The Rains of Ranchipur (1955)

You won't be disappointed!

Wow! Such a good movie.

Close shines in drama with strong language, adult themes.

This movie feels like it was made purely to piss off people who want good shows

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!

Manicured and coiffed for battle, man-eater Lana Turner arrives in Ranchipur and spots her prey in the guise of a turbaned bottle-tanned Richard Burton. Turner as the notorious Lady Edwina Esketh takes no prisoners and leaves a trail of broken men wherever she hunts. The noble Dr. Safti played by Burton seems too intelligent to succumb to the obvious wiles of La Turner, but surrender he does. Although both Turner and Burton are warned against the affair by the local Maharani, Eugenie Leontovich, Turner feels that Burton needs instruction in matters of the heart, and love or hormones conquer all. The turgid melodrama, "The Rains of Ranchipur," is played out against the color of a provincial Indian city, where the rain beats incessantly, and the earth occasionally moves. Meanwhile, an alcoholic Fred MacMurray and an irritating ingenue, Joan Caulfield, go through the motions of a secondary, but unconvincing love coupling. A stoic Michael Rennie as the patient Lord Esketh stands by and tolerates his wife's promiscuous behavior; he traded a title for her money in their loveless marriage of convenience.Fans of Lana Turner will not be disappointed. The Grande Dame plays her part with gusto; hair, makeup, and nails immaculate, except during the requisite dramatic scenes, when she either pursues her man into a raging downpour or lays pale and wan, but definitely gorgeous on a sick bed. Richard Burton is too good an actor to be less than professional, although his role as an Indian doctor raised from the untouchable class is a stretch of credibility; Burton's dark make-up seems to lighten as the romance blooms, perhaps to soften any backlash from foes of inter-racial dating. Although filmed in Pakistan, evidently few local thespians were available, because, besides Burton, casting the Russian actress Leontovich as a Maharani is another amusing stretch. Unfortunately, the usually dependable MacMurray seems to be sleepwalking and never convinces as the drunk that other characters seem to think he is. Perhaps working with Caulfield kept him sober; her character, Fern Simon, is annoying at best and as grating as fingernails on a blackboard at worst.Based on a 1937 novel by Louis Bromfield, The Rains Came, which was previously filmed in 1939 with Tyrone Power and Myrna Loy, "The Rains of Ranchipur" shows signs of a thick 500-page novel having been condensed into a 104-minute film. The motivation for the secondary MacMurray-Caulfield romance is particularly sketchy, and scenes at times jump without explanatory bridges. However, the climactic earthquake and floods are quite good for a 1955 film, and the special effects received a well deserved Oscar nomination that year. Directed by Jean Negulesco, "The Rains of Ranchipur" is a trashy soap opera that may elicit a few giggles from time to time and will definitely entertain those who enjoy 1950's melodrama. However, for fans of Lana Turner, the film is a must; Turner bites into a showy role and chews the scenery with the best. The old adage that "they don't make movies like this anymore" applies here; some may consider that a blessing, while others will see it as a loss.

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

NOTE---POSSIBLE SPOILER FOR ONE OF THE FILM'S IMPORTANT SCENES---The whole movie was good, but the great earthquake scene was spectacular! Then the dam breaking! No music was used during the entire sequence to attempt to build drama or enhance what was happening on the screen, it wasn't necessary. The minimal use of sound effects in that scene also added to the sense of impending, ominous doom. Great directing! Great special effects, especially considering the era when it was made!---Bolt.