The Rains of Ranchipur (1955) Reviews

• WHAT a SNAIL! (may contain spoilers)

  angelinastarr2004-04-09

  You know, some movies are great and others tank..... This one definitely tanked at my house. My mother and I watched this late one night thinking that it would be interesting because it was a movie starring Richard Burton right when his career was just taking off. WRONG!!!! Not only did this movie NOT help his career take off, but could have torpedoed it from the bomb that this movie was. Richard Burton stars in this movie as an Indian doctor who returns to his "roots" by doctoring the sick and needy. Lana Turner also appears as a wealthy American socialite (very social indeed) married to Michael Rennie who, I am assuming, is of English nobility. They happen to be in India as the guests of the Maharani (female version of the Maharaja, a big person in Indian society) I really don't need to go into detail about how Lana Turner and Richard Burton's characters get together, but I can assure you that they do. Michael Rennie warns the Doctor about his wife, basically saying, "Ya know, I have an airhead of a wife who likes to sleep with anything that remotely resembles even a coat rack, but you can still sleep with her and we can all be friends in the end" A few "action" scenes have their cheesy moments. In one scene, Michael Rennie is on a tiger hunt in India when all of a sudden a tiger (an actor wrapped in a tiger rug) flies across the screen and lands on him as he attempts to kill it, thus immobilizing him for a good part of the movie, giving Turner and Burton their chance to frolic with each other in some places. Another is when "The Rains" (read: killer monsoon) come and knock off the dams and bridges and wash out the poorhouse sections of the town. It goes for the same as the earthquake. The dialogue just flat lines throughout the movie. Towards the end, Turner and Burton's white, hot passion for each other cools way down with the help of "The Rains". Turner decides to be shallow when Burton tries to explain why he "couldn't come to her in her hour of need" Basically, it's like watching two elementary school kids in a little romance when all of a sudden, the girl gets mad at the boy for not playing with her on the swing set and decides to break up with him just because the boy missed one day of swing set time. Petty romances here, people. The ending was even bad. The audience expects one thing, and just the total opposite happens. I felt that the director or the scriptwriter needed some major adjustments to their craft in this movie. However, the movie was appropriately titled. The Rains of Ranchipur washed out my evening. I don't want to be a wet blanket, but I have to give this movie a -2 out of 1-10. It was that bad.

  More

• Welshman in a Turban

  JamesHitchcock2012-10-12

  Lord Esketh, a British aristocrat, and his glamorous American wife, Edwina, are touring India and staying in the city of Ranchipur, where they are guests of the local Maharani. (The action is supposed to be set in India, even though we see a prominently displayed Pakistani flag in an early scene). Their marriage is an unhappy one and each despises the other. Edwina despises her husband because she sees him as weak and cowardly and because he only married her for her money. (She is an independently wealthy heiress). He despises her because he sees her as cold and heartless; we learn that she has been unfaithful to him with a number of different men. While in Ranchipur Edwina meets and has an affair with a young suntanned Welshman in a turban. Well, actually Richard Burton's character is supposed to be an Indian, Dr Safti, a physician and the adopted son of the Maharani. Today, the idea of a white actor in "brownface" playing an Indian would strike most people as politically incorrect, but was an accepted practice in the fifties, and at least Burton's performance is a lot less insensitive than that given by Peter Sellers in "The Millionairess" from a few years later. (Sellers was also playing an Indian doctor). Watching the film, I wondered if the use of the Christian name "Edwina" was a veiled reference to Edwina Mountbatten, another independently wealthy heiress, married to a British aristocrat, who visited India and was rumoured to have had an affair with an Indian man, in her case the politician Jawaharlal Nehru. I understand, however, that "The Rains of Ranchipur" is a remake of "The Rains Came" from 1939 (which I have never seen), and that the character had the same name both in this film and in the 1937 novel on which it was based. As the Mountbattens did not come to India until 1947, the coincidence was presumably unintentional. The Edwina-Safti romance is the mainspring of the plot, but for all Edwina's good looks she is so obviously spoilt, selfish and promiscuous that it is difficult to imagine any man, let alone one as intelligent and idealistic as Dr Safti, falling hopelessly in love with her. There is a subplot involving another romance between Tom Ransome, an alcoholic former lover of Edwina and close friend of Safti, and Fern, the daughter of a local missionary, but this arouses little interest. The acting is generally undistinguished. Burton, as though embarrassed by having been cast in a role to which he was ill-suited, is horribly stilted and wooden, giving by far his worst performance in any film of his which I have seen. The Russian-born Eugenie Leontovich as the Maharani is no more convincing as an Indian than is Burton. Lana Turner as Edwina and Fred MacMurray as Tom were both capable of much better things than this. Probably the best is Joan Caulfield as Fern. The intention seems to have been to contrast Fern's youth and innocence with the cynicism and corruption of the experienced older woman Edwina, so it is perhaps surprising that Caulfield, who at 33 was only a year younger than Turner, was cast in the role, but she is fresh and youthful-looking enough to succeed in making the contrast an effective one. The best thing about the film is its special effects. Although "The Rains of Ranchipur" is not a "disaster movie" in the sense that the film-makers of the seventies would have understood the term, an earthquake and the subsequent flood after the earthquake destroys a dam play important roles in the story. These scenes are very well done, are still convincingly impressive even in the era of CGI and the main reason why I have given the film an average mark. Unfortunately, there is little else to make the film worth watching today. Special effects apart, it is the sort of dull, turgid and implausible melodrama which typified Hollywood at its worst during the fifties. 5/10

  More

• Quirk factor high, worth seeing

  eyecandyforu2005-05-02

  This film is one of those movies I sit through ("Elephant Walk" being another good example) for the special effects laden climaxes. "The Rains" is one of the greatest examples of Hollywood miscasting and racial bait and switch ever. First we have Richard Burton as Dr. Safti, a HINDU doctor. He plays the role like a weak rabbit in costumes that make his macho form especially wimpy. Eugenie Leontovich plays the Grand Diva of Ranchipur "The Maharani" who tries valiantly to out-diva Lana Turner but alas, fails. Both are unconvincing but the camp factor is worth the experience. Fred MacMurray has a turn as a drunk with a heart of gold and Michael Rennie is wasted as Lana's husband. Then there is Ms. Turner. Playing a poor little rich girl to the hilt, she manages to be uber glamorous even in the midst of a deadly fever. The romance between Turner and Burton is embarrassing in a "I love you but I really can't back it up" kind of way, and you start rooting for the rains to do their thing. When they finally get going, it's a good old-fashioned disaster movie for a while with heroics all around, then it's back to the potboiler and a disappointing ending. If you want a fake Bollywood extravaganza with Lana Turner getting drenched in high heels, this is your film. As a postscript to this review, if you want to see the real thing, check out the 1939 classic "The Rains Came", a much more entertaining, higher quality version with a very, very different outcome. It makes this one look like a bad made for TV movie.

  More

• Much worse than the 1939 original

  HotToastyRag2017-07-21

  I was halfway through this movie before realizing I'd seen it before. Only, I remembered it filmed in black and white, with Myrna Loy as the star, instead of Lana Turner in Technicolor. The Rains of Ranchipur is a remake of the 1939 disaster drama The Rains Came. In both movies, a married hussy seduces an Indian doctor while living in Ranchipur. Her attentions become a blot on his impeccable reputation, and she has nothing more than her own interests at heart. At first, I thought the remake would be an improvement. Myrna Loy was never known for her seductive prowess, but that type of behavior was second nature to Lana Turner, so I thought the steamy scenes would be steamier. Also, Tyrone Power played the Indian doctor in the original, rather than an ethnically appropriate actor, so I hoped the remake would make a better casting choice. No and no. Even though Myrna isn't the sexiest actress out there, her chemistry with Tyrone was infinitely more sizzling than Lana's was with Richard Burton. Wait, Richard Burton played the Indian doctor? I'm sorry to have to tell you that yes, he did, and with nothing more than a plain turban wrapped around his head as indication that he's racially different than his love interest. The two stars, who are very capable of creating sexual tension on the screen, must have hated each other during the filming. The chemistry was nonexistent. I'll try not to spoil anything, but this plot point is in the title: a monsoon rains down on Ranchipur. Believe it or not, the big disaster scene is scarier, more effective, and had better special effects in 1939 than in 1955! The costumes were also quite elegant and regal in the original version. Myrna was dressed in beautiful ball gowns, and Tyrone had resplendent outfits. Richard Burton was very plainly clad, and Lana Turner's dresses actually made her look like she had a bad figure. All in all, the remake was a big disappointment. Watch The Rains Came instead. It's dramatic, sexy, and exciting—I don't know how the monsoon scene was filmed in 1939!

  More

• Lana Turner, Richard Burton and great special effects

  NewEnglandPat2003-08-01

  This wide-screen romance yarn showcases the lovely Lana Turner as a wealthy and restless socialite who becomes smitten with a handsome native doctor during a trip to India. This is the main thread of the film although there are other sub-plots at work here. Richard Burton is good as the object of Turner's affections and Eugenie Leontovich is regal as the Maharani who raised Burton from childhood. This sage queen watches the blossoming romance with cold displeasure, deeply jealous of Turner's hold on him. Fred MacMurray is involved in another clincher with Joan Caulfield that doesn't ring true and adds very little to the main story. Michael Rennie has a thankless role as Turner's husband, whom she keeps at arms's length throughout the movie. The ensuing monsoons, flooding and earthquake in the region are awesome and terrible in their destruction, the special effects of which are very good. Turner is clothed in a first-class wardrobe and the film's sets reflect the lavish production. Milton Krasner's camera and Hugo Friedhofer's exotic music score are first-rate.

  More