Kama Sutra: A Tale of Love (1996) User Reviews

Story is almost overshadowed by scenery and atmosphere

[anonymili · 7/10 · 16 April 2006]

Maya is a servant to Princess Tara in 16th century India. They've known each other since childhood and have grown up as friends (or so we're led to believe). As a young woman Tara watches enviously as Maya is given lessons in Kama Sutra (an ancient 4th century guide on how to make love) by a famed courtesan Rasa Devi. Tara is allowed to observe during these classes. Maya secretly envies the life of Tara, she hates being given Tara's hand me down clothes and constantly complains to her aunt about her life as a servant. The girls grown up and Tara is to be married to Raj Singh, a neighbouring king. Unfortunately for Tara, Maya learnt a bit too much during her Kama Sutra lessons and ends up deliberately seducing Tara's opium addicted husband on the eve of her wedding! This is brought about because Raj Singh looks at Maya with lust at his first meeting with his wife to be and she is so jealous she spits at Tara and tells her to leave the pre-wedding ceremony. Tara has a brother, Prince Vicky, a hunchback who is openly ridiculed by many, who has been in love with Maya since childhood. Vicky sees Maya seducing and bedding the king and is distressed and furious! On the wedding day as Tara is leaving the palace to go to her new palace Maya whispers to her "All my life I have lived with your used things but now something I have used is yours forever." Tara doesn't quite understand this and at the same time Vicky tells his mother that he wants to marry Maya and she must arrange it for him. Maya is approached with this proposal and refuses, and an enraged Vicky tells his mother of Maya's betrayal with his sister's husband on the eve of the wedding. The queen throws Maya out of the palace banishing her from the kingdom. Maya roams the land alone and lost. Tara rejects her husband's sexual advances as she has heard how painful sex is supposed to be the first time and he calls her "Maya". So the king leaves her bed and takes more and more opium and more and more mistresses and no one is happy. On her travels Maya meets Jai Kumar, the king's sculptor, who falls for her seductive charms and she becomes his most favoured model and lover. Maya falls in love with Jai and for the first time in her life she feels out of control. In the meantime the king is still obsessed with Maya, pretty much ignores his wife and continues to bed other women when he's not searching high and low around the kingdom for Maya.

What happens when the king catches up with Maya? What is the king's relationship with Jai Kumar? Do Tara or Maya ever achieve happiness in their lives? Just how vindictive can people be in the name of love and lust and revenge? I would rate this 7 out of 10. It's a very sensuous and beautifully filmed piece of work with excellent acting (whether or not you like the characters). For those who like romance, with historical drama and jealousy and spite all rolled into one, this is worth watching. Also if you like soft-core sex you might want to check it out too! To summarise the story I'd say it was predominantly about a poor girl trying to get revenge over a rich girl after years of being made to feel inferior even though they are brought up as best friends and by seducing the latter's husband on her wedding night she extracts the best revenge she possibly can, although ultimately this leads to tragedy.

Decent Film in Retrospect

[gavin6942 · 7/10 · 1 February 2016]

Set in 16th century India, this movie depicts the story of two girls who were raised together, though they came from different social classes. Tara (Sarita Choudhury) is an upper-caste princess while Maya (Indira Varma) is her beautiful servant. The two girls are best friends, but an undercurrent of jealousy and resentment is caused by Tara's haughtiness, symbolized by the fact that Maya is given Tara's hand-me-down clothes and never anything new to wear.

During filming in India, the name of the project was not revealed to government officials who would have denied the petition to film in India had it been called "Kama Sutra." Instead, it was called "Maya & Tara." Since government officials made many periodic visits to the set to ensure proper Indian film etiquette, the cast had to improvise fake scenes which avoided the nudity and sexuality central to the story. Upon completion, authorities screened the film and it was subsequently banned in India because of the erotic scenes that contained heterosexual as well as homosexual elements.

What really caught my attention about this film was Naveen Andrews. At the time he made this film, he was unknown, and remained largely unknown after the film. But then he was a main character in "Lost". I wonder how many people went back to see his past work, as it would completely change the way they might see him. It is also interesting that he has been cast in roles as both an Indian and an Iraqi. (Andrews happens to be a British-born Indian.)

Very Well Cast

[Theo Robertson · 6/10 · 12 October 2005]

I do confess that I have read the Kama Sutra and there's an awful lot of misconceptions about it . It is NOT some hot porn manual that will get your juices flowing , it's a very thick book about the art of love . If you've bought a copy simply to use as masturbation fuel then you've certainly wasted your money . Likewise if you bought the book to wave around during some moral crusade with a rather dubious agenda

The film is very similar to the book . Many people who have stated their opinion have obviously watched the movie either expecting to be shocked or to be brought to orgasmic ecstasy but that's their problem because like the book with the same name this film while being somewhat erotic is also rather dull . It's not an adaptation per se just a rather unconnected and tenuous example of a book and movie sharing the same name . The only reason it's called KAMA SUTRA is down to the fact that it's taught to a group of courtesans , the rest of the plot involves something of a love triangle . It's also a movie that's not well made with a visual look of something that appears to have been shot on very poor stock film

I will praise it on one aspect - The casting . For this type of movie to come close to any type of success the casting of the lead female must be right and Indira Varma as Maya simply steals the film . He is strikingly beautiful but he also oozes a type of pure innocence . It's very easy to see why Raj Singh has fallen in love with her . Singh is played by Naveen Andrews who everyone in the world will now know via a very successful American show but you'll never be reminded of Sayid Jarrah while watching this because Andrews is very convincing . I do feel slight sympathy for Sarita Choudhrey as the other pivotal female role of Tara because her part feels rather underwritten and understandably she doesn't have the same type of breathtaking beauty as Varma unfortunately

This could have been a very poor film and to be honest it's not a great one either , but some clever casting and fine acting make it worth watching at least once

Excellent movie and supreme eye candy...

[LauraPalmerthemuffin · 20 January 2002]

I've watched this film over and over again and it just gets better. It's actually based on a book called "Hand-Me-Downs" which you'll understand after you've watched it. As the last person who commented on this stated it's not the "Kama Sutra" you're thinking of. There IS sex, there IS a bit of violence, but don't watch this with the hopes of seeing your average vulgar action and sex film. The women in the film are instructed and shown how to the master the art of Kama Sutra, mind you the ART not the positions. Anyway, the film setting is gorgeous and the acting is superb. You'll recognize Sarita Choudhury as Tara if you've already watched Mississippi Massala. Indira Varma does an excellent job in expressing her revenge, regret, and mystery in Tara's character. Everyone and I mean EVERYONE did an excellent job in this film.

I don't love you enough to hate you.

[lastliberal · 6/10 · 11 May 2007]

If a simple embrace between Richard Gere and Bollywood actress Shilpa Shetty caused all that furor, it is no wonder that this film is banned in India and Pakistan.

I really don't feel completely qualified to judge this film as it is the first Indian film I have seen, and probably wouldn't even have tuned in except to see Lost's Naveen Andrews, who played the King. As Mel Brooks said, "It's good to be the King." He sits around smoking opium and has a nice harem, which included Maya (Indira Varma). I thought she was hot in the short-lived TV show 3 lbs. She is even hotter here and I can see why the King lost it over her.

Sarita Choudhury plays the Queen and childhood rival of Maya. She starred with Denzel Washington in Mississippi Masala.

The costumes and cinematography were outstanding.

Near-zero relevance to the concept/book

[mailtoby · 4/10 · 15 September 2005]

As a movie, this is just about less than OK. As to why the film maker chose to have the name "kamasutra" in the film title is pretty obvious. 1. To grab attention 2. To get international recognizability 3. To get everyone interested enough to buy a ticket

Unfortunately, the storyline has absolutely no relevance to the philosophy of the ancient Indian book. Just having a total of 7 dialog lines which are nothing but snippets from the book, does not make it a Kamasutra tale.

However, international audiences would find novelty in the film simply because of its portrayal of Indian colors/settings/customs (albeit with a creative license). However, film audiences who have seen enough movies will know a good film when they see one and this one will not be part of that list under any circumstances.

Yes, the name and imagery may be enticing but if you watch the movie without expecting a great deal, you would be on safe ground.

Entertaining Picture of Love and Rivalry in India

[Hecate-3 · 7/10 · 27 September 2000]

This is the story of two girls, one a princess and one a servant girl, who were best friends as children but became rivals as adults. Tara, the princess, was voluptuously beautiful, but she could not master the sultry, compelling mannerisms that came so naturally to Maya. Maya resented having to wear Tara's cast-off clothing and was repelled by Tara's crippled but lustful brother.

The story is as much about sex as love, but in spite of the subject matter and several scenes in which girls are being instructed in the art of love, the film is neither erotic nor steamy. If you are looking for nudity, this is not your film, although there may be more bare skin in the Indian version. But the story has its interest. The direction and most of the performances are good. The dancing by Indira Varma and Rekha is delightful. The costumes are attractive. The music sometimes distracts more than it enriches, but it usually provides the proper enhancement. None of the elements are first class, but none are bad, and they come together in an entertaining whole, yielding a pleasant way to spend a couple of hours.

Nice wrapping

[sapphirebhs · 5/10 · 27 November 2001]

The setting and lead actresses are beautiful, and it had seeds of what could have been an enchanting story but something is wrong. The plot is developed in a somewhat dreary and sluggish manner, the dialogue is simple, and the characters could have been made more complex but it's still nice to look at.

Beautiful, erotic film.

[lilithg · 10/10 · 24 February 2001]

I bought this movie after seeing most of it on Bravo several different times. I really love this movie. It has beautiful imagery and a good plot. I was captivated by the lovely erotic scenes. Although there is a love story in it, the film isn't entirely an happily ever after affair. However, the ending retains the feeling of hope and the fact that love (though not necessarily the lover) survives all things.

A sad, yet hopeful movie. I highly recommend it.

A Tale of Sex.

[anaconda-40658 · 6/10 · 8 October 2015]

Kama Sutra: A Tale of Love (1996): Dir: Mira Nair / Cast: Naveen Andrews, Sarita Choundhury, Roman Tikaram, Indira Varma, Rekha: Looks more like a documentary than a feature film and sometimes contains the feel of a porn flick. It regards the confusion between love and lust and the physical and emotional. Set in India where it follows the sexual conquests of two males towards a woman named Maya. Actually it is two sisters who are the initial competitors. One is set to marry a ruler while the other is given to his courtesan. Maya seduces the ruler in a spite of revenge and flees. She encounters a tribesman with a chisel and he carves her image as a statue. The ruler will pay him for her identity. Laced with sex, sex and more sex before arriving at a very fatal conclusion. Beautiful music and stunning set pieces with fine directing by Mira Nair. Fine cast includes Naveen Andrews as the vengeful Prince whom will never receive the love he seeks due too his pride. Sarita Choundhury is Tara, Maya's sister. Roman Tikaram is the tribesman who faces fatal consequences for his dance with erotica. Indira Varma plays Maya whom must live with her actions. Rekha plays some sort of teacher of Kama Sutra. So, basically, she is a sex education representative. It is a film about sacrifice but Kama Sutra means various acts of lovemaking. Is this film suppose to be a guide? Score: 6 / 10

Stupid, pretty movie

[mrkramer · 4/10 · 20 February 2001]

Basically, this film gets a 10 for amazing scenery and costumes, beautiful people, and visual atmosphere. It gets a 1 for its screenplay. It reminded me very strongly of a very badly written romance novel, which I was not expecting. I saw this in the theater, and I remember laughing out loud at some of the unintentionally humorous dialogue. If you can stomach the inane sophistries that the characters throw out and you find the idea and look of India fascinating, it will satisfy you on a visual level. The actors and actresses are truly a sight for sore eyes.

a highly under rated film...

[ghettoracer · 10/10 · 6 May 2005]

I first saw this movie about 4 years ago. And upon the first viewing I was dis-appointed about 15 mins into it. I'm sure most males are attracted to this film simply by the title... Kama Sutra. LOL. I was disappointed because on first glance I did not find Maya and Tara attractive. Yes I know, how lame of me to judge a film based on the looks of the actresses. In my defense, the title threw me off as I was expecting something highly erotic and very porn-ish. However, other than the title of the movie I've heard accolades from critics about this movie... so I manage to finish the movie. I remember thinking wow, not too shabby, the film wasn't what I expected. It really is a tale of love. I've just viewed the movie three times in the last couple of days and at last I'm really appreciating the film.

The acting are superb and I think Indira Varma was a newcomer at that time. I think she played Maya perfectly... Her performance reminds me of how impressive Natalie Portman was in Leon as a totally unknown. Although Natalie was much younger with her debut. It was a delight watching Indira portraying the deep emotions and the hard life of Maya being always in Tara's shadow. My favorite scene was when Maya and Jai reunited. The music/score was perfect and the acting was heart felt I think they have perfect chemistry.

The sets and costumes were colorful and rich. The cinematography was stunning. Character development was complete and the pace of the story was quite good never a wasted moment. This is one of my favorite films about love. It encompasses a lot more than merely the thought of "Kama Sutra" conjures up. It is also about girl going into woman hood. Please enjoy the film with a open mind and I think you will find its true beauty that is rarely matched.

One other film that's a personal favorite is Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon which is directed by Ang Lee. I grew up in Taiwan, but spent most of my life in California and I'm well versed in both the traditional Chinese culture as well as contemporary American. I understood perfectly what Ang wanted to do. There's a big similarity in the fact that both directors made the film for the _foreign_ audiences. I think these films should not be completely judged on its accuracy, but rather, from the director's vision and what they wanted to accomplish. In both cases I think the directors were perfect.

Interesting film. Skin flick? Yes, but what skin!

[[e-mail] · 7/10 · 25 February 2007]

POSSIBLE SPOILERS: Much more has been heard from Mira Nair since "Kama Sutra: A Love Story," but comparatively little from Indira Varma, who at the time the movie was made, may have been the most beautiful woman alive. Both clothed and naked, she is so gorgeous as to defy description. Nair and her co-author have devised a more-than-serviceable plot about the rivalry between the well-born Tara (Sirita Chouldhury) and her playmate and servant Maya (Varma). When Tara is betrothed to Raj Singh (Naveen Andrews), the jealous Maya seduces him prior to the wedding. After leaving her home to take advanced instruction in the Kama Sutra, Maya falls in love with Kumar (Ramon Tikarum), a sculptor, who rebuffs her after a consuming love affair because she so fills his imagination that he finds himself unable to create. Her heart broken by her lover's rejection, Maya becomes Raj Singh's courtesan and steels his love from Tara, the queen. Kumar finds he cannot live without Maya and finds her in the harem, where he is discovered and condemned to a spectacular and particularly brutal death. The dissolute Raj Singh is then overwhelmed by enemy forces led on behalf of Persia by Tara's hunchbacked brother, who had once sought Maya for his wife, and Maya wanders off into the Indian mists as the film ends. Indira Varma -- half English and half Indian by birth -- has subsequently enjoyed a rather minor career, mostly in television. But when this film was made, there was no one in Hollywood, Bollywood or any other center in the film making industry who was a more striking beauty.

For me, a woeful misfire.

[foxbrick-1 · 1/10 · 21 May 2005]

MISSISSIPPI MASALA introduced me to both Mira Nair and (not just me, but the larger world, to) Sarita Choudhury, and I thought it a wonderful film, and Choudhury both very talented and remarkably beautiful. Thus, when hearing (first via NPR interviews) that Nair was tackling a drama that involved the KAMA SUTRA and had signed Choudhury up for the project, I couldn't imagine what could be bad about it.

Sadly, I found out. First, to have Choudhury in your cast and to make a rather less attractive woman the focus of a sensual and sexually explicit photoplay seems self-defeating, particularly when she's also, to judge from this performance, not much of an actor. Then to make the sexual scenes so devoid of chemistry or even much prurient interest, in part through the utter oiliness, both literally and figuratively, of the characters (I hadn't seen this much unction among screen lovers since the similarly unappealing scenes in the loose, awful Asimov adaptation NIGHTFALL) is to give the audience very little reason to continue being so...this would've been only the fourth film I'd ever walked out on, had my companions not wanted to stick it through to the very end. (NIGHTFALL had been one of the other three, though it was my companion, driven to the edge of physical illness by the film, whom I acquiesced to then, without much regret.) Reasonably well-shot, but a major disappointment in every other way.

A feast for the eyes and the ears

[bbhlthph · 24 July 2004]

Produced in India by an Indian director and production crew for the primary purpose of introducing Europeans and North Americans to some aspects of the Hindu culture, this film was never intended for domestic markets and in fact I believe that it remains banned in most parts of India. Although in many ways the Hindu culture is highly erotic, eroticism is not normally featured in domestic Indian films and the Director had to recruit two British born actresses for the starring roles. It is a beautiful film which was quite successful in parts of Europe and it is unfortunate that it had only a limited release in North America.

Ultimately the film is a Feminist Tract, which is said to be based on an Indian legend from the early sixteenth century - the period immediately after the foundation of the Mohgul (Mongol) empire in India. It is a story about an intelligent woman born into a low cast who is the servant of a high cast compatriot betrothed to the local Raj. In most parts of the world the subservient status of women at the time of this legend made it very difficult for them to establish a satisfactory lifestyle except in the traditional role of wife to the master of a family and mother to his children. In India the difficulties were greatly compounded by the additional limitations imposed by the cast system. The film basically records the efforts of this woman to use her sexual attractiveness to develop a lifestyle that would be acceptable to her. In modern parlance Maya has the moral standards of a guttersnipe, but in the context of the period in which she lived she merely manipulated the weapons available to her to try to establish what any modern woman would describe as an acceptable independent lifestyle. Ultimately her plans basically fail and the film ends with her walking confidently towards an unknown future after losing her lover and every support that her former life had provided, but with a confidence that she could face the future, whatever it might bring, thanks to the lessons in life that she had learned during her period at the Royal Court. Women can clearly identify with this story - although IMDb users in general have only given this film fairly average ratings, the demographic breakdown of these ratings shows that younger women rate it most highly.

The title "Kama Sutra - A love story" poses a problem, Many western viewers expected a near pornographic sequence of orgies with sexual encounters involving highly convoluted positions - their disappointment can be seen both in some of the viewer comments featured in this data base, and by the low ratings many viewers have given to this film. (One IMDb reviewer has made the interesting comment that the film might have been much more successful if it had simply been titled "A love story".) The film has also been derided as an Indian version of a modern soap opera. The common feature of soap operas is probably their limited characterisation and a shallow one track story line; but if we look at European stories and legends from the same period we find that they mostly show similar features - think only of the Decameron or such works as Moll Flanders and Fanny Hill. I have never been a fan of the modern soap operas- perhaps because they cut too close to home- but I am a sucker for those such as "Dangerous Beauty" or "Black Venus" which have the ability to temporarily transport one into life during an earlier period. Consequently I greatly enjoyed this film which not only successfully recreates a long past period, but also provides a realistic glimpse of life as lived in a totally different culture to my own. Most soap operas are rather melodramatic, but despite its exotic locale and period, the film "Kama Sutra - a love story" remains somewhat underplayed. The Raj showed a fairly unsavoury character, but none of the petty vindictiveness we associate with European royalty of the period. The arrest and execution of the sculptor, Maya's lover, was clearly inevitable but it was not carried out with the oriental barbarism I expected to be displayed, and this Indian royal court was shown as both more civilised and more humane than say its European equivalent in the English court of Henry VIII.

For a film to be a success there are basically two requirements, it must have something worth while to feature and it must be sufficiently competently made to hold the viewers attention whilst watching it. In my view this film fully meets both these requirements. Although the story line was a little trite and the characterisation was somewhat shallow, the camera work was superb and was a delight to the eye throughout. It is hard for a Westerner to judge how authentically the sixteenth century Mohgul royal court was represented, but as shown its visual impact was both exotic and exciting. A important part of this film was the outstanding score which contributed much to the mood and atmosphere. This score, the sets, the costumes and the camera work were outstanding throughout and provided a continual feast for both eyes and ears. What more can a viewer expect? I give this film a rating of eight out of ten, much higher than the average rating recorded in the IMDb database, and I do so deliberately not because it was a great story but because both the score and the camerawork justify this rating. This is at least as valid as giving a similar rating to films with a great story to tell, but with very indifferent camera work. After all the cinema is essentially a visual form of entertainment and any film which can, like this one, keep our eyes glued to the screen throughout has to be recognised as way above average.

the transcendent Indira Varma

[jannings · 6/10 · 9 April 2006]

True, this movie does not match Mira Nair's earlier movies such as Mississippi Masala and Salaam Bombay! It is also true that much of the movie's pace is sodden and the plot is fairly predictable. And yes, unfortunate feminist tendencies creep in from time to time. But the presence alone of the incomparable Indira Varma is worth the price of admission—or the price of renting the DVD.

What makes this movie valuable is its sumptuousness, as many critics noted when it premiered. The sexuality is intense; the locations in northern India are stunning; the costumes are well wrought and the music is convincing. Westerners are used in some ways to seeing movies about India, especially India of the British Raj. But this movie is set in the 16th century, well before Western influences had set in. But what makes the movie so fascinating is the "Westernized" vision that emanates from the four lead actors, all of whom were either born in or grew up in England. Indira Varma was born, I think, in Kent; Ramon Tikaram, whose voice is as resonant as any movie actor's heard in the last thirty years, grew up in Germany and later moved with his family to England. Naveen Andrews was born in London, as was Sarita Choudury. These four actors share nearly all the movie's focus, and they are thoroughly westernized. They, and directoress Nair, all got away with filming this movie under the noses of the Indian authorities. As a result, there is a delightful seditious quality to the work. But the most delightful of all is the aforementioned Indira Varma, whose stunning beauty and sexual intensity almost leap off the screen. At times she is playful, at others deeply distressed, at other times she seeks vengeance. Repeatedly she embraces her destiny with what seems to be her entire being: rarely has an actress in recent films been able so to concentrate on and immerse herself in the dangers, the hope, the expectations, and the benevolence that surround her. What a woman! And what an artist. Like all great artists, she transcends the limits of culture, critical distinctions, and artificial categorization.

must see film if India interests you.

[ds-12 · 5/10 · 4 August 1999]

It's certainly an erotic movie. And if you are interested in seeing full nude and sexy Indian women then I will recommend the movie highly. Also the portrayal of old India is interesting. A must see film for all the Indians.

Garbage

[randy_lejeune · 2/10 · 7 February 2001]

If there is one movie that is worse than the "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" then this has to be it. A story of a scheming woman who intentionally sleeps with her "best friend's" (Tara) husband on the day of Tara's wedding and then doesn't have the sense to keep quiet about it in revenge for Tara's crime of being born in a higher caste than she. Maya gets everything she deserves as everyone else is left cleaning up the mess that she created. One of the central ideas of the film is that if a lady isn't aware of the "Kama Sutra" then she'll never be able to keep a man, which is as silly as cooking televisions. The "guru" who supposedly teaches this art to her young pupils is so stupid that she can't even seem to tell the difference between love and sex, but is nevertheless portrayed as being a "wise" woman. The scenery is OK, but far outdoes the plot and the acting. Save your money. If you want real porno, try some X-rated stuff, and if you want a better story, try the daytime soap-operas or typical Bollywood fare.

Insightful, romantic, moral tale

[schilauefer · 9/10 · 24 April 2005]

Having read The Kama Sutra and having found it disappointing, I figured this late night showing couldn't be anymore disappointing than the text of the same name in translation. The subtitle, A Tale of Love, does help inform the potential viewer that this is not a hot porn flick.

The few pieces of Indian literature I have read treated love stories similarly. I was curious though, as to how the Bombay movie industry would treat this story, knowing they do no show kissing in the romantic films for domestic consumption. IMDb was the source I turned to to learn more about this film and its production. Thank you for the answers.

This movie is a fine tragedy carefully told in the context of 16th century India. It portrays a woman's plight in that time, marry or be a courtesan in a harem. By giving the women empowered roles the writers allow viewers to see that while today would would find those roles unacceptable, some women of those days could find satisfaction, if not happiness. The mistress of the courtesan school gave everyone her pupils a view of the truth and their options, even before the women were ready to see them.

The movie also contains moral lessons. Maia misuses her sexuality to her own detriment. The princess, could not buy happiness. The sculptor rejects Maia's love out of fear for loss of his independence, then gets paid back in kind.

This is a captivating story I will watch again, to catch the dialog I missed while away from the television, and I rarely watch movies twice.

Pathetic effort

[Vai · 1/10 · 4 August 1998]

This is one of the worst movies I've ever seen. It will thoroughly disappoint all those who see the movie for either it's sexual content or for it's artistic (ha!) content. Please steer clear of this one :)

A beautiful work of art with an incredible story and even more incredible actors.

[Xev_Lizard · 10/10 · 25 April 2001]

I saw this movie and I loved it. It was powerfully beautiful and the character of Maya was unbelievable. (I was pleased to share the name with her.) Indira Varma did a wonderful job and I was completely taken with it. I recommend this movie, although will not be liked by everyone. It is truly a work of art.

I don't love you enough to hate you.

[film-critic · 4/10 · 16 April 2006]

I believe that I would like to place a moment of blame on this film. Due to the title alone, I was nervous about viewing it with the windows open. Prior to my viewing, I was unaware that it was directed by famed director Mira Nair, and was fully prepared to draw my blinds as I embarked on this film adventure. The title was Kama Sutra: A Tale of Love, what was I to assume. After watching nearly two hours of this film, I was disappointed. I was upset with not only the lack of commitment to the characters, the tired storyline, and the anti-climactic ending, but also due to the lack of sexuality surrounding this film. "Kama Sutra" headlines this feature, but alas, it is not the central focus, and this is where I believe Nair failed us and my moment of blame was born. I would like to make it clear that I did not desire a film of pornography, I knew that this was a "mainstream" film, but I did want something deeper and centered around the art of "Kama Sutra" instead of just another cliché story of rival girlfriends. I realize that I am generalizing the overall theme of this film, but at the core of this movie it was not about the art of sex, but instead the decay of man.

I did not like this film. I understood this film to be considered an adult fairy tale, but alas, I never saw the elements of a fairy tale in this story. Written in part by Nair, I saw this film as her opportunity to demonstrate the power of a woman's sexuality over even the strongest of men. In a very small part she succeeded, but her attempt to build this opportunity failed with her characters. When you make a film centered on love, or the passion of its act, you must hire actors that will give the audience that sensation. The audience must feel the sweat, the energy, the excitement of what is happening on screen or it will fall swiftly into just another Skin-a-Max midnight movie. Sadly, Nair could not accomplish this. When her characters, whether it was Maya, Tara, Raj, or even Jai, were "forced" into the "Kama Sutra" part of the film, it felt scripted and staged. There was no instant passion between these characters, which destroyed, utterly ripped from its roots, any attempt that Nair had to create the theme of sexual independence. Without the fire behind her actor's eyes, the rest of the film fell to the wayside as just your "average" film.

Nair had another opportunity to capture back her audience with this film, but she never took it. Nair could have pulled a Gandhi-esquire moment for us by countering the horrible acting with beautiful images of India. Nair could have coupled the beauty of "Kama Sutra" with the beauty of the land, thus creating at least one moment of visual eye-candy for the viewers, but again, she did no such thing. The few moment of fresh scenery that we had seemed like it came from National Geographic stock footage. I realize that she was actually in India, but what concerned me was that I didn't feel like I was in India. Throughout the film I realized that I was sitting on my couch watching bad acting with recycled images of India. I was nowhere close to being swept away by a lavish love story. Wait. This wasn't an original lavish love story. This was nothing more than the cliché story of two friends whom find themselves fighting over the same man with a foreign twist. Perhaps I needed more influx into India's culture or even more back-story on our smaller characters, but nothing took my breath away. The character's lack of passion cheated me, and now Nair's choice of scenery felt just as plastic.

Finally, I would like to say that (without giving anything away); the ending was rather lackluster. Void of emotion to our characters and obvious cliché India images only strengthened the forgettable ending. Again, the title of this film was Kama Sutra, which invokes images of lust and passion, sadly the ending evoked nothing of the sort. There wasn't a care in the world for our characters, so why should we feel impassioned about them in the final climactic moments? I didn't. As I watched this film I felt as if I was on a Disney ride through India. The tracks were in place so my cart couldn't go off the forsaken path, while the robotic characters did what they were supposed to do without any surprises or excitement. The only character (and I hate to go back on this rant again, but it is the central reason this film fell hard) worth enjoying was that of Naveen Andrews, but I think it is because of his Lost connection. By the time the ending finally happened, I was sculpting my own story in rock and hoping that Hollywood would produce it.

Overall, this film did have potential, but by giving it a name like Kama Sutra it over promised and ultimately did not deliver. Again, I would like to make it clear that I was not hoping for a heavily sexual film, but it needed to be a stronger point in the story than just a "quick-cut" or a side quest. Kama Sutra failed because of its characters and their obvious lack of devotion to the story. There were no surprises, there was no excitement, and there was no romance, just cliché plot points that you can see in any film across the fine Earth. Could Nair been more adventurous? This reviewer thinks so. She could have taken us off the beaten path, deeper within the darkness, but instead she glossed over the truth giving us a Kama Sutra that was more pastel than passionate.

Grade: ** out of *****

Good Love Story / Drama

[toddphillips-1 · 28 January 2002]

When I rented KAMA SUTRA - A Tale Of Love, I thought my girlfriend would kill me for what the title implied. We were plesantly suprised to find a Love Story / Drama which, yes, has some very sexy scenes in it. Those looking for a movie version of the ancient text will be disapointed with the reasonable use of sexual content. There is an actual storyline here! This film is about true love, and the struggle for that love in the face of adversity. The love triangle, along with enough character development to explain the relationships between the five main characters, speaks of the human condition.

The story takes place "Once upon a time...". The costumes and sets are really well done. The cinematography is richly textured, with India as the exotic backdrop, and you are transported back into time... and into the lovers' experience.

This movie can take you through a full range of emotions, see it with your significant other, and expect it to effect you for the rest of the night.

Probably one of the worst movies error

[postbox-vijay · 1/10 · 31 March 2008]

Expected a lot more from the maker of Salaam Bombay. Bought a DVD version of the movie in Canada with a sequel from Mira Nair herself.

She babbled erotic scenes and melodramatic sequences are a must to the story. But where is the storyline here? At best she has exploited the flesh of then beautiful women in the world Indra Verma.

In Mira Nair rates herself as the purveyor of women liberation and wanna highlight the plight of a servant girl in the medieval India, whats the point in those surrogate scenes? Still cannot figure out why this movie was labeled Kamasutra.

A billion dollar question even the director cannot answer

A complete disaster

[Li_85 · 3/10 · 15 June 2006]

Kama Sutra is a good opportunity gone to waste. First of all, it must be quite hard to find a Indian actress for this role. Reason being is, at the time, there were hardly any Indian girls willing to perform sexual acts. Maybe in porn movies, but you need a professional actor as well. The two actresses who star in the movies were not that great Their acting skills weren't very impressive. Indira Varma was a little sexy in a few scenes, the other actress wasn't. The movie is titles Kama Sutra, you expect to see some different unusual positions. But No, forget positions, there's hardly any sex in it. A Daft storyline, which is apparently true with bad performances. Some of the actors cant speak English properly, with bad accent.