Why is this not up there with Citizen Kane, Vertigo, 8 1/2, The Godfather, 2001 a Space Odyssey, Jules and JIm etc?
I just watched it and am just awestruck. This is right up there in my all time favourite list. What a movie. I am reading the book now and I am going to revisit this once I am done with the book.
First, that's a fine list you made there. I can tell you why I think "Zhivago" does not belong there... several reasons:
>the story is at least nominally about Zhivago, but almost all of the first 1/2 hour is about Lara
>Zhivago and Lara apparently fall in love while working together at the makeshift hospital. And yet -- there is not one second of screen time provided to show how this relationship developed -- MAJOR oversight. In one scene, they've been brought to the hospital to help; the very next scene, presumably a number of months later, they are getting ready to leave the hospital, and Zhivago more or less states his love for Lara, and she more or less reciprocates. Since this relationship is integral to the story, we really should have been shown how and why it blossomed --
>too many contrived plot developments -- specifically, characters who knew each other years earlier, in completely different locations, keep running into each other
>although I love the wonderful wide shots Lean gives us throughout this film, they tend to be overly long, as if he's intending for some connotation to emerge
BTW -- "Bridge Over the River Kwai" and "Lawrence of Arabia" are both in my personal Top 10 of favorites --
As I sat here watching this movie I could not put my finger on why I just don't think that though, quite a visual spectacle, it is not all that great.
I find your points very helpful. There is no chemistry between Omar & Julie. The camera loves Julie Christie's eyes and the camera lives Omar sharrif's eyes; but there is no acting that indicates they love each other's eyes.
And, omg, is there a female character who has an idea in her head other her state with regards to her man ? All the characters seem very shallow and static.
I think the sweep and historical importance of the backdrop (war, revolution) and the visual beauty of many scenes are the source of its high ratings.
>Zhivago and Lara apparently fall in love while working together at the makeshift hospital. And yet -- there is not one second of screen time provided to show how this relationship developed -- MAJOR oversight. In one scene, they've been brought to the hospital to help; the very next scene, presumably a number of months later, they are getting ready to leave the hospital, and Zhivago more or less states his love for Lara, and she more or less reciprocates. Since this relationship is integral to the story, we really should have been shown how and why it blossomed
You're in good company with a lot of other people who admire and love the film, but, even as an industry rep and film lover, my personal opinion is that it's just too big of a film with too little pay off. The exposition is very staged, by today's younger audience standards, it's a bit long and overburdened with inhibitions on the character's part, and it just one giant torture session for Omar Shariff's character.
It's also not very true to some of history, and the shots where you're supposed to feel and say "how horrible", like the train sequence, aren't that convincing by today's standards.
I've never liked it much myself even though I'm old enough to remember when it came out.
the critics are stupid, when vertigo first came they hated it, and the audience too. the intelligent people in this world are minority.
shareProbably because it focused on Russian characters, which Americans love to hate. I loved it as a kid, I definitely think it's one of the best and most ambitious films ever made.
shareMy grandad loved this film, Russian or no, he knew a universal story when he saw one. He came from the generation of Americans who grew up in a time of peace, who were taught war is too costly for this earth in resources and in human spirit, but had to shift all teachings to the back of his mind as he went to fight the Japanese. This became his favourite film, I suppose, because he had a sweetheart back home who he thought he would never see again, once he had lived through the horrors of war, the unspeakable horrors and tragedies which he repressed for many years, he came back and had a family with my grandma, he studied microbiology and moved away from farm work, which he found dreadfully dull... I guess by the time this film came about he was settled in his new life, and it all came back to him, hs friends who never made it, life that could have been, I don't know, but he watched this film more than any other. I think he loved it for its poetic nature, as a piece of poetry, this film is unparrarelled. It's the closest I can come to my mind about why he loved it so much. Poetry was the soldier's way of expressing themselves without sounding weak, pathetic or hysterical, it showed they made sense of the horrors and tragedies around them, he knew in the end that everything he learnt before the war was right, so he carried on writing poetry until he died, his name was Jules Vernon Hallum, he was good. I love this film because it reminds me of my grandad, but when I try to understand why he likes it, I like it even more. I hope this helps put some perspective on why the film is important to people who do relate to it. The long camera shots are for people who ponder, who make sense of what is going on. I think it's a teriffic film, but I can see how certain people don't share that desire to fill the gaps. To me, those gaps of beautiful scenery go by very quickly, but just as 9 seconds can seem like an eternity when you are waiting for something, you may wind up making the same mistake when you "wait for something" to happen there, and if you've got the blopper in hand waiting to fast forward those bits, I can tell you, this film ain't for you.
shareIt may have had less popular appeal, but it is up there as one of the great films in the minds of a very diverse group of leading filmmakers today, who say they were profoundly influenced by it. James Cameron, Steven Speilberg, John Woo, Gary Ross, Kathleen Kennedy and others.
Interesting that you are reading the novel as well. I think the film captured some aspects of the novel well while it made major changes to the story (of necessity, IMO). I think that one reason it lacks the popular appeal of some of the other films is that its themes are more subtle and some things that the audience expects -- a passionate love story, for one -- are underplayed or lacking. Whether this was Lean's intent I can't say but one common element in both Pasternak's novel and the film is how individuals are tossed about by revolution and disaster, and their lives disrupted both emotionally and physically. Zhivago and Lara don't have the "spark" together that viewers expect to see; but theirs is a bond brought about by circumstance and they cling to each other in a relationship that is not so much one of raw eroticism as of floundering fellow survivors of tragedy. Zhivago is also a passive person in the story; he doesn't make things happen, he observes and reflects on them (and suffers from them). In that he is contrasted with Yevgrav, who is an active participant at all points.
This film is in my top films list because there is so much in it to appreciate, though often its only after repeated viewings and a reflection.
Spielberg, et al were profoundly influenced by it? That is interesting.
shareYeah, Spielberg said it "destroyed" him when he first saw it as a teenager. And really, it definitely seems like his kind of material.
shareSpielberg, et al were profoundly influenced by it? That is interesting.
A film that affected me a lot when I was eighteen or nineteen was Dr. Zhivago. A lot of people don't consider that Lean's best film, but it was my first David Lean film on the big screen. It's still a stunning movie. So if there's any sense of conscious emulation, or setting the bar high, it would be Lean. But I didn't get there with this film [Titanic]. I might never get there, but you gotta set the goal high, so that when you fail, you're failing at a higher level.
Um... It is considered one of the greatest films of all time.
shareI was going to say exactly what you said. Right down to the 'um' at the start ;)
Never defend crap with 'It's just a movie'
http://www.youtube.com/user/BigGreenProds
Because most people are sheep like simple
share