhi returns to India in 1915 where he is cordially invited to theIndian National Congress where at an outdoor luncheon he gets to meet its leaders:Sardar Patel, a youngJawaharlal Nehru,Maulana Azad, andMuhammad Ali Jinnah, who is advocating self rule for India, as well asGopal Krishna Gokhale, who becomes his mentor. Jinnah supports Gandhi's involvement in politics, but opposes his unconventional approach. At a meeting of the Congress led by Jinnah, Gandhi's speech captivates the ensemble, especially Patel.
Gandhi pledges allegiance to the British Empire in World War I, but simultaneously demands self rule for India. Hissatyagrahas atChamparan andKheda are brutally curtailed by the British. Despite Indian involvement in World War I, the administration in India passes theRowlatt Act in 1919, which is seen by the movement as betrayal. While a group of people listen to speeches about freedom, ColonelReginald Dyer orders hisGurkhas andsepoys to fire upon them unawares, committing theAmritsar massacre.
Jinnah suggestsnon-cooperation for protesting against British rule, and Gandhi surprisingly agrees. Its immediate success causes theChauri Chaura incident, where protestors kill and burn police officers in theUnited Provinces. Disgusted, Gandhi orders to call off the non-cooperation movement, enraging Jinnah, before he retreats to his ashram and fasts to call off the masses.
In 1930, after organizing theSalt March against the British monopoly on salt in India, accompanied by Vince Walker and his associate, Gandhi is arrested and sent to prison. When he is released, Gandhi is then invited to London byRamsay MacDonald to attend theRound Table conferences regarding futureDominion status for the Indian Empire. However, they prove fruitless and Gandhi and the other Congress leaders are imprisoned during World War II. While under house arrest, Gandhi's wifeKasturba dies, and he mourns her.
Dissatisfied by the Congress and Gandhi, Jinnah resigns and returns to theMuslim League, where he beginsdemands for aseparate state to be made out of British India for the Muslim minority. Gandhi is upset, and in 1945,Viceroy Louis Mountbatten declares India's upcoming independence as the territory's final Governor-General. Gandhi offers Jinnah to be Prime Minister and to choose its first cabinet; Nehru agrees to it to maintain India's independence, but Jinnah declines, stating that only independence for Pakistan with him as its leader, will ensure Muslim safety, upsetting Patel, Nehru, and Azad.
India and Pakistan finally gain their independence back-to-back in August 1947, and millions of peoplecross the borders into the two newly-formed countries, but sectarian violence occurs along the new borders between Hindus and Muslims alike. The Indian military attempts to control uprisings in Delhi and Bombay, while in Calcutta murder and violence between Hindus and Muslims rampage through the streets. Devastated, Gandhi holds a fast unto death, causing Hindus to stand down andHuseyn Suhrawardy to call upon Muslims to stop fighting. Gandhi advises a concerned Hindu man, upset about murdering a Muslim infant to avenge his son's death in the violence, to find a Muslim boy whose family had died in the violence and raise him as a faithful Muslim.
While heading to afternoon prayers in New Delhi on January 30, 1948, Gandhi is shotpoint blank 3 times byNathuram Godse and exclaims "Oh, God!" as he perishes. After his funeral, his casket is carted throughout Delhi accompanied by a mourning Nehru (now thePrime Minister of India), numerous Indian citizens, government officials from all over India, and international dignitaries. His ashes are poured into theGanges, and he is mourned by the leaders of the Congress and the Indian independence movement as a whole.
This film had been Richard Attenborough's dream project, although two previous attempts at filming had failed. In 1952,Gabriel Pascal secured an agreement with thePrime Minister of India (Jawaharlal Nehru) to produce a film of Gandhi's life. However, Pascal died in 1954 before preparations were completed.[8]
In 1962 Attenborough was contacted by Motilal Kothari, an Indian-born civil servant working with the Indian High Commission in London and a devout follower of Gandhi. Kothari insisted that Attenborough meet him to discuss a film about Gandhi.[9][10] Attenborough agreed, after readingLouis Fischer's biography of Gandhi and spent the next 18 years attempting to get the film made. He was able to meet prime minister Nehru and his daughterIndira Gandhi through a connection withLord Louis Mountbatten, the last Viceroy of India. Nehru approved of the film and promised to help support its production, but his death in 1964 was one of the film's many setbacks. Attenborough would dedicate the film to the memory of Kothari, Mountbatten, and Nehru.
David Lean andSam Spiegel had planned to make a film about Gandhi after completingThe Bridge on the River Kwai, reportedly withAlec Guinness as Gandhi. Ultimately, the project was abandoned in favour ofLawrence of Arabia (1962).[11] Attenborough reluctantly approached Lean with his own Gandhi project in the late 1960s, and Lean agreed to direct the film and offered Attenborough the lead role. Instead Lean began filmingRyan's Daughter, during which time Motilai Kothari had died and the project fell apart.[12]
Attenborough again attempted to resurrect the project in 1976 with backing fromWarner Brothers. Then prime minister Indira Gandhi declared astate of emergency in India and shooting would be impossible. Co-producer Rani Dube persuaded prime minister Indira Gandhi to provide the first $10 million from theNational Film Development Corporation of India, chaired byD. V. S. Raju at that time, on the back of which the remainder of the funding was finally raised.[13][14] Finally in 1980 Attenborough was able to secure the remainder of the funding needed to make the film. Screenwriter John Briley had introduced him toJake Eberts, the chief executive at the new Goldcrest production company that raised approximately two-thirds of the film's budget.[citation needed]
Shooting began on 26 November 1980 and ended on 10 May 1981. Some scenes were shot nearKoilwar Bridge, inBihar.[15] Over 300,000 extras were used in the funeral scene, the most for any film, according toGuinness World Records.[3][4]
The film was shot on 35mm anamorphic equipment usingPanavision cameras and lenses. For theatrical release, it was projected using either 35mm anamorphic prints with a 2.39:1 aspect ratio andDolby stereo sound, or 70mm anamorphic prints with a 2.2:1 aspect ration and six discrete sound tracks.[16]
Duringpre-production, there was much speculation as to who would play the role of Gandhi.[17][18] The choice wasBen Kingsley, who is partly of Indian heritage (his father wasGujarati and his birth name is Krishna Bhanji).[19]
Gandhi premiered inNew Delhi, India on 30 November 1982. Two days later, on 2 December, it had a Royal Premiere at theOdeon Leicester Square in London[20] in the presence ofPrince Charles andPrincess Diana before opening to the public the following day.[21][22] The film had a limited release in the US starting on Wednesday, 8 December 1982, followed by a wider release in January 1983.[2] In February 1983 it opened on two screens in India as well as opening nationwide in the UK and expanding into other countries.[23]
Reviews were broadly positive not only in India but also internationally.[24] The film was discussed or reviewed inNewsweek,[17]Time,[25] theWashington Post,[26][27]The Public Historian,[28]Cross Currents,[29]The Journal of Asian Studies,[30]Film Quarterly,[31]The Progressive,[32]The Christian Century[32] and elsewhere.[33] Ben Kingsley's performance was especially praised. Among the few who took a more negative view of the film, historianLawrence James called it "purehagiography"[34] while anthropologistAkhil Gupta said it "suffers from tepid direction and a superficial and misleading interpretation of history."[35] Also Indian novelistMakarand R. Paranjape has written that "Gandhi, though hagiographical, follow a mimetic style of film-making in which cinema, the visual image itself, is supposed to portray or reflect 'reality'".[36] The film was also criticised by some right-wing commentators who objected to the film's advocacy ofnonviolence, includingPat Buchanan,Emmett Tyrrell andRichard Grenier.[32][37] InTime,Richard Schickel wrote that in portraying Gandhi's "spiritual presence... Kingsley is nothing short of astonishing."[25]: 97 A "singular virtue" of the film is that "its title figure is also a character in the usual dramatic sense of the term." Schickel viewed Attenborough's directorial style as having "a conventional handsomeness that is more predictable than enlivening," but this "stylistic self-denial serves to keep one's attention fastened where it belongs: on a persuasive, if perhaps debatable vision of Gandhi's spirit, and on the remarkable actor who has caught its light in all its seasons."[25]: 97 Roger Ebert gave the film four stars and called it a "remarkable experience",[38] and placed it fifth on his 10 best films of 1983.[39]
InNewsweek,Jack Kroll stated that "There are very few movies that absolutely must be seen. Sir Richard Attenborough'sGandhi is one of them."[17] The movie "deals with a subject of great importance... with a mixture of high intelligence and immediate emotional impact... [and] Ben Kingsley... gives what is possibly the most astonishing biographical performance in screen history." Kroll stated that the screenplay's "least persuasive characters are Gandhi's Western allies and acolytes" such as an English cleric and an American journalist, but that "Attenborough's 'old-fashioned' style is exactly right for the no-tricks, no-phony-psychologizing quality he wants."[17] Furthermore, Attenborough
mounts a powerful challenge to his audience by presenting Gandhi as the most profound and effective of revolutionaries, creating out of a fierce personal discipline a chain reaction that led to tremendous historical consequences. At a time of deep political unrest, economic dislocation and nuclear anxiety, seeing "Gandhi" is an experience that will change many minds and hearts.[17]
An important origin of one myth about Gandhi was Richard Attenborough's 1982 film. Take the episode when the newly arrived Gandhi is ejected from a first-class railway carriage at Pietermaritzburg after a white passenger objects to sharing space with a "coolie" (an Indian indentured labourer). In fact, Gandhi's demand to be allowed to travel first-class was accepted by the railway company. Rather than marking the start of a campaign against racial oppression, as legend has it, this episode was the start of a campaign to extend racial segregation in South Africa. Gandhi was adamant that "respectable Indians" should not be obliged to use the same facilities as "raw Kaffirs". He petitioned the authorities in the port city of Durban, where he practised law, to end the indignity of making Indians use the same entrance to the post office as blacks, and counted it a victory when three doors were introduced: one for Europeans, one for Asiatics and one for Natives.[41]
Richard Grenier in his 1983 article,The Gandhi Nobody Knows, which was also the title of the book of the same name and topic, also criticized the film, arguing it misportrayed him as a "saint". He also alleged the Indian government admitted to financing about a third of the film's budget. He also criticized the film's portrayal of Muhammed Ali Jinnah, although he does not elaborate much on this criticism.[42] Grenier's book later became an inspiration forG. B. Singh's bookGandhi: Behind the Mask of Divinity. Parts of the book also discuss the film negatively.
One notable person,Mark Boyle (better known as "The Moneyless Man") has stated that watching the film was the moment that changed his life and said that after that, he took Mahatma Gandhi's message of peace and non-violence to heart and that the film inspired him to become an activist.[43][44]
Review aggregator websiteRotten Tomatoes retrospectively collected 111 reviews and judged 89% of them to be positive, with an average rating of 8.30/10. The website's critical consensus reads: "Director Richard Attenborough is typically sympathetic and sure-handed, but it's Ben Kingsley's magnetic performance that acts as the linchpin for this sprawling, lengthy biopic."[45]Metacritic gave the film a score of 79 out of 100 based on 16 critical reviews, indicating "generally favorable reviews".[46]CinemaScore reported that audiences gave the film a rare "A+" grade.[47] In 2010, theIndependent Film & Television Alliance selected the film as one of the 30 Most Significant Independent Films of the last 30 years.[48]
The film was included by the Vatican ina list of important films compiled in 1995, under the category of "Values".[49]
Outside of the United States and Canada, the film grossedUS$75 million in the rest of the world, the third highest for the year.[2]
In the United Kingdom, the film grossed£7.7 million (£22.3 million adjusted for inflation).[54][55] It is one of the top ten highest-grossing Britishindependent films of all time adjusted for inflation.[54]
In India, it was one of the highest-grossing films of all-time (and the highest for a foreign film[23]) during the time of its release by earning over₹100crore or 1billionrupees. At today's exchange rate, that amounts toUS$14.9 million, still making it one of the highest-grossing imported films in the country. It was shown tax free inBombay (known as Mumbai since 1995) andDelhi.[24]
The film grossed a total of$127.8 million worldwide.[2]Goldcrest Films invested £5,076,000 in the film and received £11,461,000 in return, earning them a profit of £6,385,000.[56]
The film was also successful on home video selling over 50,000 copies in the United States in 1983 despite a $79.95 retail price.[57]
^abcHay, Stephen (1983). "Attenborough'sGandhi".The Public Historian.5 (3). University of California Press:84–94.doi:10.2307/3377031.JSTOR3377031.
^Wilson, John Howard (2010). "The Empire Strikes Back: The Critical Reception ofGandhi andMishima".Reception: Texts, Readers, Audiences, History.2 (2). Penn State University Press:94–115.doi:10.5325/reception.2.2.0094.
^Bose, Sugata (30 June 2009).A Hundred Horizons: The Indian Ocean in the Age of Global Empire. Harvard University Press. p. 155.
^SeePascal, Valerie (1970).The disciple and his devil: Gabriel Pascal, Bernard Shaw. New York: McGraw-Hill.ISBN978-0-595-33772-9.Archived from the original on 17 December 2019. Retrieved15 October 2016. Page 219 states that "Nehru had given his consent, which he confirmed later in a letter toGabriel: 'I feel... that you are the man who can produce something worthwhile. I was greatly interested in what you told me about this subject [the Gandhi film] and your whole approach to it."
^Kroll (1982, p. 60) mentions advocacy ofAlec Guinness,John Hurt, andDustin Hoffman, and quotes Attenborough as stating that "At one point Paramount actually said they'd give me the money ifRichard Burton could play Gandhi."
^SeeJack Kroll (1982). "To be or not to be... Gandhi".Newsweek (13 December 1982): 63. – "BornKrishna Bhanji, Kingsley changed his name when he became an actor: the Kingsley comes from his paternal grandfather, who became a successful spice trader in East Africa and was known as King Clove."
^Christian Williams (6 December 1982). "Passage to 'Gandhi'; Attenborough's struggle to bring the Mahatma's life to the screen".Washington Post. pp. Show, F1.
^Coleman McCarthy (2 January 1983). "'Gandhi': Introduction to a moral teacher".Washington Post. pp. Style, K2.
^Stephen Hay (1983). "Review: Attenborough's "Gandhi"".The Public Historian.5 (3). University of California Press on behalf of the National Council on Public History:85–94.doi:10.2307/3377031.ISSN0272-3433.JSTOR3377031.
^Darius Cooper (1983). "Untitled [review of Gandhi by Richard Attenborough]".Film Quarterly.37 (2). University of California Press:46–50.doi:10.2307/3697391.ISSN0015-1386.JSTOR3697391.
^abcDeParle, Jason (September 1983). "Why Gandhi Drives The Neoconservatives Crazy".The Washington Monthly:46–50.
Attenborough, Richard.In Search of Gandhi (1982), memoir on making the film
Hay, Stephen. "Attenborough's 'Gandhi,'"The Public Historian, 5#3 (1983), pp. 84–94in JSTOR; evaluates the film's historical accuracy and finds it mixed in the first half of the film and good in the second half
