Posted on 09/22/2021 7:33:52 AM PDT by DIRTYSECRET
As I see it there are too many similarities to today. The Tzars were living it up while the people suffered. You had the hothead(Lara's boyfriend) who was a definite leader who took them on. Then when they took over the constant war/turmoil kept the Bolsheviks focused on their mission, like Covid and the border crisis/Afghanistan. Today the party in power can't kill and destroy like they did in the movie but the parents of Ashli Babbitt would disagree. Constant turmoil/distraction and our hope is in November, '22? I'm sure they have other plans.
The author of the original book was surprised when the commies banned it. He, like most useful idiots, thought communism was great. The powers that be didn’t like the stuff in there about the privation that immediately followed the revolution.
I don’t think I’ve ever seen it. Gunna watch it now, though. Thanks, FRiends!
Then there’s the most important moment when they turned on their leaders. The scene where the commander talks patriotism gets animated and then slips into the barrel of water. Laughter and then he gets shot. Instant silence-perhaps instant justice. The rest of the commanders then get killed. Who wants to be a lieutenant when the leaders are leading everyone over a cliff. Think Lt. Col. Scheller. At least he’s still alive. I just hope he’s aware of the read danger that could happen. The left is violent. They don’t need an excuse-any reason will do.
All those illegals Biden is importing are going to need places to live.
comrade kaprugina delivers a scolding - Dr. Zhivago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mq__Z-Z_Ofs
There are ethical opportunists, but Komarovsky was amoral, what we now might term a high-functioning psychopath. Russia abounds in the species.
The message I got from Dr. Zhivago was that communism itself is virulent and opportunistic (the Bolsheviks took over during WWI and during the reign of an uncommonly impotent absolute ruler); and that it breaks down morality, virtually digests it. Strelnikov said the personal life is dead, but in fact the society had been destroyed and the individual only cut adrift from the bonds of morality that are the musculature of a society. The lone, vulnerable individual, cog in the machine, is all that remains, and if he doesn’t, so what? One’s like another. In the end, the “citizen” is a person without a family history or even an interest in it; she keeps her head down, to survive physically, and that’s the entirety of her moral life.
But the 1965 Hollywood movie, although very well done, was not always adhering to Pasternak's vision.
Granada made a 2002 series film of Zhivago that greatly surpasses the Hollywood production which many thought impossible but was achieved nevertheless.
The Hollywood version was beautiful, beautiful music, great acting etc. but the Grenada version authentically captures the real epic that won the Nobel Prize.
Thanks for posting that. Will have to look for.
Autocorrect changed Pasternak to Paternal.
Forces me to proofread more.
Bkmrk
Ditto about the Bible, whose main point throughout is that human nature is sin nature, and doesn’t change — always characterized by pride and envy in its unregenerate state. It also is about a remnant, always being culled out and refined by the grace of God.
I haven’t done much sci-fi reading.
1984 turns out not to be sci-fi at all. I’m in the middle of reading it for the first time since the 60s. Remarkably prescient!
:-)
I prefer the newer version myself as well. I recently watched Bitter Harvest, a moview about the Ukranian Holodomo and saw many similarities to today.
I consider it the longest and most boring film ever made. To each his own. ;-D
Liked Gone with the Wind........Zhivago was awful for my taste. Script roles were painfully bad.
The Germans supported Marxism in Russia as they thought (correctly) that it would take Russia out of WWI.
I was a 12 year old when my brother and I pedaled our bikes over the next town to see it. As now I was a history buff and wanted to know the story of the Russian Revolution. I didn’t get the love story part but thought the music was beautiful.
Everything seemed fine until the end which was years down the road. They show all these happy young people walking off their shift at a hydroelectric plant, I think. This struck me as weird. Now I think these people were representing the glory of Communism. Not to mention that they were brainwashed like our young people today. I also thought “where are the old people?” I think Stalin has the answer to that question.
Lara is actually the center of the story.
Three men love Lara: Komorovsky, Sasha and Zhivago.
Each, very different.
There’s also a Russian version from 2006. No idea how it compares or if there is any subtitled or dubbed version.
*Lara is actually the center of the story.
Three men love Lara: Komorovsky, Sasha and Zhivago.
Each, very different.*
Eloquent but when you look at Julie Christie you can see why she’s the story’s center. Komorovsky was a horny neanderthal. Sasha was stupid. Didn’t know what he had and it killed him. Zhivago was like today’s artists. Idealistic and would not let the restrictions of married life get in his way.
A lot of people don’t like the movie because of Zhivago’s infidelity.
The movie doesn’t really explain what happened to Zhivago’s wife.
“She went to France with their two children.”
Marxism didn’t put a high value on family.
That’s why the ending is so important.
Zhivago’s brother, a real Marxist, is searching for his niece.
The Marxist is lonely for family.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.