Indian Summers

2015

Seasons & Episodes

  • 2
  • 1
  • 0

7.3| 0h30m| en
Synopsis

Epic drama set in the summer of 1932 where India dreams of independence, but the British are clinging to power. Set against the sweeping grandeur of the Himalayas and tea plantations of Northern India, the drama tells the rich and explosive story of the decline of the British Empire and the birth of modern India, from both sides of the experience. At the heart of the story lie the implications and ramifications of the tangled web of passions, rivalries and clashes that define the lives of those brought together in this summer which will change everything.

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

Stream on any device, 30-day free trial Watch Now

Trailers & Clips

Reviews

Redwarmin This movie is the proof that the world is becoming a sick and dumb place
UnowPriceless hyped garbage
Comwayon A Disappointing Continuation
Dynamixor The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.
patlightfoot I loved the first series, however, it was no Jewel in the Crown, or Gandhi. I studied Rudyard Kipling's India at Uni. And the period of 1932-35, was a strange period. Certainly the British were trying to evolve brown Englishmen such as Nehru, and most of the Indian civil service were still holding mediocre positions. Being Parsees they (like the Sikhs) were in the minority, and after the Indian Mutiny, few Hindu's remained in the Indian Army as their cast taboos etc., But a Parsee marrying a Muslim. I doubt it. Or a Parsee civil servant, being seen with a British woman who came from quite an influential family. Right until independence, cast and interracial snobbery and racial intermarriage, and segregation were the norm. Anyway I was spellbound at first, but as the second series unfolded I found that it did not make much sense. But I did enjoy it. The British did treat the Indians roughly and growing resentment among the populace. To a point that there were massacres on both sides, and inter religious jealousy's and hatreds. Gandhi was for independence, eliminating the cast system and untouchables, and all Indians get on together irrespective of religious hatreds. It didn't work. Although I did love the first series, I felt the second was a bit disappointing. The second world war was about to erupt, and with Hitler stating the Aryan race, actually they came from North India centuries before, never Nordic.The acting flawless. I don't think a London accent would have been appreciated in the British polite society set then though. Or Cockney songs.And what happened to the young orphan lad who towed the explosives 'A gift for the King' and survived it? And his patron dying and leaving a widow and two sons. The British Raj were not that forgiving.
qui_j While it's not to the level of Jewel in the Crown or Passage to India, This little production is entertaining in it's own way. It does evoke some of the absurdities of British rule in India and the last days of the Raj. The seasoned actors do their best with a script that's appalling at times, and at others just plain silly and predictable. The second season really scratches around for plot lines to follow but many of them just become more and more outrageous. As has been pointed out, not a lot of attention was paid to detail. The actress playing Whelan's wife is supposed to be American but her accent is so poorly done, it becomes distracting. Simla was used as a "Hill Station" where the handful of British administrators who governed the whole country would go to escape the summer heat. It would not have tropical foliage like what is shown. Things like that may pass unnoticed by the average viewer but for people who know, it is very distracting and irritating. Overall, it's an entertaining but a very superficial view of a time in history that has been much better portrayed by other authors, script writers and TV series! So watch it just for entertainment value, and don't expect too much!
gtweston Being born and brought up in Simla, only a few years after the British left, I hated it!!! It was so hard to watch. Simla is at 7500 ft above sea level. Tropical foliage where there should have been majestic deodars or Himalayan Cedars. Why did they not film it in Scotland? The vegetation and topography is so much more like the Himalayas. The Raj was as much about Simla and its unique landscape and the way it influenced life and government as anything else. The whole concept of the Mall and Promenade every evening, the Gaiety Theater and Green Room, Bandstand not to mention A race course created on a small hill using local labor to flatten the ridge to create an oval space, defined Simla. I actually have a map of the houses of the British which enabled social activity without losing ones way.The producers, directors etc, just did not get it! The Indians consisted of many more levels of society...educated, refined and of illustrious families.....than just household retainers and clerks. The British Civil servants themselves, were generally competent and decent and their lives consisted of a lot more than socializing. A bad show, misinforming the viewers. So disappointed, PBS!
ssnedunuri As another reader pointed out, it seems in some way to just perpetuate the stereotypes - the stuffy, inconsiderate, haughty British, and the unpredictable natives - complete with the dark brown skin that is definitely not common in Shimla. So they imported South Indian actors speaking south Indian languages because the locals didn't fit the stereotype. Honestly I expected something more complex and better than this in 2015. Even the scenery is not very Shimla which is in the foothills of the Himalayas, so why make it look like the jungles of Bengal. Oh wait, why lose another opportunity to project yet another stereotype - India the land of jungles, when in fact the country stretches from a latitude of 38N down to about 7N so as you might expect, has a much greater range of scenery - from mountains to deserts to green hills, to scrub, to yes jungles!