Sat 20 Jan 2007
Friday, 19th January
From time to time, when I was a boy, it would be said within my hearing that Mrs So-and-So had been to see Doctor Zhivago. As when someone had been to Lourdes, you felt it wasn’t appropriate to ask whether they had enjoyed it. Nor did you usually hear tell of anyone who had gone to see Doctor Zhivago more than once. To my tender ears, the name Zhivago held a certain unpleasant threat which wasn’t to be matched until the works of Harold Shipman became generally known.
Zhivago was a super-production of 1965, garlanded with three Oscars, despite competing with The Sound of Music, which suggests its brow was trailing dangerously close to the ground. None of the principle actors was even nominated for an award - so it was thought to be a jolly good thing, in general but without the sort of particulars which anyone in the Academy really wished to encourage. I was nine and had an early musical task entrusted to me: extracting the top line of Lara’s Theme for the school recorders to play. It’s one of those tunes that is pretty once but, heard daily in rehearsal, it was about as endearing as school disinfectant. Some notes were impossible on recorders so they were modified by the music master. Having heard the whole score tonight for the first time, I think I may have been over-critical about that three-minute school version.
Let’s not forget that the Bolshevik Revolution was also, no doubt, a horrible thing, impossible to sit through. David Lean took his revenge by directing this cinematic counter-revolution in which a moral victory could be snatched out of the ruins. It would be a monument to the middle-class, middle-brow, and middle-aged. It would celebrate poetry in terms which even the English could understand: a pot of ink, an icy desk and a flock of golden daffodils. Tactfully, it would avoid quoting a single line of the poet’s verses. This, after all is poetry as commodity, flourished like a passport and likely to inspire respect even in one’s sworn enemies. On its own, it won’t impress the groundlings much, so our poet must also be a doctor, glimpsed at regular intervals tying a splint around a broken limb or closing the eyes of a corpse. The doctor as bourgeois individualist has more fun in Altman’s MASH. Come to think of it, Gary Cooper had more fun in A Farewell to Arms. Zhivago must be seen doctoring as much as possible and Lara must dash away with her smoothing iron; you see, these are not decadent bourgeois, but the real workers in a country where the workers did nothing but whinge, protest and act nasty.
This is a film in which about half a dozen characters count and the tides of extras are part of the scenery. Hostile scenery, for much of the time. You can tell it’s an epic from the scene where Zhivago is caught stealing wood on the same day as the Bolsheviks ransack the last room left in the house. A wisp of a scene that should have been handled with irony and intimacy. Instead, the screen fills with grey hordes and the moral lesson is read at great length by Alec Guinness, playing a half-brother whose rĂ´le in the drama is disturbingly surplus. He opens and closes the thing, to be sure, but he feels like an expensive luxury, one that was ordered and needs to be used, even if only as a door-stop.
Julie Christie is pretty but in a sixties way. When Rita Tushingham makes an appearance, it seems a pity that we couldn’t also have had Dora Bryan show up as a Babushka in a shawl to claim her and drag her back to Salford. Omar Sharif is handsome but can do nothing to remedy the emptiness of his part. Rod Steiger has too many lines, in contrast, but his playing is as near human the temperature gets in this waxwork world.
Old VHS copies are not a bad way to catch up on films you feel a duty to view once. This was in OAR & goodish stereo. Yes I know they were meant to be seen in a deluxe theatre in 70mm but this sort of viewing should establish if the picture has anything but spectacle to offer. I endured Lawrence of Arabia last February. I’ll see if I can get a note to excuse me from Ryan’s Daughter.
January 21st, 2007 at 10:59 am
Despite agreeing with nearly everything you say, I love the film. It’s a triumph of spectacle and massive set-piece scenes, and it has the ability to take your breath away, even if the whole experience does come across as slightly hollow - revolutionlite, if you like. But hey, I’ve (sort of) studied the revolutiuon, and coming close to capture its real nature would have made for a longer and less fun movie.
January 21st, 2007 at 11:03 pm
Like anything else, film boils down to a matter of taste, but I still think you’ve been pretty snide about Dr Zhivago. Sure, it’s stagey and melodramatic, but what do you expect of a big-screen epic made in 1965? Appreciated on its own merits, it’s a superb piece of visual storytelling. The cinematography is exceptionally beautiful and the performances still affecting even at the remove of over 40 years. As for Julie Christie being “…pretty, but in a sixties way,” that’s rather like saying the sun is bright, but in a ‘main-sequence star’ way. To be frank, if you really found so little of merit in Doctor Zhivago and describe yourself merely as having ‘endured’ Lawrence of Arabia, I think you’re beyond redemption!
January 22nd, 2007 at 1:42 am
I suspect that I obtain a great deal more fun lobbing snowballs at Zhivago than anyone ever does sitting solemnly within its icy grip.
It remains impressive entirely in general: costumes, sets and photography are ostentatiously splendid.
Can anyone, however, venture an appreciation of any single scene dramatically?
January 22nd, 2007 at 11:57 pm
Yes, loads! I guess the thing is, DZ is one of those films I became fixated on as a kid so I think its impact on me may have been a little exaggerated. Its funny you mentioned this particular point, though, as there are so many specific moments that have lodged in my memory. In a way, I can understand (to an extent) why people talk about Lean making ’scenes’, rather than ‘films’, but I’ve never thought of this as being a negative thing, at least not until ‘Ryan’s Daughter’.
Anyway, stand out moments include:
- Yuri and Lara’s silent walk through the frozen house
- Yevgraf clearing an entire room by snapping his fingers
- Young Yuri imagining his mother lying in her coffin
- Gromeko’s wordless, brimming welcome of Tonya
- Transition from Tushingham’s face to the epic landscape
- Opening the carriage door to reveal its ice covering
- The cavalry charge across the ice
- “Yes, that’s Strelnikov,” and the immediate shot of Pasha
…and more! This last moment actually caused a friend of mine to shout out ‘Fuck!’ in delighted surprise when I showed
BTW, ‘beyond redemption’ is rather strong, sorry. I would have changed it but there’s no edit function…
January 23rd, 2007 at 12:03 am
Yes, loads! I guess the thing is, DZ is one of those films I became fixated on as a kid so I think its impact on me may have been a little exaggerated. Its funny you mentioned this particular point, though, as there are so many specific moments that have lodged in my memory. In a way, I can understand (to an extent) why people talk about Lean making ’scenes’, rather than ‘films’, but I’ve never thought of this as being a negative thing, at least not until ‘Ryan’s Daughter’.
Anyway, stand out moments include:
- Yuri and Lara’s silent walk through the frozen house
- Yevgraf clearing an entire room by snapping his fingers
- Young Yuri imagining his mother lying in her coffin
- Gromeko’s wordless, brimming welcome of Tonya
- Transition from Tushingham’s face to the epic landscape
- Opening the carriage door to reveal its ice covering
- The cavalry charge across the ice
- “Yes, that’s Strelnikov,” and the immediate shot of Pasha
…and more! This last moment actually caused someone I know to shout out ‘Fuck!’ in delighted surprise when I showed the film to a group of friends.
BTW, ‘beyond redemption’ is rather strong, sorry. I would have changed it but there’s no edit function…
January 26th, 2007 at 9:44 pm
I rather envy anyone who got to see the picture in a 70mm presentation, where I’m sure its impact would be tremendous.
I agree that the moments you mention are striking visually but when they are dramatic, they often seem to me to be dramatically wrong.
Take the coffin scene. You interpret it - sensibly enough - as existing in the young Yuri’s imagination. The sound-design gives us the soil on the lid from the POV of the corpse. Pure Poe! Coming quite early in the film, it is not simply a lapse of taste but a jarring dissonance of genre. It should have been resisted.
At the other end of the picture, the frozen house is utterly delicious. But it is a confection spun out of sugar. A house so distractingly sweet that we expect a line of swans in tutus to come tripping down the stairs. It is a feast for the eyes but it has to function dramatically as both a correlative to Zhivago’s ideal love affair and to the inspired word of his poetry.
Not something a witch-house can properly do. It’s the web spun by a deceptive spirit or Lamia. We may want to believe in it but surely we don’t! Not if we care for redemption really:-)