User Reviews

For years I thought this knockabout service comedy was a product of John Ford, especially with Victor McLaglen as one of the leads. It certainly has the same rough house humor that Ford laces his films with.

To my surprise I learned it was George Stevens who actually directed it. Still I refuse to believe that this film wasn't offered to John Ford, but he was probably off in Monument Valley making Stagecoach.

Victor McLaglen along with Cary Grant and Douglas Fairbanks, Jr., play three sergeants in the Indian Army who have a nice buddy/buddy/buddy camaraderie going. But the old gang is breaking up because Fairbanks is engaged to marry Joan Fontaine. Not if his two pals can help it, aided and abetted by regimental beastie Gunga Din as played by Sam Jaffe.

The Rudyard Kipling poem served as the inspiration for this RKO film about barracks life in the British Raj. The comic playing of the leads is so good that it does overshadow the incredibly racist message of the film. Not that the makers were racist, but this was the assumption of the British there at the time, including our leads and Gunga Din shows this most effectively.

The British took India by increments, making deals here and there with local rulers under a weak Mogul emperor who was done away with in the middle of the 19th century. They ruled very little of India outright, that would have been impossible. Their rule depended on the native troops you see here. Note that the soldiers cannot rise above the rank of corporal and Gunga Din is considerably lower in status than that.

Note here that the rebels in fact are Hindu, not Moslem. There are as many strains of that religion as there are Christian sects and this strangling cult was quite real. Of course to those being strangled they might not have the same view of them as liberators. But until India organized its independence movement, until the Congress Party came into being, these people were the voice of a free India.

But however you slice it, strangling people isn't a nice thing to do and the British had their point here also. When I watch Gunga Din, I think of Star Trek and the reason the prime directive came into being.

Cary Grant got to play his real cockney self here instead of the urbane Cary we're used to seeing. Fairbanks and McLaglen do very well with roles completely suited to their personalities.

Best acting role in the film however is Eduard Ciannelli as the guru, the head of the strangler cult. Note the fire and passion in his performance, he blows everyone else off the screen when he's on.

Favorite scene in Gunga Din is Ciannelli exhorting his troops in their mountain temple. Note how Stevens progressively darkens the background around Ciannelli until all you see are eyes and teeth like a ghoulish Halloween mask. Haunting, frightening and very effective.

It was right after the action of this film in the late nineteenth century that more and more of the British public started to question the underlying assumptions justifying the Raj. But that's the subject of Gandhi.

Gunga Din is still a great film, entertaining and funny. It should be shown with A Passage to India and Gandhi and you can chart how the Indian independence movement evolved.

George Stevens' "Gunga Din", loosely based on the famous poem by Rudyard Kipling, tells the story of a trio of British soldiers in India along with the titular native water-bearer who yearns for the life of a soldier. When one of the three decides to leave the army and get married his buddies trick him into returning for one last mission which ends up leading to a stand-off with the murderous Thuggee cult.

The cast is expertly assembled. Cary Grant, Victor McLaglen & Douglas Fairbanks Jr. make a great team. Their characters are men of action but each of the actors also get a chance to inject some comedy into the proceedings from time to time. Sam Jaffe plays Gunga Din and he does a fine job as well.

The film benefits from the sure hand of director George Stevens and features a wealth of quality location work. The cinematography garnered the film's sole Oscar nomination but the film exhibits considerable technical appeal on the whole, including a stirring score from nine-time Oscar winner Alfred Newman.

"Gunga Din" mixes action, adventure, comedy and drama in a good old-fashioned adventure yarn the likes of which we rarely see these days. It's an obvious influence on "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom" and I also have to wonder if some of the characterization rubbed off on Lucas' "Star Wars" as well. It's a pity that the background of British imperialism spoils the film for some but I can't say that it did so for me.

The film is based on Kipling's heroic lines that inspire Hollywood's biggest movie 1939 . Out of the drumbeat rhythm of Kipling's most famous 85 lines rises a picture that will become known as the one great movie of the year . Big on the score of its armies in battle , its war elephants , its bandit hordes , its terror temples Thugs and mystic mountains of India . The picture is bigger still in its scope and sweep , is thrill and action but biggest of all in the life breathes through three (Gary Grant , Victor McLagen and Douglas Fairbanks Jr) roaring , reckless , swaggering sons of the thundering gunfighters men who stride its mighty scenes in the flesh and blood of high adventure , it's a honest film of it all that makes Gunga Din a new experience in entertainment . Joan Fontaine gambled her against the valiant sergeants three . The romance between Fontaine and Fairbanks Jr aflame through dangerous days and nights of terror in a land where anything can happen .

This George Stevens motion picture has thrills for a thousand movies plundered for one mighty show . It's a fabulous , furious and far-flung adventure with the red-blood and gunpowder heroes who rise from the storied mystery of India and storm the screen with the lusty , rousing , robust life-thunder of men who fight for the love of it and love for the fun of it . Those portions of this picture dealing with the worship of The Goddess Kali are based on historic fact . Upon release a campaign was launched by the Indian newspapers against the misrepresentation of Indian caricatures in the film, and the displaying of insensitivity towards Hindu customs , following riots in India and Malaya the film was withdrawn by the censors . The roles of Sergeants Cutter, Ballantine, and MacChesney were based on Privates from Kipling's "Soldiers Three" short stories .

The picture is well interpreted by the brave and roguish Gary Grant who rounded hundred villains Thugs and the mean Guru -Eduardo Ciannelli- , then Grant shouts : You're under arrest! . Gary Grant being amusingly accompanied by two great and sympathetic colleagues : Douglas Fairbanks Jr. and Victor McLagen . Besides , appearing the heroic water man , Sam Jaffe , whose regiment colonel -Montagu Love- says of him : You're a better man than I am , Gunga Din ! . However , Sabu was first choice to play Gunga Din ; when it became clear he was unavailable , the Jewish Russian-American Sam Jaffe was hired in his place , playing convincingly the valiant Indian Muslim .

Although I'm usually only mildly appalled reading through user comments on movies on imdb.com some of the comments made here about this classic movie exhibit a true nadir of ignorance of history in general and movies in particular. E.g.;

1 - I'm particularly struck by the comment - "This movie is shot on location in California because shooting in India would have been too expensive." Prior to the 1950's Hollywood movies were rarely (and I mean rarely) shot on the original location sites. The problem was not expense (although the moguls certainly were pinching the pennies), the problem was transportation! Transporting a movie production company halfway around the world would have been nearly impossible to accomplish (let alone how long it would have taken and then they would have been shooting under impossible conditions in India anyway) not to mention that WWII was on the verge of breaking out! The biggest movie of that year was shot on a set in Culver City, CA where they could easily manipulate the filming. Even if they had sent the production company to Atlanta they couldn't very well burn down Atlanta for authenticity' sake now could they? They would have had to have built a set(s) in Atlanta - why would they go all the way across the country to do that when they could do it Culver City?

2 - Several people lament that Gunga Din was not shot in color. A little movie history context here - first of all, the first full length feature film shot in color had only been done 4 years earlier, secondly three-strip technicolor was outrageously expensive in 1939 (only one other movie was shot that year in technicolor and it didn't start making back its costs until the late 1960's) and the few features shot prior to that year in color had failed miserably to make back their production costs. And finally, the studios had no faith in color (just as they had resisted "talkies" a decade earlier) - they were in business to make money, not experiment with an innovation that had not yet been accepted and proven to bring in a bigger audience. Also, there was a comment about the graininess of the B&W cinematography of GD - that's because 99% of the present day viewers are seeing multi-generation copies that have been played to death! Get a fresh, first generation copy to see the B&W shading in its true brightness, focus and clarity and that objection will go away. BTW - the colorized version of GD is abysmal - faded coloring effects and indistinct edges make it look like a sloppy water color painting!

3 - Labelling anything from the past as not being PC only shows the lack of historical context knowledge so rampant in the present day. First of all this movie was loosely based on a poem that was already 47 years old when this movie was released. If you change the politics to match the present day conception of "correctness" then you really don't have the original concept do you? Not to mention that America was a far different place racially (and socially) in 1939. There are movies being released in 2003 that will catch hell 50 years from now for their "politics" - just chalk it up to the ignorance of future generations to not recognize what the history of the times were. I do like the analysis by one writer though that far from being a reactionary screed the movie went further than the poem in emphasizing that Gunga Din was far better off in his position than he would have been otherwise. After all, he was an "untouchable", a social postion that was abused, exploited and terrorized by their fellow Indians for thousands of years. Whatever one might think of his treatment by the British it was a high step up from what he would have endured out in his own society! Which brings me to.........

4 - ..........the ridiculously misguided (and just plain wrong) observations about the Thuggees of India being "freedom fighters", this couldn't be more wrong. Several of the commentators really need to read up on Indian history - the Thuggees had been ritualistic murderers and thieves for thousands of years in India before the British ever arrived! If they had any support from various rulers of parts of India it was because those rulers either feared for their own positions or they could get the Thuggees to do their dirty work for them - for a high price of course. The Thuggees reputation for brutality, unabated crimes of the worst kind and general, overall lack of human attributes make most other singlemindedly evil groups throughout history (even in the present day) look like amateurs! The reason they fought the British so vociferously was that the British recognized this and fought to suppress them - I seriously doubt that many Indians lamented that suppression. And to the person who equated the Thuggees with French Resistance fighters killing "collaborators" - where did you get such a preposterous idea? Do you know anything at all about the history of the Indian sub-continent?

Let me also point out here that it is the British who are the infidels not the "natives", just another example of how mixed up one can be about who is who and understanding what history and meaning really are.

I especially love the reviewers who spend their time comparing this to another movie that they like better in order to dis this one - so they review the other movie instead. Why bother, movies stand on their own, you either like them or you don't, go watch the other one you like instead.

5 - Now, everyone is entitled to their opinion, which I certainly support, as to whether this is a "good" or a "bad" movie (opinions are like.......well, you know) but fergawdsakes base that opinion on an informed knowledge of the times, the historical context of the work and the realization that movies are just movies - they aren't "real" and they certainly make up whatever "truth" and "facts" they see fit!

My opinion? This is one of the great "entertainment" movies ever made - the reason to go to the movies I thought? It has everything - a good script, a good story, epic sweep, fantastic acting, inter-character chemistry, charisma, pacing and coherency. How many movies can you say that about? And kudos to those who see this movie for what it is, not what they want it to be!

The movie "Gunga Din" (1939), an adaptation of Rudyard Kipling's poem, is a corny but fun-filled buddy film. Cary Grant, Victor McLaglen and Douglas Fairbanks, Jr. were cast perfectly as three British soldier buddies fighting in colonial India. Cary Grant was funny and lovable as a Cockney sergeant. Victor McLaglen portrayed his two-fisted soldier role perfectly. (McLaglen was an ex-pugilist and ex-British colonial soldier in real life.) Douglas Fairbanks, Jr. almost outdid his legendary, swash-buckling father in this film. Although he was too old for the role, Sam Jaffe in his heavy make-up was excellent as the native water-boy, Gunga Din. Even Joan Fontaine, in her thankless role as a meddling fiancee, shined. (It was strange that Joan Fontaine, who in real life is related to the British nobility, sounded rather American.) Some of the conversations were very amusing. Recall Grant's remark about the jail being made of pudding when Gunga Din brought him a fork as a breakout tool. This action film, with its competent direction by George Stevens and effective film score by Alfred Newman, was so fun-filled that negative things like soldiering for British imperialists and killing human beings looked deceivingly fun and exciting.

Also, making the thugs into the film's villains is an excellent and cunning choice. Many Indians who fought against the British were legitimate freedom fighters and deserve lots of our sympathy. However, the thugs deserve no sympathy whatsoever. They were incredibly vile men who make the crimes of crazed serial killers like Ted Bundy and John Wayne Gacy look like child's play. Thugs were members of a demented cult of Hindu and some Muslim thieves who tried to justify their numerous robbery murders by claiming that their criminal acts were justified by the Hindu goddess Kali. In the 19th century, tens of thousands of innocent travelers in modern day India, Pakistan and Nepal were strangled and robbed by groups of thugs every year. When asked if they felt any guilt about killing innocent men, many thugs boldly stated that they felt nothing but pleasure. One thug even bragged about killing more than one thousand men during his murderous career. Some IMDb commentators surprisingly compared the thugs to Mohandas Gandhi, an advocate of non-violence, and French freedom fighters of W.W. II. These comparisons are outrageous and nonsensical to say the least. Just because the thugs wanted the British to get out of India does not make them into freedom fighters. If the thugs did indeed advocate the expulsion of British from India, it was for their own vile, self-centered interest. The thugs hated the British because it was the British who persistently suppressed the thugs from 1830's to 1850's. Before the British suppression, thugs were allowed to murder and rob undisturbed possibly for two thousand years. (Herodotus mentions a thug-like cult in his book.) Although some Muslim rulers tried to suppress the thugs, very few other Indian rulers did anything about the thugs. In fact, some Indian rulers were active supporters of the thugee cult. Moreover, the statement that the thugs murdered as a way to fight the British colonialism makes no sense whatsoever. Thugs had been robbing and killing thousands of victims long before British came to India. Moreover, if thugs were indeed anti-British freedom fighters, why were so few victims of the thugee cult British soldiers? Almost all thug victims were native Indian travelers. In fact, thug murders were rarely politcally motivated. They murdered for financial gain and for the sake of satisfying the vile pleasure of murdering another human being. Even if, arguendo, we labeled the thugs as freedom fighters, their methods are totally demented. Does robbing and murdering tens of thousands of people per year constitute acceptable acts of freedom fighters? French partisans did indeed kill many collaborators, but their killings were much fewer as compared to the thugs' carnage. The only other people, who were equally crazed and murderous, were the Mayan and Aztec priests. Just like thugs, they murdered thousands of innocent victims without any scruples whatsoever. Even if I had quite a corny fun with this film, I do not agree with its approval of British imperialism. I was also disappointed with Gunga Din's misguided loyalty to British imperialism. The film's insidious pro-British political message was highly relevant when it was made because Britain was indeed controlling many oversea colonies-including India--in 1939. Until recently many Hollywood movies wholeheartedly supported British imperialism. Many of them overlook the historical fact that British government and its officers were brutal and immoral exploiters of its colonies. Many dwellers of British colonies greatly suffered from this exploitation. Maybe the American movie audience forgot about it, but there is a former British colony which was so infuriated by the conducts of British government and bureaucrats that it revolted against the British. This former colony fought the British Army and Navy and killed thousands of British soldiers--just like those Asian and African anti-British rebels who are portrayed as villains in numerous Hollywood movies. The colony eventually won its independence from Britain. Its name is the United States of America.

Anyone with a young boy in the house who won't watch black & white movies should put this on their television set. When the child walks by, wondering what all the on screen shouting and shooting's about, tell him this is a picture for adults and that he isn't big enough to watch it yet. That'll hold him there for a few minutes; director George Stevens and his team will keep him to the end.

I think my father did that to me, anyway, and I'm the better man for it. This classic adventure yarn, set in India during the British occupation, features a trio of Army sergeants who find their tight union facing dissolution as one prepares to marry his sweetheart. Help arrives in the form of a vicious Thuggie revolt that the soldiers find themselves united against.

"Gunga Din" was one of the great movies to come out of Hollywood's finest year, 1939. Even more than most great movies from that Golden year, it is entertaining in a very immediate and accessible way. The theme music is instant hummable nirvana. While shot in California, the camera work (the only thing in "Gunga Din" that got so much as an Oscar nomination) has a windblown grandeur that feels very much like the Raj of a hundred years before. The battle scenes are shot in a very realistic manner, not too violent but very messy as people fall and shoot and run in all corners of each frame in a way that feels real, not staged like some Cecil B. DeMille Biblical slaughter fest.

The script doesn't just set up action scenes, it also develops the relationship of the three sergeants with great dollops of humor. The main focus is on Sgt. Cutter, chasing after tall tales of golden treasures. It's a rare actioner for Cary Grant, and his lightness is just right for a film that never takes itself seriously even as it develops taut suspense.

Anchoring the trio is Sgt. MacChesney (Victor McLaglen), who dotes over his elephant Annie and tries to protect Cutter from his own hare-brained schemes. He's just as funny in his own way, leaving Sgt. Ballantine (Douglas Fairbanks Jr., displaying some nice Errol Flynnish dash) as the one with the love interest and grounding enough to know he needs to chuck his boyish pals and grow up.

If "Gunga Din" was a Lifetime movie, it would be about Joan Fontaine's efforts to save her man from his two loser friends and their skull crushing hijinks. But since it's a guys' film, the accent here is on how the threesome must stay together and save Ballantine from a fate worse than death, not only marriage, but as Cutter indignantly exclaims several times, the tea business, too.

The political correctness police are hard on this film, not so much for the gender issue but the idea of British soldiers saving poor Indians from the vicious Thuggies. It reeks of colonial apologia. Thankfully, this film was made back when, and the producers thus felt no need to spell out the obvious liberalism at the heart of the film, that these three sergeants, so full of derring-do and false racial pride, have to be saved along with the rest of their army by a humble bhisti that only one of the three had any time for when he sought their approval. After all, for all their swashbuckling glory, the film's true sacrifice involves the title character, played so heart-wrenchingly by Sam Jaffe.

Back when this film was made, movie mogul Jack Warner had a saying: You want to send a message, use Western Union. Still, it seems like the messages were flying fast and furious in "Gunga Din." I watch the film now and wonder if audiences back then were meant to wonder what Gunga Din was really up to when he led Cutter to the golden temple. Was he really plotting revenge against his British overlords? Would he have been justified in doing so, especially given MacChesney's cold treatment of him? When Col. Weed delivers that eulogy, the poem by Rudyard Kipling on which the film is loosely based, was it with a nod in the direction of imperialism's folly, of lording it over someone who proved "a better man than I am" in the end? What did they make of the Guru's great speech, delivered in perfect clipped English: "You have sworn an oath as soldiers to maybe die for a faith, which is your country, England. Well, I can die for my country and my faith as readily as you...India, farewell."

Of course, the same character also instructs his brutal followers: "Kill for the love of killing! Kill for the love of Kali! Kill! Kill! Kill!" Which means we are allowed to hate him and root for the British, and save the questions about what it all means for later.

What "Gunga Din" means to me, most of all, is the quickest, surest 90-minute thrill ride on video. Cutter never found his golden temple, but there's one for all of us watching "Gunga Din."

Derived from the Rudyard Kipling poem, this adventurous relic stars Cary Grant, Victor McLaglen and Douglas Fairbanks Jr. as Cutter, MacChesney and Ballantine, in that order. Sam Jaffe's Gunga tags along. Ballantine is about to retire from the military to be with his wife Emmy while his mates want him to take another tour. The film begins not with this trio but with the surprise attack of a British convoy who face an inconspicuous group of Indian trekkers who slay them in their sleep. When the company never returns, the military starts to fret, validated when communicating with one of their headquarters and communication is abruptly severed.

Disentangled from a huge bar brawl over a phony treasure map, the three soldiers are penalized by leading a party to the small village where the British telegraph operator and army base was. There, their group is gradually dispatched by the hostile natives who led the initial attack only to be shown what for by the practiced scuffling of the trio. They unearth the existence of a treacherous insurgence that wants nothing short of the complete obliteration of the British army. Their plans are further developed when Cutter goes off with Din seeking a temple of gold where they expect to find the incentive to persuade Ballantine to rejoin. Eduardo Ciannelli is excessively tanned and forcefully overzealous as the Guru in command of the mutiny. He speaks practically superior English to his peers. Fontaine is hardly in the picture, so measuring her squandered performance against the male players feels pointless.

Making use of the impact of popular movies of the era, the music score is mindlessly audacious, just like the British trio at the hub of the picture. And keeping consistent with the three main characters, when the music needs to be more striking or restrained, it becomes even more customary and pompous. Alfred Newman's best score has one or two moments that work adequately, though like most Golden Age films, there are a few sequences of silence that are more effective than over half of the scored ones. The film seems very much like a pathwork of conventional patterns that never convey themselves inventively. George Stevens was clearly attempting to create something with the heart of a high seas adventure and less a war drama. He strives to generate a degree of thrill that's only effective in a few scenes, such as the climactic moments and wrap-up of the movie, but not in others, like the rooftop fight.

One nevertheless acclimatizes to the movie's qualitative footing in its own time, and we can give in in view of that. Grant is delightful and lively without the urge to bogart the spotlight, which he splits with his co-stars. McLaglen is a presence and Fairbanks Jr. hangs generally in the wings. The three work extremely well together, which provides a degree of brotherhood vital to their character arcs. Much like other films of the 1930s, Jaffe's performance is ornamented with twitches and pigeonholes that carry the character without supplying much dimension, but he introduces enthusiasm into the part that allows us to grow an feeling connection to his wishes to become a real warrior.

A trio of buddies, sergeants all in the British Army, carouse & brawl their way across Imperial India. Intensely loyal to each other, they meet their greatest & most deadly challenge when they encounter the resurgence of a hideous cult & its demented, implacable guru. Now they must rely on the lowliest servant of the regiment, the water carrier GUNGA DIN, to save scores of the Queen's soldiers from certain massacre.

Based more on The Three Musketeers than Kipling's classic poem, this is a wonderful adventure epic - a worthy entry in Hollywood's Golden Year of 1939. Filled with suspense & humor, while keeping the romantic interludes to the barest minimum, it grips the interest of the viewer and holds it right up to the (sentimental) conclusion.

It is practically fruitless to discuss the performance nuances of the three stars, Cary Grant, Victor McLaglen & Douglas Fairbanks Jr., as they are really all thirds of a single organism - inseparable and, to all intents & purposes, indistinguishable. However, this diminishes nothing of the great fun in simply watching them have a glorious time.

(It's interesting to note, parenthetically, that McLaglen boasted of a distinguished World War One military career; Fairbanks would have a sterling record in World War Two - mostly in clandestine affairs & earning himself no fewer than 4 honorary knighthoods after the conflict; while Grant reportedly worked undercover for British Intelligence, keeping an eye on Hollywood Nazi sympathizers.)

The real acting laurels here should go to Sam Jaffe, heartbreaking in the title role. He infuses the humble man with radiant dignity & enormous courage, making the last line of Kipling's poem ring true. He is unforgettable.

Montague Love is properly stalwart as the regimental major, whilst Eduardo Ciannelli is Evil Incarnate as the Thuggee guru. The rest of the cast, Joan Fontaine, Robert Coote, Lumsden Hare, are effective but have little to do. Movie mavens will recognize Cecil Kellaway in the tiny role of Miss Fontaine's father.

The film picks its villains well. The demonic Thuggee cult, worshipers of the hideous, blood-soaked Kali, Hindu goddess of destruction, was the bane of Indian life for 6 centuries, ritualistically strangling up to 30,000 victims a year. In 1840 the British military, in cooperation with a number of princely states, succeeded in ultimately suppressing the religion. Henceforth it would remain the stuff of novels & nightmares.

As a child in the sixties, I remember being enthralled by adventures of the 1930's--the plots seemed to move at a fevered pace, and the action riveted me to the TV screen. But when I return to such films now, I must remind myself that times have changed: the fevered pace of the 30's plods like a moribund snail in the 90's, where the quick-cut editing of MTV is now the standard for all "action" films.

If, however, you can abandon all your adventurous expectations, you can enjoy the daring deeds of these 30's heroes. "Gunga Din" is not a bad place to start, for it is certainly one of the best (and best known) in the genre.

"Gunga Din," based distantly on Kipling's poem, takes place in British colonial India, a standard setting for a number of films in the 30's adventure genre. Although less crisp in writing and acting then "Lives of a Bengal Lancer (1935)," the film faithfully recreates the ambiance of a British Indian regiment. Even the Hindi phrases heard in the film are not half bad, and the final battle scenes were clearly executed under the careful eyes of British military advisors--look out for the rousing shot of a Sikh officer brandishing his sabre as he leads his disciplined lancers in their thunderous, galloping charge against the thugee hordes.

The film's sincere attempt at realism is one of the things that make it a curious artifact, for it embodies that (somewhat crude) realism in the two-dimensional attitudes of wholly unreal characters. Add to this another curio: the film combines romantic attitudes about the Raj with the ambiguous need to elevate a "simple" Indian to the level of inspirational hero. Gunga Din, the lowly bisti (water-bearer), must remain the childish idiot that authorizes British rule (they're too childish to take care of themselves, you see); but at the same time, the plot demands that he display the courage and ingenuity to warrant our admiration. In this sense, the film captures Kipling's own ambivalent attitudes about India. And as with Kipling's poem, the movie might prompt you to ask whether our hero, Gunga Din, could ever be anything more than a hell-bound heathen in the eyes of his British companions. But what, then, does it mean to say, "You're a better man than I am, Gunga Din"?

A rousing adventure form director George Stevens (before he would turn to more serious fare such as 1948's I REMEMBER MAMA and 1956's GIANT) that set the standard for all future action yarns to follow. Loosely based on Rudyard Kipling's poem of the same, GUNGA DIN follows the journey of three military officers in 19th century India. The noble trio must brave a series of battles and other various dangers including a thuggee cult and a temple full of gold. Their screen adventures remain thrilling even after more than six decades, and have lent inspiration to nearly everything from the cliffhanger-inspired space opera STAR WARS (1977) to the similarly-plotted RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARC (1981).

The biggest reason for the picture's success, however, is the pitch-perfect performances by the film's trio of extremely charismatic actors. Victor McLaglen has rarely been better as the strapping tough guy, Cary Grant is the ultimate comic foil, and Douglas Fairbanks, Jr is as suave a swashbuckling hero as imaginable - perhaps even more so than rival Errol Flynn. The chemistry between the three actors simply could not be improved upon, and such warm and believable comradely is precisely what's missing from most modern action pictures - and they receive tremendous support from the marvelous Sam Jaffe, who overcomes the obvious physical miscasting and makes the title character a beacon of humane sweetness and quiet strength. A huge hit in its day (the film was reportedly the second-biggest money maker of 1939 behind the outrageously successful GONE WITH THE WIND), and it remains arguably the best film of its kind.

Three British soldiers tackle a gang of thugs in colonial India. "The Front Page" team of Hecht and MacArthur came up with the story, inspired by a Kipling poem. Perhaps further inspiration would have helped because the story is rambling and the humor is barely above the level of The Three Stooges. The key Indian roles are played by white actors in black face. In the title role, Jaffe assays an Indian accent and manages to be fairly convincing. As the leader of the thugs, Ciannelli does not bother to even attempt an Indian accent. For some reason, the action scenes unfold in fast motion, giving the film a primitive look. Grant, McLaglen, and Fairbanks overplay their roles.

Obviously a film that has had great influence not only on the buddy genre but action genre as well. George Lucas had to be a fan of this flick as so much of his Star Wars series seems to a homage to Gunga Din. The characters that Grant, McLaglen, and Fairbanks play are just precursors of Han Solo, Luke Skywalker, and Chewbacca. Even Sam Jaffe's Gunga Din morphed into C-3PO and R2-D2 and like him or not: Jar Jar Binks.

Today this film is viewed as non PC but there is a speech by Eduardo Ciannelli as Guru the leader of the Indian opposition to the British raj that could can be echoed in the sentiments of many today.

To a young boy this was a great film. Three strong male leads and only a hint of romance. There was a time when young boys deemed kissing the girl in Saturday matinee film was just mush. Not like today when the more skin is greeted with delight. Too late to lament lost innocence.

Hopefully this film will not be forgotten and a few who are channel surfing will stop at TCM and catch a film with action, adventure, and a cast of thousands instead of CGI actors.

The movie is totally over rated. The plot is not authentic. White actors with faces grease painted black playing Indian characters, poorly Pretty lame. The Thugs mostly operated in central India not in Khyber Pass. They were small roving bands of criminals not a military force with canons. Scenes of Kali worship in a temple are utterly ridiculous. Historically the movie is totally inaccurate. British Indian army did not fight any full scale wars with the Thugs. They were picked up one by one and hanged.

I can go on.

There are much nicer 1939 movies that you could watch.

Thanks.

While it is fashionable in too many circles to condemn anything which portrays European colonialism generally, and the British Empire specifically, in a favorable light, a little historical knowledge will show that Kipling's story, as well as this superb film, are hardly the reactionary racist screed some would like to demote them to. Gunga Din is a regimental bhisti - a water carrier - and in 19th century India that meant that he had a job which guaranteed a place to sleep and food in a very brutal society. Considering that he was also an "untouchable" - a member of India's lowest caste - this was something. Colonel Weed is correct in saying "he had no official status as a soldier" - bhistis were non-military auxiliaries. As for his loyalty to the British, there were many Indians who clearly preferred British rule to that of their fellows - and not just the maharajas and princes.

If you read the story - and watch the movie with an objective eye - at the end, all the major characters have nothing but respect for Gunga Din. Sergeant MacChesney (Victor McLaglen) is clearly shamed by the fact that Din, in the end, was not only the better soldier but the better man - he sacrificed himself to prevent the ambush and massacre of the British column. The most telling example that the movie doesn't "put down" Gunga Din is at the end when Colonel Weed posthumously appoints the former regimental bhisti as a Corporal in the regiment. Corporal was a BRITISH rank - the equivalent Indian rank was Havildar. So, he was appointed as a BRITISH non-commissioned officer who could command British troops - hardly an example of political incorrectness.

Yes, this is "men-as-buddies" flick. However, this movie has a special appeal to anyone who has actually served in the military - those are the types of friendships you make (you'll share your last drop of water with your mess mate) and keep for the rest of your days. It acknowledges that. So enjoy it - it is a rousing tale - and keep the PC-nonsense out of it. The bad guys lose in the end while the best man is recognized for his virtues - you don't even get that it in real life.

In the frontiers of colonial India, British troops are attacked and a British outpost at Tantrapur is lost. British troops led by sergeants MacChesney (Victor McLaglen), Cutter (Cary Grant), and Ballantine (Douglas Fairbanks, Jr.) are sent to investigate. They encounter an abandoned town except some of the rebels stay to ambush the troops. Gunga Din (Sam Jaffe) is the regimental water boy who wants to be a real soldier. Soon the men and their local troops are surrounded.

It's an old fashion war movie akin to cowboys and indians movie. One guy can take out six with only fisticuffs. It's good ole blow-em-up action adventure. It's the kind of movie where Cary Grant can have a bit of fun in between some action scenes. It's rip roaring fun but a bit dated.

What a hit this was when first released, and I must say it has not stood the test of time in a lot of ways! Believability is out the window in today's climate but in the 40's we all took the action in our stride in just enjoying what was action from Go to Whoa! The cast was ideal with Cary Grant and Victor McLaglen stand-outs among the leads, but the acting honors had to go to Sam Jaffe as Gunga Din, and Edward Cianelli (Kill for the love of Kali!) as the leader of the "thugs". The love interest provided by Douglas Fairbanks and Joan Fontaine was very secondary to the rest of the plot, but did provide interest. If you view it today, just remember when it was made and how there were no such gimmicks as computer-generated technology and you will find it a lot of fun.

This movie has been a favorite of mine since I first watched it on late night TV in the mid 60's. It has a little something for everyone. Romance, action, comedy and just plain fun. Although the dialog could have been a great deal better the actors do a fantastic job of making it work. I would love to see an honest remake of this film. With today's technology and a great writer, it would be a hit.

There are too many favorite scenes for me to single out just one for comment but I have decided that the bugle scene that begins the climatic battle towards the end would have to be Number One. I have to rewind the DVR several times just to relieve the goosebumps I get every time I see it. I know that not all will agree with and that is fine, but I have to say that is is perhaps one of my favorite films of all time.

Classic adventure yarn set in old India when this country was still part of the British kingdom. Three soldiers (Grant, McLagen and Fairbanks) fight against a group of fanatics that worshipped Kali, the godess of death and by their side is an Indian young servant named Gunga Din (Jaffe) that will be the great heroe of the story when the right time comes. Energetic and vibrant but a bit outdated for the present times with far fetched dialogues and situations all around. Anyway,you can find some memorable scenes, like, for instance, the elephant over the bridge and Gunga Din, wounded, playing the trumpet to warn the English army. Another curious point is the comic performance developed by Grant, a change of mood for this otherwise serious and discreet actor. I give this a 06 (six.

Gunga Din is produced and directed by George Stevens and co-adapted to screenplay by Ben Hecht, Charles MacArthur, Joel Sayre and Fred Guiol. It's loosely inspired by the Rudyard Kipling poem of the same name. It stars Cary Grant, Victor McLaglen, Douglas Fairbanks Junior, Eduardo Ciannelli, Sam Jaffe and Joan Fontaine. Music is by Alfred Newman and cinematography by Joseph H. August.

1939 was a golden year for cinema, a raft of classic movies were produced, many of which still hold up today. Unfairly suffering under scrutiny for its colonialist attitudes and embracement of war is Gunga Din, RKO Pictures' magnificent action adventure. Political Correctness in this day and age has led some to be sniffy towards Stevens' movie, it seems that to understand the period from when the film was made is a stretch too far. Balderdash say I. Really in this instance no charges should stand or be considered for this is a movie that should be heralded and treasured for the template it is. This was after all an anti-dote to the Great Depression that was drawing to a close, and with WWII kicking off, the likes of Gunga Din were medicine for the wounded millions.

For the love of Kali: Kill, Kill, Kill.

Undeniably it's preposterous and over the top, that's kind of the point really. It's a live action cartoon for the adults to enjoy whilst the kiddies get swept up in the gusto of it all. You don't have to condone anything by feeling uplifted as Gunga Din plays on themes such as loyalty, bravado and friendship, to go in deep with a good ole battle of good against evil, where fists fly and gunshots fill the air. Where hundreds of horses hooves pace in time with your heart. It's a spiffying adventure yarn deftly constructed by Stevens and his team. There's much light hearted interplay between our three stoic heroes, and the fist fight scenes have a charming silent movie feel to them, further enhancing the joviality that pulses throughout. And yes, there is sentiment, even a bit of cornball thrown in for good measure, but it lands in the cinema lover's heart and helps it beat happily.

You Lazarushian-leather Gunga Din!

Cast are having a great time, especially Grant who revels in playing knuckles and delivering songs about British Roast Beef! Newman's score is a neat blend of heroic bluster and exotic reflections, and the California locations, notably Alabama Pine, are expertly used by Stevens and August, the latter of which was nominated for an Academy Award for his efforts. Production design is eye catching, with the Indian temples standing out, while the final battle showcases Stevens' strengths in composition and action construction. Its influence should not be understated either, you can trace a line from this to Indiana Jones, and even beyond to the big box office coffer fillers like National Treasure and The Mummy et al. Gunga Din, an ode to good time cinema from a golden age, bravo! 9/10

Gunga Din (1939)

A movie with a roaring reputation, but I had trouble getting past its corny humor, and even past its fake British superiority in the wilds of Pakistan.

It does have Cary Grant in it just when his career is reaching true stardom. And it has a young Joan Fontaine, who will blossom the next year in Hitchcock's "Rebecca." (The two will star two years later in the Hitchcock film, "Suspicion," as well.) The pair, however, barely cross paths in the filming.

The big theme here is how the British are cleverly controlling a tribal area of Northwest India (now Pakistan) where the natives are obviously naive and superstitious and the Brits are so good at being good they can joke and be idiots along the way. It's all in fun on some level, a lighthearted adaptation of the epic poem by British poet Rudyard Kipling.

There were actually attempts at a better film originally—William Faulkner began on the script before it ended up in Hecht's able hands, and Howard Hawks was lined up to direct. There are echoes here (good ones) of true screwball comedies, and the transplanted zany humor, mixed with overlong battle scenes and genuine imperialist camp, is weird.

But all of this is if you take it seriously one bit. As a vehicle for some gags and some playful rivalry between a bunch of likable guys on the eve of World War II it fares pretty well. For me the humor ebbed and flowed (it might depend on your age and your background), but the overall arc of events was sometimes grand and fictionally dreamlike. I imagine what early explorers felt coming on beautiful remote lands and the people living there, but having no intention of understanding them, just seeing them (and employing them, literally).

By the end, it doesn't add up. Even the lionizing of the title character, a local who sides with the British in their battles, is a bit hard to swallow. Certainly the evil guru and his murderous minions is offputting with his face painted to look dark. And the empathies for the three main characters are thrown in the air by their antics, their obviously silly military exploits, and by a kind of loyalty to their stuffy superiors that flies in the face of good logic, even in the sanitized reality of this film.

So, Cary and Joan are in my personal pantheon, and I love this period of movies. Even so I couldn't enjoy this movie very well. You might know your tastes and can dive in accordingly.

This movie is one of my all time favorites. Cary Grant, Victor McLaglen, and Douglas Fairbanks Jr...what a cast. Not to mention Sam Jaffe as Gunga Din. Drama, action, adventure and comedy all rolled up into one. The final battle scene still to this day gives me chills and the ending always leaves me in tears. If you haven't seen it, I'd strongly recommend it.

I've read somewhere that this was the second most successful film at the American box office in the acknowledged watershed year of 1939 and can see why that would be so. It's a good old-fashioned crowd-pleasing blockbuster mixing adventure with humour and a starry cast with exotic locations. One can certainly see its glaring faults today but it was made in a completely different era from now and I guess allowances have to be made.

I deliberately read beforehand Kipling's poem on which the movie was based and certainly the film stays true to its ethos. Yes, both Sam Jaffe as Gunga Din and Eduardo Canelli as the Kali guru are obviously in objectionable blackface but there are compensations elsewhere in the panoramic camerawork, populous crowd-scenes and action sequences.

The adaptation here uses the tried and trusted "Take three guys..." template of "The Three Musketeers" "Beau Geste" or, most closely "The Lives Of A Bengal Lancer" by taking three inseparable army buddies and transplanting them to the Indian Raj at the time of the Thuggee rebellion. Cary Grant is the goofy, harum-scarum Sgt Cutter, Douglas Fairbanks Jr the milder, more strait-laced Sgt Ballantine, just about to be manoeuvred into marriage by Joan Fontaine and Victor McLaglen is the tough, gruff Sgt MacChesney.

I personally found the horseplay between them to be a bit forced at times. Cary gets to talk in his native Cockney and even answer to his Christian name by birth at one point but I did think he overdid the mugging and clowning which could have been reined in somewhat. McLaglen does what he always does, in his usual big bluff manner but again I think he's allowed to overdo it. That just leaves ordinary average Fairbanks Jr, usually the butt of the other two's merry japes, but who for me fails to really project anything approaching personality. I did however appreciate director Stevens depicting the real-life character of Kipling to help top and tail the movie but overall, I appreciated this movie a bit less than I thought I would.

If you enjoy it more than me, you're a better man (or woman) than I am.

I know this is supposed to be a "Great Movie". And it's not awful. But the only reason I can see that people think it's "great" is because it's old and it has some "stars" in it. Most of the acting is abysmal caricature. The brits practically strut around saying "Pip pip pip, cheerio, spot of tea, say what?" throughout. Watching the three main characters, the Sergeants, all I could think of was that whoever wrote this must also be moonlighting writing Three Stooges scripts. It *is* an interesting movie in a historical context, both as an expression of movie making of that day and of the underlying story of the Thuggs. But being interesting isn't the same as being "good". Plan Nine from Outer Space is also interesting.... So if you haven't seen it, it's worth watching, but it's no great movie. I would never watch it a second time in a decade.