zzzorf I wanted to like this movie. The storyline seemed interested and the non-song and dance Indian movies I had seen so far had been of quite a good standard. This however did not do it for me. The movie moved along very slowly, enough that I started to find myself drifting off to sleep at different moments in time.Don't get me wrong though, the story was still good and I would love to see it again in a redo, but as it stands as is, I have to pass on it.

gavin6942 The lonely wife (Madhabi Mukherjee) of a newspaper editor (Sailen Mukherjee) falls in love with her visiting cousin-in-law (Soumitra Chatterjee), who shares her love for crafting literature.I make no secret of the fact that I simply do not care for Indian films. I can't really express why, but they do not appeal to me. With regard to Ray, I was not moved by the Apu trilogy. However, after seeing "The Music Room" (1958) I found there was at least one Indian film I liked.And now "Charulata". Much has been written about how this film has more of a Western sense to it, even invoking the name of Mozart. That may be so. But I also appreciate that at this point Ray had access to better equipment, apparently. Cinematography-wise, this is his best-looking film, and he experiments a little bit in a dreamlike way that I find very effective. We have the right balance -- not that low grade film India had in the past, and not the overly polished junk of Bollywood. This and "Music Room" may be the pinnacle of Indian film.

David **POSSIBLE SPOILERS**Lacking the formidable cultural legacy of his earlier Apu trilogy, CHARULATA (Ray's 11th film) lacks nothing else – if Ray's overall style was derived from neo-realism; CHARULATA proved that – in his own uncluttered way – he was also a master of style and subtle elegance.CHARULATA was perhaps Ray's most technically stunning work, featuring an elegant - if moody - story shot in a manner that finds Ray experimenting a bit. The story is set in an upper-class, intellectual household in 1890s India, and the period setting is rendered in great detail – giving the film a lush, living beauty that (thanks to the stunning cinematography of Subrata Mitra) never crosses over into stuffiness. In a handful of scenes, a French new wave influence can also be seen – primarily at the very end, and also in an earlier scene featuring the title character's recollections (in a quick-moving montage) of childhood memories. Based on a story by Rabindranath Tagore, the film explores marital complacency, as Bhupati (a wealthy publisher and political idealist, devotes the majority of his time to his publishing business, and to political interests, and grows increasingly isolated from his wife, Charulata. Charulata – as an attractive upper-class wife, is essentially expected to manage the household, and not much else, and is increasingly both lonesome (Bhupati is a generally pleasant enough husband, though also a severe workaholic who is rarely around, and - in his sexual politics - he is a product of his time) and intellectually restless. In the midst of this, Bhupati's younger brother Amal arrives – Amal, a romantically inclined bohemian and recent college graduate who is searching for work while also pursuing literary ambitions, and has temporarily moved into the household. Amal and Charulata are instantly drawn to each other – first as intellectual companions, before an awareness of attraction is recognized. The two are plainly aware of the impossibility of the unrequited relationship, as Bhupati – after discovering than an employee has been embezzling form him – is then devastated to discover that his wife is turning away from him. To highlight the increasing distance between each of the three characters, CHARULATA is formalistic in it's look (with the handful of well-placed new-wave-inflected scenes adding textural complexity and emotionalism), with the classical touches of the cinematography underscoring the characters' ever-increasing distance from each other. Exploring sexual and class politics - with great depth and complexity - in a historical setting (while – in its' exploration of idealistic, nationalistic politics – making subtle connections to the present-day handling of the same issues in Bengali society), with flawless performances from all, CHARULATA is a beautiful and haunting masterpiece.

kaimal The best Satyajit Ray movie. Ray, at his peak, gave us his most convincing insight into love and loyalty, two of his universal themes. Unfortunately, the brilliant Apu trilogy has more of an visceral draw to Western audiences and Charulata is overlooked. The Apu trilogy invokes the idea of the Western view of India right or wrong while Charulata almost represents an anomaly of upperclass Indians in the late Victorian era.Charulata actually is a better film than any of those in the Apu trilogy (as hard as that is to believe) not to mention the most visually striking. However, the one thing Apu trilogy has over Charulata is its freshness. But this almost the same situation as Martin Scorsese and Mean Streets and Taxi Driver. This is not to say that he didn't make any good movies after that. Goodfellas is perhaps his best.In the end, Ray had style as well as substance in many of his films and Charulata represents that pinnacle while the Apu trilogy establishes what was to come.