georwash Folks -The comments I see coming from Indians who have grown up hating Pakistan and Pakistanis are obvious. So is the adulation from Pakistanis for their founder.Is anyone surprised? I am not. However, I happened to have the opportunity to be taught by a certain Dr. Kumar who was a female visiting professor from University of Bombay in 1994 when I took Indian History 1847-1947 as an elective senior yr course. And was taught from 7 different books. all from several different authors from India, Pakistan, UK and USA. and that was a start of my education on the subcontinent and its politicians that created India nd Pakistan today....i find the movie Jinnah simply fantastic. Its more closer to the truth then anything else coming from Indians who hate him, and many westerners that have a very negative image of any leader whose name starts with Mohammad.please goggle Jinnah. and read up and research yourself. then see the movie.i am saddened by the hate in hearts of Indians, especially Hindu Indians who have chosen the path similar to Islamic Jihadi Taliban sympathizers in the Muslim world...as when i visited Pakistan as a guest and met several Hindu Pakistanis, they were all very well off and had prospered in Pakistan.Pakistan has its share of problems, but since Soviet occupation of Afganistan, the country has been DE-stabilized by US and Afgan interference. I am saddened by the distortions and lies spread about Jinnah and Pakistan by Indian Hindu hate mongers.thank you, George

muzafar.h.bokhari (amraampk) The man M.A.Jinnah in my opinion wasted and spoiled his life for an incapable , callous corrupt nation nation like Pakistan.Although he was a man who thoroughly believed in what he do , always kept his principles come 1st, what he meant he really do but he failed to forecast what his followers will do to his country for which he made hard efforts to build. He had a vision of a brighter prosperous Pakistan but what Pakistan now ,a state failed, engulfed in corruption, nepotism, religious extremism , lawlessness, unemployment , poverty and disunity. So Gandhi and Nehru were also right on their behalf when they opposed the creation of Pakistan. A group of religious school of thought was also against Mr Jinnah they even tried to assassinate him , they belonged to Deobandi school of thought , todays taliban are their followers. If he knew what is going to happen inside this country years after he would had never worked for a separate homeland for Muslims, he would had understand it will be completely useless. Unfortunately some few of his fellow comrades persuaded him to much for this adventure and he finally succumbed to their idea. Soon after his death they immediately entangled in struggle of power and the whole purpose was lost for ever. Even in the name of Islam Pakistanis failed save eastern part now Bangladesh because not to give them authority and their proper share in country' s economics. Now this country is in more pain, routine suicide bombings and lawlessness, recently in sialkot city , 2 teens bros were mercilessly brutally beaten to death by a mob right in presence of police and thousands of callous spectators,(watch it on youtube , you ll see the plight of this country). If talking about this film i will say that however this movie may be very good , maybe accurate but if the future a Pakistan is concerned this country now is a failed state and its not gonna last,nobody can save it. Mr Jinnah this nation should owe you an apology. It would had been better if you might had accepted the idea of united India.

balajiviswanathan I'm an Indian who wanted to learn about Mr. Jinnah. But, I didn't learn a lot of new stuff and was a quite disappointed. The good stuff: 1.Lee's acting was quite good and he was quite good for the part. Though he is not Ben Kinsley, he is the main pivot here. 2. Mahatma and Nehru, though portrayed by weak actors, were not depicted too negatively. 3.For a Pakistani film, the film was reasonably professional.Bad stuff: 1. Younger Jinnah (Lintern) never looked/spoke remotely South Asian. It looked more like the director was trying too much to play to the Western audience. 2. A lot of times the scenes were ridiculous like Gandhiji staring his computer etc. 3. Jinnah's sister in most of the movie really looked like a witch, and maybe she was one.4. Throughout the movie the Hindus were predators and muslims were shown the prey/reactors. On the contrary while only 10% of Muslims were forced to flee India, 90% of Hindus in Pakistan were either slaughtered or become refugees in India. If Hindus were as blood thirsty as was portrayed in the movie, we would not have let 200 million muslims to stay in our country. Both sides had their victims and evil forces.5.Maharaja of Kashmir signed the ascension to India after Jinnah invaded Kashmir while the movie totally ignored the crucial fact. 6. There was far too much stress on Edwina-Nehru that at some point I felt it was Nehru/Edwina's biopic rather than Jinnah's. 7. If Civil disobedience and Nonviolence made one a Hindu as depicted in the movie, then Rev. Martin Luther King, Nelson Mandela and Henry Thoreau must all be Hindus! Nonviolence is beyond religion and as shown in the movie, Jinnah failed to grasp it. 8. Mountbatten's portrayal was horrible. He was shown to be without humor, grace, etc. While Pakistanis are right to claim that Jinnah created their nation for them from India, they must also remember that there would be nothing called Pakistan had British India not won her Independence. Jinnah did relatively nothing to win independence to India and that is a fact. If not for Gandhi, India would have taken a few more decades to gain independence and by that time Quaid and his ideas of Partition would have long been dead.I would give an above-average rating of 6 for a relatively bold story telling and good acting, but on the whole it was quite disappointing.

Umar Mansoor Bajwa Comparatively, this is a movie in its own class, well directed and effectively pictured. The Quaid-e-Azam (Muhammed Ali Jinnah) is portrayed as a leader of unwavering integrity and impeccable determination, all set to win a country for the hapless Muslims of the sub-continent. However, history has been distorted (wittingly or unwittingly ?) at least on one occasion. It was not Allama Iqbal who persuaded Jinnah in 1933 to return to the sub-continent and lead the Muslims. Instead, the fact is that Mr. Abdur Rahim Dard (the resident missionary of Ahmadiyya Community) in London was responsible for convincing Mr. Jinnah to return to his land of birth and fight for the cause of his brethren Muslims. It was Mr. Dard's eloquent persuasion that led Mr. Jinnah to accept his logic of leading/guiding the hapless Muslim masses of south Asia. It seems that Mr. Jamil Dehlevi could not muster the courage to film this fact as it would had annoyed the Pakistani countrymen beyond any reasonable rationale. THE TRUTH WILL LIVE FOREVER. NO AMOUNT OR REASON AS EXCUSE FOR THE DISTORTION OF HISTORY CAN BE JUSTIFIED.It may be the best acting performance of Christopher Lee, quite in contrast with his earlier dreadful image of Count Dracula and mostly negative roles as villain like in the Bond movie "The Man with The Golden Gun" .... but, he was, indeed too bulky to portray an aged and skinny Jinnah, as in reality.All said, the movie is respectably poised to exalt the saintly image of an honest and principled leader of the Muslims of the South Asian subcontinent.