disgusting, overrated, pointless

This is a tender, generous movie that likes its characters and presents them as real people, full of flaws and strengths.

I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

It is encouraging that the film ends so strongly.Otherwise, it wouldn't have been a particularly memorable film

BRILLIANT FILM FILMED IN MY HOMETOWN OF SALFORD,GREATER MANCHESTER, FUNNY ,MOVING FILM

When the first Muslims from the colonies arrived in Britain in the 1950's, nobody really paid them much attention for the simple reason nobody really thought there needed be any. Islam was practically Christianity anyway, wasn't it? It was patriarchal; inherently conservative (if not more conservative); took a firm position on things such as the death penalty and had a rigorous idea of what constituted good sexual conduct. Many Muslims, suddenly finding themselves in a free and open democratic rather than a despotic Islamic one, left Islam altogether and became Christians anyway.By the 1970's, things had become more complicated - a series of radical reforms by Labour governments in the 1960's had changed Britain from being a country built on restraint, and into something else. Suddenly, things are more liberal - attitudes to a range of things from God to sex to the Empire are reset, and default positions take a staggering shift. To varying extents, Muslim people become outcasts - the fundamentals of their religion clash with the pervasive mood of the times, although the alternatives offering themselves to said mood do not seem to be on the side of ethnic minorities in the first place..."East is East" is a film from the mind of Ayub Khan-Din - somebody who seems to have been on the front-line of a lot of what transpired during this period - and covers both a family's inner-turmoils on top of a society's desperate staggering around for identity and meaning, as a series of violent dynamics are forced to fuse with one another. It is often a very funny film, but one finds difficulty in recommending it as a comedy; its grounded, even touching, coming-of-age narrative is too often undermined by a very distinctive post-1980's canon of crude American films for it to be a total success.In a small house in early 1970's northern England, an Islamic inter-racial marriage between Ella (Linda Bassett) and George (Om Puri) has produced a large family of boys and girls who, at this period in time, are more interested in chasing after girls; sneaking out to nightclubs; hiding from the bus that takes them to Koran school and refuting the veil than anything intrinsically "Islamic". Having triumphed in the 1970 election, Edward Heath occupies 10 Downing Street, but the 'conservative' triumph is a false-dawn - his party triumphs DESPITE Enoch Powell's "Rivers of Blood" speech of two years prior, not BECAUSE of it. The worries expressed by a certain Wolverhampton constituent of Powell's, which induced the speech, are not acted upon.The simmering non-white backlash the family seemingly live in constant fear of does not erupt in any especially manic, dangerous way - the kids in the family are far more frightened of their own father and what he might do to take their lifestyles away from them than anything else. Indeed, it is George himself who is guilty of one of the more nationalistic (or even bigoted) moments in the film when he proclaims his hatred of Indians following the patrician of Bangladesh thousands of miles away. In one of the more bizarre scenes perfectly capturing the ridiculousness of the situation England faced at the time, as numerous political and religious elements clash with one another, Enoch Powell's presence on a television screen speaking about immigration lends George's children hope that, with Powell's party in power, George himself may even be repatriated. Would the children have gone so far as to vote for John Tyndall's National Front party (who argued for the total repatriation of ALL non-whites) at such times of desperation had they been given the chance?. What holds "East is East" back from being a roaring success is, I suppose, the fact it thinks it ought to be more mainstream & accessible than it needs to be. The film feels too far removed from a really grounded, even disturbing, sense of realism you might find in a "La Haine" or anything coming out of post-Second World War Italy. The inflections of a classic, British kitchen-sink drama are certainly there, but they are undermined too often by a joke about circumcision or a gag on certain bodily functions which take you right out of the picture. It is all too often that Damien O'Donnell's film plays like a cross between "Saturday Night, Sunday Morning" and "American Pie", but with Asians. This may have been different if Khan-Din had decided to take the directorial reigns himself.In its rummaging around for some sort of direction, "East is East" settles on an arranged marriage to propel it through to its final act - something which results from its unfortunate inability to decide whether it is going down the road of accessible generic causality or something grittier. It had already been established as to how an estranged son of the family, who must be awkwardly telephoned from the veiled sanctuary of a phone booth away from the house by the rest of the family, conflicted with George over a preordained marriage agreement, so when the time comes for our rebellious leads to go through the process, we expect sparks to fly.And sparks do fly, in what is an often engrossing film about a strange time in contemporary British history, where nobody really knew all of the time who they were; where they belonged; where they were going; with whom they belonged and whose side they should back. There is more to recommend in "East is East" than dismiss, but one cannot do so without some reservations.

I cannot help but notice the subliminal messages of hatred and narrow mindedness which is incorporated through out the movie. Start with the glaring mistake of history shown in the early part of the movie when the opening says "george khan immigrated from Pakistan to england in 1937". There was no Pakistan in 1937. It was part of India. But if the film maker has said that George Khan immigrated from India in 1937 then people would have associated his character with indians and thats not the goal of this movie The goal of this movie is to ridicule Pakistan. Then the other scenes especially of bringing 1972 war totally out of context of the movie and putting sentences like "these bastard indians" truly shows what this movie is all about. It is not a comedy movie or drama. It is a pathetic futile attempt by tiny narrow minded Indians hiding behind the lens of the screen and just trying to ridicule their neighbor. Im not from Pakistan. Im a white irish American and I have more than a few pakistani friends and I don't agree with the content of this movie and I had to speak up in their defense. Nevertheless I gave 1 star to the movie for the aforementioned reasons and also I didnot find the movie funny and most of the time the "comedy" was done in awfully bad taste

I just saw this incredible ensemble movie - I was most struck by the amazing ensemble acting by the entire cast, mostly unknown to me (Archie Panjabi is an emmy winner for her role on "The Good Wife", and I have seen Linda Bassett in a few movies). I absolutely hated the father - he reminded me of my late father, who was also a bully who was enraged by his lack of ability to control others completely - Om Puri gives a ferocious performance - I would be curious to know what the actor felt about his part, did he see him (as I do) as a villain or did he see him as "right"? I found Linda Bassett's role a bit infuriating: those women who stay with their abusive disgusting husbands no matter what. I loved how rebellious the kids were, yet they stayed stuck under this tyrant's thumb. But they could escape into British culture, the neighborhood, school, music, culture that was not Pakistani. The gay son was certainly stereotypical but I still found it daring - it's rare to see a happy gay couple (who also appear to be "married") in movies from before 2000. Meena's dance is wonderful and fun. Damien O'Donnell's direction makes me wish he could make more movies (I've also loved "Rory O'Shea Was Here", which was originally titled "Inside I'm Dancing", but his other few films don't seem to have made it over here) - his direction is incredibly self-assured and brilliant, it was his feature film debut (he had made short films and commercials previously). I especially loved the feel of the film, the production design, the street - interestingly, it was filmed at Ealing Studios, 40 years after the last of the Ealing films were produced there. While this film can get my blood boiling - I wished somebody would run the father over with a car or do anything to get him to STOP his bullying disgusting behavior. (Why is he married to her? It's a real mystery. If he's so "Pakistani", why isn't he married to a Pakistani woman?) But that's what's so great about this movie: it can be simultaneously infuriating AND fascinating! I absolutely loved this movie!!!