A nude man is semi-visible from the side behind glass as he takes a shower.
No sex or nudity. Some shots of ancient statues intertwined in erotic poses with bare breasts. A male character briefly talks about women’s breasts (PG-type dialog).

The plot involves an accusation of rape. The rape is obliquely referenced for the most part, and it is left ambiguous whether or not it actually took place.


Film review:Translated by www.rabudo-ru.com


From 1912 to 13, E.M. Forster traveled in India, but soon after the outbreak of World War I, he joined the Red Cross and served in Alexandria, Egypt. There he met the Greek poet C.P. Cavafy and published his collection of poems, pharos and pharillon. In 1921, Forster returned to India and worked as a private secretary for Maharaja of Dewas. This land later became the background of his book a passage to India. This is Forster’s last work – he devoted his energy to other activities for the remaining 46 years. Maurice was published after his death in 1970. After a trip to India, the creation of novels is no longer the most important element in his life. In the book he wrote: “Most of life is so boring that it is not worth mentioning. The books or conversations that depict it vividly and interestingly are exaggerated out of the desire to prove their own existence. In the cocoon of work and social obligations, the human soul is mostly asleep, recording the difference between pain and pleasure, far from living as we pretend Jump. ”

After Forster’s death, the executor of his work refused the invitation from Joseph Losey, Waris Hussein, Ismail merchant and James ivory, and finally handed over the film adaptation copyright of a trip to India to David Ryan. Forster and T.E. Lawrence, just like fate, “share” the unpleasant and boastful of the film. As we all know, David Ryan portrayed t.e.l as a man who likes killing in his Lawrence of Arabia. Similarly, the end of a trip to India has been rewritten. He was accused of producing his own vision of India, not Forster’s. It is said that the last two chapters of a trip to India were influenced by t.e.l’s seven pillars of wisdom when Forster wrote them.

T. E.L. began to communicate with Forster in early 1924. They didn’t know when and where they knew each other. The only clear thing is that when they met and started this friendship for more than ten years, they were both social celebrities. A trip to India was written in 1924. T. In the correspondence between E. L and Forster, it is inevitable to talk about this new novel from time to time. T. E.L. has a frank and humble worship for Forster. He compares himself to an ant hill on the plain. He always looks up to the continuous mountains and longs to be one of them. He compared himself to a creature as small as a flea and Forster to a lion, “If fleas can claim to have similar feelings with lions, allow me to make you think how my work experience in Arabia (and giving up) repeats your history about situations that cannot be described in an honest way. You are based on a broad ideological level, while I stay on a chaotic action level… Both are lost.” (the seven pillars of wisdom is not a completely realistic Autobiography) he regards reading Forster’s works as the “one supreme good thing” given to him by the latter, and often compares Forster’s writing with his own writing (SPW), which is naturally humble. Undoubtedly, a trip to India reminds t.e.l of his experience and feelings in Arabia and his reaction as an Englishman and a white man in an exotic land.

If excellence of materials meant anything, my book would have been as good as yours: but it stinks of me: whereas yours is universal: the bitter terrible hopeless picture a cloud might have painted, of man in India. You surpass the Englishman and surpass the Indian, and are neither: and yet there is nothing inhuman (like Moby Dick) in your picture. One feels all the while the weight of the climate, the shape of the land, the immovable immensity of the crowd behind… all that is felt, with the ordinary fine human senses.

——T. E.L. 24 July, 1924 a letter to E.M. Forster on a passage to India

I don’t want to compare the text with the film. I’ll just talk about the film itself for the time being.

Metaphor of Malaba Cave: under the background of chaotic solitude, the cramped space has become an emotional vent and breakthrough. In a trip to India, David Ryan did not give a shot of the interior of the cave (such as the beautiful murals at the beginning of the film) except for the strange and terrible echo phenomena in the cave. As a result, for a long time after Miss Goss filed a charge against Dr. Aziz, I was puzzled about what she saw in the cave that made her hallucinate. Mrs. Moore had a psychological effect of rejecting echoes, but miss Goss didn’t at first. She was calm and interested in the cave at the foot of the mountain. Her change began when she reached the top of the mountain. Exhausted, she accepted Aziz’s help. When they touched each other’s skin, Gus’s expression was strange and confused. At this time, she suddenly asked Aziz about his marriage and his wife, and asked if there was love in his marriage. These untimely inquiries revealed Grace’s psychological state: her uncertainty about love swayed from side to side until she found that she didn’t really love Lonnie – the colonial magistrate played by Nigel Havers. Then when she entered the cave and lit a match, the strangest part of the whole story happened. Aziz called to her anxiously at the mouth of the cave. Hearing the echo, gosh rushed down the mountain like crazy and fled in a hurry, regardless of being stabbed with blood by cactus. Then she accused the poor Indian doctor of bad intentions. From this point of view, no matter what is in the cave, all the disasters are caused by this visit to the cave. The trip was specially prepared for two distinguished guests, but first Mrs. Moore got into trouble and stayed at the foot of the mountain, and then miss Goss was greatly stimulated. Is Malaba’s illusion a total outbreak of acclimatization in the nature of simple cultural objects, or does it have a deeper meaning? What role did the statues of sexual intercourse that grace saw in the jungle play? And the wild monkeys chasing Gus? All this shows that India, a mysterious foreign land, is strange and incomprehensible in the eyes of foreign Britons, and the resulting sense of fear and exclusion. At the same time, it is also accompanied by the impact on the internal cultural psychology and habits? The constantly flashing look and posture of the statue made Gus have an incredible illusion in the fear of Malaba’s echo: Aziz planned to rape her. For the restrained and conservative British, such illusion is divorced from nature and shows the characteristics of alienation. It should be noted that grace was in an unstable psychological state during her journey to Malaba. Foreign discomfort intensifies and eventually stimulates this psychological effect. Gus found herself alone in India. There were not only difficulties in communicating with Indians, but also barriers to communicate with close relatives. The whole land she was in was strange and full of unacceptable psychological hints to her. When she announced the withdrawal of Aziz’s charge in court, she was abandoned by the British Overseas Chinese Association, and really transformed from psychological loneliness into real loneliness.

Therefore, gosh’s loneliness is not only caused by cultural and ethnic differences – the estrangement of exotic geography, but also an ultimate loneliness from the depths of human destiny. The foreign land only tightened the bowstring of the bow and made it break in time. This loneliness will not be cured immediately as she leaves India. Mrs. Moore’s death on the ferry back to England illustrates this.

Aziz is another thought-provoking character. Most of the time in the film, he wears a suit and speaks English. He tries to communicate with the British. He is humble and respectful in speech and behavior, or even cautious. He is afraid of being uncomfortable at all times. He always has an overly enthusiastic and even flattering smile on his face. He is often flattered by the little friendly expression of the British. This Indian doctor reflects the mentality of some people in colonial India towards the British as the suzerain. They are not only wary of hostility, but also deeply admire their elite cultural life. However, after the Malaba incident, Aziz’s hope was dashed. He took off his suit and changed into an Indian robe. He was deeply aware of the infeasibility of this unequal communication, and he could not eventually become a British Indian accepted by the British. He can only be a pure Indian, not stand between the two. As soon as he changed his docile face in the past, he roared at fitin who came to persuade him, accusing him that he was still biased towards his own people, but kindness was a part of universal human nature, and he finally gave up the right of recourse against grace.

The colonial police chief dressed as a black face has two famous experienced sayings. One is that, as far as I know, if Indians and Britons are too close, it will always lead to catastrophe. Another is that, according to experience, white people’s appearance is always attractive to people of color. He thus deduced that Aziz was bound to have evil thoughts on Gus. The Englishman who defended Aziz (?) The strange looking and mysterious defense lawyer continued with a smile, even if the woman’s appearance is even inferior to the man’s? It’s a wonderful sarcasm at the absurdity of the chief of police’s argument.

After the Malaba incident, the representatives of the suzerainty, all the British living in India, almost fell to the ground and showed hostility and judgment towards Aziz, except for two Britons, Mrs. Moore and Mr. Richard fitin, President of the government University. Unwilling to be a witness against Aziz, Mrs. Moore was sent back to England by her son, who was a magistrate. Fitin, as always, showed enthusiasm and attention to Indians. He actively helped Aziz, contacted his lawyer and made suggestions on how to defend. He was also worried that the Indian side would overreact and worsen the situation. Mrs. Moore and Mr. fitin are really kind people. They don’t stop at the difficulties of communication caused by race and color, but retain the universal human nature – goodwill and sincerity across races, and love. Communication cannot be relative, but the commonality of human nature among races is absolute.

Aziz, as a colonial Indian, showed goodwill and tolerance, Mrs. Moore and Mr. fitin, as British suzerain, showed sincerity and friendship, and miss Goss, who withdrew the lawsuit, also showed the courage to face mistakes. These are all from the beauty of human nature. At the end of the film, Aziz’s understanding of fitin and GUS shows that racial estrangement can be crossed. Communication is feasible, not only among different nationalities, but also among individuals within the population, as long as these goodness and love from nature are maintained. (very main melody)

Let’s talk about gorboli, the mysterious and wonderful Indian Professor philosopher played by Ag. There are not many scenes in the whole film, but there is deep meaning in every place. By the pool outside fitin’s house, he was vague and ambiguous about Malaba cave; At the Malaba trip railway station, he deliberately delayed the prayer time to make FeiTing late, which led Aziz to go alone with the two women, indirectly promoting the subsequent disaster; After Aziz was detained and charged, he went to FeiTing’s house to ask worried FeiTing to name his new school in Kashmir, which aroused FeiTing’s disgust and questioning; When Mrs. Moore returned to England, she took the train to the wharf and saw goboli praying on the platform. Later, Mrs. Moore had a heart attack and died suddenly on board; After Malaba’s case, he helped fitin deliver letters to Aziz and finally mediated the relationship between Aziz and fitin. This mysterious Indian professor is as mysterious as the Indian philosophy he represents, full of fatalism and religious harmony. In the whole film, when everyone, whether British or Indian, is in trouble, only he is calm and calm. He seems to have seen through that the world will be solved in a naturally doomed way.

T. E.L. said Forster surpassed the British and Indians, and did not favor either side. Does he think he can’t do it himself?

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here