Sergio Leone Web Board

Other/Miscellaneous => Off-Topic Discussion => Topic started by: The Peacemaker on February 23, 2006, 07:47:09 PM

Title: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: The Peacemaker on February 23, 2006, 07:47:09 PM
Just saw Doctor Zhivago and I loved it! David Lean is one of the greatest directors of all time and can easily be compared to the great Sergio Leone. Every shot is like a painting, some can even be quite haunting such as the guards facing off against a crowd of peaceful protestors or when Zhivago is following the sound of the waterfall through the woods but accidently ends up facing Strelnikov's armored train. The beautiful shots of the Russian landscape that lavishingly fill the screen, the haunting theme music, and the fierce social commentary all add to the powerful effect this film has.
Title: Re: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: Beebs on February 23, 2006, 09:14:21 PM
What can I say, I must be a Lean trend starter.
Title: Re: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: dave jenkins on February 23, 2006, 09:23:47 PM
Zhivago is a terrible film, but Kinski's scene is great. The DVD is worth owning just so you can replay Kinski ranting over and over again.
Title: Re: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: Groggy on February 25, 2006, 08:45:07 AM
I like "Zhivago" a good bit, though not nearly as much as LoA or "Bridge On The River Kwai".  As I've said before I was never overly convinced by Zhivago and Lara's love for each other, but I was able to overlook that to an extent.

Omar Shariff is amazing, there's no other word to describe.  Pretty much the whole supporting cast is superb, particularly Tom Courtenay as Pasha/Strelnikov and Rod Steiger as Komarovsky.  (I'd add Alec Guinness but his part's rather small.)  I honestly didn't like Kinski in this one, though it was good to see him.

The cinematography is beautiful, and I love Maurice Jarre's score.  The set for the "ice palace" towards the end was quite haunting.

I'd give it about 8/10.
Title: Re: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: The Peacemaker on February 26, 2006, 03:54:43 PM
I really wish we were able to see Strelnikov and Komarovsky more in the film. After the intermission we only see Courtenay for one more scene before he completely vanishes and Rod Steiger's part is so minimal that I doubt he is seen more than 25 minutes in the film.

But I love the film and in my opinion it's much better than Lawrence of Arabia and Bridge on the River Kwai, but they are still great too.
Title: Re: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: Groggy on February 27, 2006, 08:35:03 PM
I really wish we were able to see Strelnikov and Komarovsky more in the film. After the intermission we only see Courtenay for one more scene before he completely vanishes and Rod Steiger's part is so minimal that I doubt he is seen more than 25 minutes in the film.

But I love the film and in my opinion it's much better than Lawrence of Arabia and Bridge on the River Kwai, but they are still great too.

I agree, like I said those are my two favorite characters, particularly Komarovsky.  I've never been a big Steiger fan, but DAMN is he good here.
Title: Re: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: Groggy on March 06, 2006, 06:18:27 PM
BTW has anyone here seen the PBS miniseries with Keira Knightley and Sam Neill?  I'm just curious, I've heard both good and bad things about it, so if anyone here's seen it I'd be interested in any advice. . .
Title: Re: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: Beebs on March 12, 2006, 11:04:53 AM
Why, Groggy! You've changed. Is this the new summer look?
Title: Re: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: Groggy on March 12, 2006, 04:42:49 PM
Well, I've been looking for a good avatar for a couple of months now, and I just found that one on another thread here.  No big story.  I've already used a variation of it on several other boards in the past.
Title: Re: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: The Peacemaker on March 12, 2006, 10:31:51 PM
I just had that avatar a couple of months ago. I too was considering changing my avatar.
Title: Re: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: Groggy on March 18, 2006, 08:54:16 PM
Anyway, to get somewhat back on topic, I would like to agree with Peacemaker's assertion about Lean being comparable to Leone.  In reality, there are only three other directors whom I hold in as high of regard as Leone: Ford, Peckinpah, and Lean.  I think it's beyond question (as others have said) that Leone used Lean's films - particularly "Lawrence of Arabia" - as a reference point.  (I'm sure I'm not the only one who thinks of LoA during the desert scenes in GBU.)  Certainly Peckinpah did; as several have pointed out, "Major Dundee" contains several references, probably though not definitely intentional, to LoA.  (It may be of note on that score that Anthony Quinn appears to have been the first choice for Tyreen, though honestly I can't see anyone but Harris in the role.)  And the blowing of the bridge in "The Wild Bunch" used similar camera angles as in "Kwai". 

But anyway, I think very highly of David Lean.  While his films are pervaded by a strong anti-war sentiment (not that there's anything wrong with that, though it does cause distortion of historical fact more than once), that does not change the fact that he is a truly amazing director.  I'm curious what he thought of Leone's films, or if he even saw them.
Title: Re: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: The Peacemaker on March 18, 2006, 09:36:01 PM
Well, he was an American director so I don't think he took Leone or his films seriously. I would like to hear what Lean had to say about him anyway.
Title: Re: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: Groggy on March 19, 2006, 06:18:51 AM
Lean was actually British, but point taken.  :P
Title: Re: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: Groggy on April 01, 2006, 06:35:31 PM
I'm pretty far into the novel (350 pages out of about 510 in my edition), and most of the complaints that I had about the movie are remedied by the book.  The historical elements (particularly WWI and Zhivago's involvement in with the Partisan Rangers) are described in much more detail and work better than in the film.  Pasha/Strelnikov, while not necessarily appearing more, is described in a lot more detail (his character is very different than in the book, and his meeting with Zhivago is too), though Komarovsky is MIA at this point in the book too.  I'm not done with the novel yet, but I'd recommend it if you could find to time to read it.  Most (though not all) of the problems you'd be likely to have with the movie aren't there in the book.
Title: Re: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: Jon0 on November 25, 2006, 06:37:13 PM
Question: does anyone know where much of the landscapes were shot for this film?

I'm guessing Colorado?
Title: Re: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: Jon0 on November 25, 2006, 06:50:22 PM
Also: is the Pasha Antipov character supposed to be based on or inspired by Leon Trotsky?  The bespectacled, fanatical army General dashing across Russia on a train brought Trot to mind for me at least.
Title: Re: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: Groggy on November 26, 2006, 05:53:14 AM
Question: does anyone know where much of the landscapes were shot for this film?

I'm guessing Colorado?

It was shot almost entirely in Spain, with a few scenes in Finland and Canada.

The really snowy scenes were shot in Finland, without any doubt.  Most of the snow was fake (I believe they said it was marble dust).  The only scene that was shot in Finland was Zhivago's escape from the Partisans, plus a few of the establishing shots of the Russian winter.  Amazingly enough, the cavalry charge on the lake was shot in Spain on a 100-degree day.  The only scenes filmed in Canada that I'm aware of are some shots of the Urals train.

The entire town of Moscow was built from scratch right outside Madrid (it was either Barajas or Canillas, I forget).  All of the World War I scenes (except the parade of course) and most of the partisan scenes (except the ones already mentioned) were shot in Soria.  I think Varykino was there too, but don't quote me on that.

As a point of interest, filiming the USSR was considered by Lean and the producers, but it didn't pan out because their government wasn't too keen on the idea.

Quote
Also: is the Pasha Antipov character supposed to be based on or inspired by Leon Trotsky?  The bespectacled, fanatical army General dashing across Russia on a train brought Trot to mind for me at least.


Probably on Trotsky somewhat, but I believe that the main model for his character was Felix Edmundovich Dzerzhinsky, the head of the Cheka (Soviet Secret Police).  Dzerzhinsky was an intellectual and something of a poet who, after the outbreak of the Revolution, became a die-hard Bolshevik.  He also invented a type of calculator, the "Felix", which was widely used for decades in Eastern Europe, and a type of camera as well.  He was known as being incorruptibly honest and devoted to the cause.  Unlike Strelnikov, however, he lived and continued to have influence in government until his death in 1926.

Aw hell, I just broke my Sabbatical.  Whatever.  :P
Title: Re: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: cigar joe on November 26, 2006, 06:27:14 AM
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0059113/locations
Title: Re: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: Jon0 on November 26, 2006, 07:35:42 AM
Also, I've heard the book was originally banned in the USSR.  How about the film?
Title: Re: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: Groggy on November 26, 2006, 03:06:55 PM
Also, I've heard the book was originally banned in the USSR.  How about the film?

IIRC the film wasn't shown in Russia until 1994.  When it was released it didn't get a particularly warm reception either.
Title: Re: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: titoli on August 13, 2008, 04:11:49 PM
Doctor Zhivago - I saw this in my preteens at the cinema and was bored to death. Tried later but could scarcely get beyond the first  15 minutes. Today I watched it all and got about the same negative reaction, but now I can understand why. But I won't go into it. Great Kinski cameo. 3\10
Title: Re: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: Groggy on August 13, 2008, 04:31:55 PM
Doctor Zhivago - I saw this in my preteens at the cinema and was bored to death. Tried later but could scarcely get beyond the first  15 minutes. Today I watched it all and got about the same negative reaction, but now I can understand why. But I won't go into it. Great Kinski cameo. 3\10

Zhivago is Lean's weakest epic, and it has a large number of flaws that are very easy to spot. I'm not going to bother trying to change your mind because I imagine I'd agree with a lot of your criticisms. It helps to view the film as an experience - the visuals are amazing, the spectacle is without peer, gorgeous music, and some good performances among the supporting cast, at least. Just ignore the story and characters and you should be okay. :D
Title: Re: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: titoli on August 13, 2008, 06:27:27 PM
Zhivago is Lean's weakest epic, and it has a large number of flaws that are very easy to spot. I'm not going to bother trying to change your mind because I imagine I'd agree with a lot of your criticisms. It helps to view the film as an experience - the visuals are amazing, the spectacle is without peer, gorgeous music, and some good performances among the supporting cast, at least. Just ignore the story and characters and you should be okay. :D

Unfortunately I have seen the fullscreen version aired by the italian publiic tv, dubbed and with pale colours. So I wasn't impressed by the visuals either but I don't think that a better release would make much difference as Russia, expecially the city streets, looks a sham (I don't know where the movie was shot). And ignoring story and characters is a big effort to ask to this viewer, expecially as this is a epic movie. Kinski's cameo is the only moment where you perceive something diffferent might have been made out of this meatloaf.   

Only thing I appreciate is to have assessed better the Steiger's character, whom I had always vaguely remembered in the negative.
Title: Re: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: Groggy on August 14, 2008, 05:03:43 AM
Unfortunately I have seen the fullscreen version aired by the italian publiic tv, dubbed and with pale colours. So I wasn't impressed by the visuals either but I don't think that a better release would make much difference as Russia, expecially the city streets, looks a sham (I don't know where the movie was shot). And ignoring story and characters is a big effort to ask to this viewer, expecially as this is a epic movie. Kinski's cameo is the only moment where you perceive something diffferent might have been made out of this meatloaf.   

Only thing I appreciate is to have assessed better the Steiger's character, whom I had always vaguely remembered in the negative.

Of course it's a sham. Do you really think they would have been able to film in the USSR at the time? Especially considering the book was banned there.

Movie was shot in Spain, with a few additional scenes in Finland and Canada. I think the production design is amazing - especially considering that a lot of the snow-bound scenes were shot in 100 degree weather in the summer.

Kinski's bit part is loads of fun, I'll agree. But it's a romance, what were you expecting? I don't see how you could take issue with Rod Steiger, Tom Courtenay and Alec Guinness. Reasonable people can disagree on Sharif, who admittedly isn't great, but then the role of Zhivago would defeat just about everyone by its nature. And I don't really care for Julie Christie either (nor Ralph Richardson).
Title: Re: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: dave jenkins on August 14, 2008, 10:49:19 AM
Movie was shot in Spain, with a few additional scenes in Finland and Canada. I think the production design is amazing - especially considering that a lot of the snow-bound scenes were shot in 100 degree weather in the summer.
The St. Petersburg street scenes--the ones shot in a Spanish studio, if I remember rightly--look like utter shite. Everytime Lean leaves locations for studio work he makes a huge mistake (he does this a couple times in Lawrence, too). Another problem: all the actresses have 60s hair. I don't know why the proper coiffuring of actresses was such a problem then, but it was.

Title: Re: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: Groggy on August 14, 2008, 03:15:42 PM
They were constructed sets, not a studio Jenkins. And it was Moscow, not Petersburg. Read a book.
Title: Re: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: titoli on August 14, 2008, 04:12:34 PM
Of course it's a sham. Do you really think they would have been able to film in the USSR at the time? Especially considering the book was banned there.

Movie was shot in Spain, with a few additional scenes in Finland and Canada. I think the production design is amazing - especially considering that a lot of the snow-bound scenes were shot in 100 degree weather in the summer.

Kinski's bit part is loads of fun, I'll agree. But it's a romance, what were you expecting? I don't see how you could take issue with Rod Steiger, Tom Courtenay and Alec Guinness. Reasonable people can disagree on Sharif, who admittedly isn't great, but then the role of Zhivago would defeat just about everyone by its nature. And I don't really care for Julie Christie either (nor Ralph Richardson).

Of course they couldn't shoot in URSS. That's why the movie shouldn't have been made at all, as an epic movie. Sorry but I do not find anything amazing in the production design: nothing. And I think Sharif does a very good job, better than Courtenay (who is not helped by the character, who is simply absurd). Guinness playing young man is irritating. Steiger comes off better than the rest: he has the best charachter to play, though . But what I do not like it is not the coiffure but the fact that there is not a single russian looking character in the entire movie. This is a epic of no epic proportions because everything is small. The front scenes are embarassing, to put it mildly: in italian b productions they would have come off better. Much better the mutiny scene, but is it necessary for the plot? I think the movie would have had better results if it had stuck to Zhivago-Lara love story, leaving out all those incidents which slow down the movie, like the city attack of the mounted police, the war and mutiny scenes, the partisan war, the meeting Sharif-Courtenay. I could go on and on.
Title: Re: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: Groggy on August 14, 2008, 04:22:11 PM
Quote
That's why the movie shouldn't have been made at all, as an epic movie.


Rather specious logic here, I think.

Quote
And I think Sharif does a very good job, better than Courtenay (who is not helped by the character, who is simply absurd).

Please elaborate.

Quote
Guinness playing young man is irritating.

That was one scene, and in any case I found it amusing rather than irritating, myself.

Quote
This is a epic of no epic proportions because everything is small. The front scenes are embarassing, to put it mildly: in italian b productions they would have come off better.

I don't necessarily disagree with the second part of your statement, but it's not the point of the story. Lean always tried not to spend a whole lot of time on historical stuff, when there's a romance and characters to deal with.

Quote
Much better the mutiny scene, but is it necessary for the plot?


That's definitely the best scene of the movie, but it is important if for no other reason than it allows Lara and Zhivago to meet one another. It's also an homage by Lean to his favorite film, King Vidor's "The Big Parade".

Quote
think the movie would have had better results if it had stuck to Zhivago-Lara love story, leaving out all those incidents which slow down the movie, like the city attack of the mounted police, the war and mutiny scenes, the partisan war, the meeting Sharif-Courtenay. I could go on and on.


If they left out the historical stuff, it wouldn't be Doctor Zhivago. You could argue that Lean and Bolt did an awkward job of adapting it (which, again, is the nature of the beast: I've heard Zhivago described as "a 600 page poem", and I can't really disagree) but it's an essential part of the novel and its story.

As flawed as Zhivago is, I can't imagine any director or writer doing a better job translating it into a 3-and-a-half-hour film. Just by its nature, it's a futile exercise, and Lean and Bolt get credit for at least making something worth watching, if rather flawed and imperfect, out of it. I haven't seen either of the miniseries adaptations (although I'm leery of anything with Keira Knightley, personally) but that format, at least, seems the better way to adapt it.
Title: Re: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: titoli on August 14, 2008, 05:48:31 PM

Quote
Rather specious logic here, I think.

If you can't do a thing properly better not to do it. There are so many other ones to do.


Quote
Please elaborate.

There is nothing to elaborate. Courtenay's character is less than one-dimensional, irrealistic (one wonders why he marries Lara at all). 

Quote
That was one scene, and in any case I found it amusing rather than irritating, myself.

A matter of tastes.

Quote
I don't necessarily disagree with the second part of your statement, but it's not the point of the story. Lean always tried not to spend a whole lot of time on historical stuff, when there's a romance and characters to deal with.

Still that historical part is of no use and most of it easily dispensed with by verbal explanations. Actually, the less about that mess that is a revolution, the better, if your aim is making a romantic film.

Quote
That's definitely the best scene of the movie, but it is important if for no other reason than it allows Lara and Zhivago to meet one another. It's also an homage by Lean to his favorite film, King Vidor's "The Big Parade".

As above.

Quote
If they left out the historical stuff, it wouldn't be Doctor Zhivago.

Yes, but it would be a better movie.


Title: Re: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: dave jenkins on August 14, 2008, 10:04:09 PM
Titoli, when you watch Zhivago, is it with an Italian dub?

Oh, and, a much better film on a similar topic is Quiet Flows the Don (1957), which runs about 6 hours IIRC. Naturally, the Russians do movies about Russia  better. Too bad its so hard to find in a good edition on HV (the Kino disc is atrocious).
Title: Re: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: Atlas2112 on August 14, 2008, 10:20:39 PM
Of course they couldn't shoot in URSS. That's why the movie shouldn't have been made at all, as an epic movie.
I've never seen Doctor Zhivago, so i can't comment on it, but i feel kinda irked by this comment. What about GBU? Obviously not anywhere near the US, but still convincing in it's use of location. It just feels silly when concerning fiction, obviously what you're looking at is not truely "real" so whats the point of complaining about whether or not it's filmed on location. I can understand gripes about being unconvincing when it can be fixed with a little time and effort, but locations seems like crying over spilt milk.
Title: Re: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: Groggy on August 15, 2008, 05:03:19 AM
There is nothing to elaborate. Courtenay's character is less than one-dimensional, irrealistic (one wonders why he marries Lara at all).

Strongly disagree. I think Pasha/Strelnikov is by far the most interesting character in the book and movie. The only thing the movie doesn't sell me on is his ultimate fate, which is done in a frankly insulting manner.
 
Quote
Still that historical part is of no use and most of it easily dispensed with by verbal explanations. Actually, the less about that mess that is a revolution, the better, if your aim is making a romantic film.
 
...

Yes, but it would be a better movie.


Have you read, or are at least familiar with, the book Titoli? You have to have the historical content or else it's not Doctor Zhivago. That's the point here.

I would actually make the opposite argument - that the film dealt with its historical subject matter in a rather terse and truncated manner, to the point where they marginalize it. The partisan scenes in the novel are amazing (if not necessarily cinematic), and they are dealt with in what's basically a ten minute montage sequence in the movie. Most of the movie's better scenes are the historical bits, particularly considering that Sharif and Christie have very little chemistry. We don't really get a sense of why and how they fall in love. But that's another issue entirely.

I've never seen Doctor Zhivago, so i can't comment on it, but i feel kinda irked by this comment. What about GBU? Obviously not anywhere near the US, but still convincing in it's use of location. It just feels silly when concerning fiction, obviously what you're looking at is not truely "real" so whats the point of complaining about whether or not it's filmed on location. I can understand gripes about being unconvincing when it can be fixed with a little time and effort, but locations seems like crying over spilt milk.

Agree with this one hundred percent. Titoli and Jenkins' whining about this seems a head-scratcher, and frankly nitpicking. One might also ask about, oh, ANY Hollywood depiction of a foreign culture - the various sword-and-sandal epics for a start.

Naturally, the Russians do movies about Russia  better.

So I guess only Americans can make Westerns, huh Jenkins? :D
Title: Re: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: dave jenkins on August 15, 2008, 11:08:05 AM
So I guess only Americans can make Westerns, huh Jenkins? :D
A general truth that knows one exception.
Title: Re: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: titoli on August 15, 2008, 02:36:17 PM
Yes, I watched the movie dubbed and full-screen.

The fact is simply that the streets of the big cities in Zivago do not look real. Could be anywhere. I don't care whether you shoot it in Africa or in Middle East. I just care about the final result which is unsatisfactory.

Courtenay's character is unbelievable, and in the light of what we saw him do with Lara, one wonders whatever happened to make him such a mechanical character. Maybe in the book it is explained, but in the movie we're left to wonder what it made him like this. I think they wanted to exploit the surprise to see him resurface after we thought him was dead.   

I never read the book and do not intend to. I laid aside my russian since I don't know when and if i had to take it up again (which I doubt I'll be able to find time for) I would sharpen it with some other tens of books which I'd rather read than this.
Title: Re: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: Groggy on August 15, 2008, 03:23:11 PM
Yes, I watched the movie dubbed and full-screen.

Well there's a good amount of your problem.

Quote
I never read the book and do not intend to. I laid aside my russian since I don't know when and if i had to take it up again (which I doubt I'll be able to find time for) I would sharpen it with some other tens of books which I'd rather read than this.


I'm not clear why you'd want to see the movie but never have any intention of reading the book. :( It's not essential that you've read the book, but many of your criticisms would apply to the original text as well.
Title: Re: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: titoli on August 16, 2008, 07:41:19 PM
I'm not clear why you'd want to see the movie but never have any intention of reading the book. :( It's not essential that you've read the book, but many of your criticisms would apply to the original text as well.


I saw the movie because I saw it when not a teen in a cinema, because it was on tv a few weeks ago, because I was curious to see what I remembered about it. I am not likely to read the book because that would mean I should dedicate many hours to better my russian. (I never read, if not in exceptional cases, translations. I'm a snob, you know. :-[). And before arriving to Pasternak, there would be other greater russian writers I'd give my preference to. I don't think I have that much time.
Title: Re: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: Groggy on September 13, 2008, 10:01:11 PM
Jenkins, Juan and Titoli will hate this, but for those of you not so inclined:

http://nothingiswrittenfilm.blogspot.com/2008/09/seduced-by-grandeur-doctor-zhivago.html (http://nothingiswrittenfilm.blogspot.com/2008/09/seduced-by-grandeur-doctor-zhivago.html)
Title: Re: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: T.H. on September 14, 2008, 06:05:08 AM
DZ is a bloated, 3.5 hour pretentious mess with no character development and a romance (which is the heart of the story) that isn't exactly believable but I somehow really enjoy it despite the flaws. It's just so pretty to look at, consider me infatuated.
Title: Re: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: dave jenkins on September 14, 2008, 08:09:02 AM
Grogs, just because I don't like a film it doesn't follow that I don't like reading about it. I like reading any well-written piece and your Zhivago review is certainly that. You make probably the best case one can make for the film, and draw my attention to its many good points. Your summary of the plot is wonderfully concise: my hat, if I had one, would be off to you. Perhaps there are a few too many repetitions in the review (it isn't necessary to list the actors and their roles twice, for example), but with a bit of editing (you should be able to cut 10% of the words) you'd have a piece ready for publication. Well done.
Title: Re: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: Groggy on September 14, 2008, 08:29:32 AM
Well, I appreciate your comments, the only point I would make about listing the actors is that I was highlighting their performances the second time, but I suppose that's a fair criticism. I admit, trying to write a concise plot summary for this movie was torturous, and that's about as brief as I could get it without leaving out a whole lot.
Title: Re: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: Groggy on November 10, 2008, 03:02:47 PM
Lasermagnetic, the IMDB gentleman who brought us the From Script to Screen thread on Lawrence of Arabia, is now undertaking a similar project for Zhivago. Check it out:

http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0059113/board/nest/121105187 (http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0059113/board/nest/121105187)
Title: Re: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: Groggy on March 20, 2010, 04:06:07 PM
Came across the shooting script today.
http://www.dailyscript.com/scripts/drzhivago.pdf (http://www.dailyscript.com/scripts/drzhivago.pdf)

This looks pretty damned legit to me.
Title: Re: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: dave jenkins on April 19, 2010, 03:18:57 PM
Beaver reviews the Blu-ray: http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film3/blu-ray_reviews51/doctor_zhivago_blu-ray.htm

Arrrrggghhhh! I hate dropping 30 bucks for a film I dislike, but I suppose I'll have to get it for the sake of the Kinski scene.
Title: Re: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: Groggy on April 19, 2010, 06:05:53 PM
I'm happy enough with my 35th Anniversary DVD. Looks like most of the special features are the same.

Thanks for the heads-up though. O0
Title: Re: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: Groggy on April 23, 2010, 09:43:29 AM
DVD Savant's take:

http://www.dvdtalk.com/dvdsavant/s3192zhiv.html (http://www.dvdtalk.com/dvdsavant/s3192zhiv.html)

I agree with most of what he says.
Title: Re: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: dave jenkins on April 23, 2010, 02:25:55 PM
Erickson needs to develop some interests that go beyond films. Books don't win Nobel Prizes, authors do (for their entire body of work).
Title: Re: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: Groggy on April 23, 2010, 02:46:18 PM
And he didn't even mention Klaus Kinski in his review!
Title: Re: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: dave jenkins on April 23, 2010, 02:54:49 PM
In fact, mostly he just reminded me of bad things in the film I'd forgotten about. Cancel my order!
Title: Re: Doctor Zhivago (1965)
Post by: Groggy on April 23, 2010, 03:10:01 PM
In all honesty I'm surprised his review is so positive. In the past he's referenced Zhivago rather negatively in other reviews.