Viceroy's House is the story of the end of British rule in India, and what ended up being the partition of India into India and Pakistan. The film opens with the arrival of Lord Moutnbatten (Bonneville) and his wife (Anderson) to India, and concludes just after India and Pakistan claim independence/nationhood. The bits that follow the drama of the handover of power are very well done. Bonneville and Anderson due a worthy job of making you feel that they care for what is going on and keep you invested. Scenes with the Indians working in the house show the tensions growing as the decision whether to keep India whole or divide it comes to be made. It's certainly a part of history not often touched upon, and I learned some stuff from it.However, there's a second main thread to the movie which hampers the much stronger historical side. That would be the love interest between the Hindu Jeet and Muslim Aalia. By the end of the movie these scenes felt rather forced, and I couldn't help but want the movie to go back to the far more interesting historical aspects.It's definitely a movie worth seeing, but there may be some eye-rolling involved.

I have read many books and seen the events of 1947 first hand. But Gurinder Chadha brings new facts about Churchill and Partitioned Map of India drawn in 1945. Hasting Ismay role in giving secret files to Radcliffe was unknown to me.Also Mounbatten finding out the 1945 Files was something I did not know. Thanks to Prince Charles for guiding Gurinder Chadha and great job done where she put her SOUL into this movie. I saw it last night on rented DVD thru Netflix.

they are just showing the one sided picture and did not mentioned anywhere the affairs of Nehru and lady Mountbatten and the other genuine things that influenced the whole scenario, it would have been more enjoyable and balanced with all of those missing facts. Otherwise it's just a good watch not a movie to learn a history from.

I like the movie, but the content of films are totally based on propaganda and in the point of view of Indians Hindus. For example , Jinnah never said this "Pakistan will be a secular country" Second Jinnah and Churchill decide the plan of dividing India ?In other side , the selection of actors are not good but they act well , specially Huma Qureshi and Hugh Bonneville . The Jinnah character is not show well that's I understand , they show him as bad :) but same the character of Nehru and Ghandhi was not portrayed well .. Over all its a good film if you don't want to know the real history . .