Comment

Jan 01, 2018gord_ma rated this title 4 out of 5 stars
“Love is life. All, everything that I understand, I understand only because I love.”  – Leo Tolstoy   [Doctor Zhivago], adapted from the novel by Boris Pasternak and filmed by the great David Lean, remains one of the world’s great epics of film. On the face, the film is a tragic romance that follows a young Russian doctor, his family, and his forbidden lover through the tumults of World War I, the Russian Revolution, the Russian Civil War, and the Stalinist period. But, as with all epics, nothing is so transparent.    As filmed by Lean, [Doctor Zhivago] is an enjoyable adventure that is stuffed with epic, unforgettable vistas, iconic but tortured heroes and complex villains, excellent editing, memorable dialogue, and even a Chekhov’s gun. Everything about this film was first-rate then, and arguably even now.    From [Lawrence of Arabia], Lean not only re-enlisted Omar Sharif and Alec Guinness, but also Maurice Jarre for the score, screenwriter Robert Bolt, and cinematographer Freddie Young. Great performances herein by Julie Christie as Lara, Rod Steiger as the intriguingly immoral Victor Komarovsky, Tom Courtenay as the naïve young activist Pasha, Rita Tushingham as Tanya, Lili Murati as the train jumper, Klaus Kinski in a superb but albeit too brief a role. And true to epic form, a background cast of thousands.    Upon release, many contemporary critics savaged [Doctor Zhivago] for its lengthy and indirect plot that spanned over three hours. Other critics condemned a lack in character development, a central romance they felt was over-hyped, and for much heavy-handed soppiness. Still some condemned the loose adaptation for missing out on the meaning behind Pasternak’s original novel and his poetry. But the contemporary critics had it wrong. In fact, the People insisted that the critics were wrong.    As with James Cameron’s [Titanic], decades later, audiences loved this technical masterpiece centred on a doomed romance, especially as buoyed by its massively popular score by Jarre. When adjusted for inflation, [Doctor Zhivago] earned over a billion dollars. But is [Doctor Zhivago] a good film?    [Doctor Zhivago] is slow but technically marvelous, beautiful, and intelligent. It is not a bad film. Bad films tend to prompt their audiences to ask, “Was this film necessary?” Was [Justice League] necessary or [Plan 9 from Outer Space]? There is a consensus that even if he wasn’t broke at the time, Francis Ford Coppola had no reason whatsoever to film [The Godfather Part III].    Good films, like [Doctor Zhivago], asks us questions.    Does Dr. Yuri Zhivago’s struggle between his wife and his lover, his past and his future, the comforts and lustre of the Romanov-era versus the firmness of the revolutionary period, mirror the Russian nation’s painful entry into modernity?    Does the film provide a critique of the Revolution or the USSR or collectivism? That is, whether it was right or wrong, good or bad that the initially populist revolution was subverted into a force that steamrolled the people into compliance or worse?    Can collectivism provide the individual with the essentials of life, i.e. family, friendship, passion, community, meaning, truth, and love?    The film prompts us for answers, none that I can provide in the space given here. But as it was in the film, Lean’s [Zhivago] ends with a final piece of wistful idealism: that the new generation should avoid the confusion, the errors, and the waste of their parents.   “Wind” by Boris Pasternak Trans. by R. Pevear and L. Volokhonsky   I’m no more, but you’re still alive, And the wind, complaining, weeping, Sways the forest and the dacha, Not each pine tree separately, But all in their entirety, With all the boundless distances, Like the hulls of sailing ships On the smooth surface of a harbour. And it’s not out of mere bravado, Nor out of pointless fury, but So as in anguish to find words To make for you a lullaby.