After attending all four parts of this film on four separate nights, I still don't feel as if I have even a cursory comprehension of what War and Peace was about. Let me back up. I am someone who has never read the book or seen any other version of this film. I had hoped after seeing the four part newly remade Russian version, I would have the best opportunity on film to get the most understanding possible from a film. I figured they would have to leave huge chunks out just due to the sheer size of the book but I felt confident, if I stuck with it, I would walk away with some insight. I'm guessing those of you who have studied the book in school prior to seeing this newly restored version were able to see the excellence in this movie but I would guess that others who have had a similar experience as I have will walk away bewildered by the prior fantastic reviews. Here is what i saw.
Part 1: I thought I was watching a Fellini film. Everything seemed nonsensical and bizarre. Nothing was explained and all the characters were treated as if we already knew who everyone was. I almost got up and walked out many times but as I had already paid for all four installments I decided to stay. Funnily enough, the first part was broken into 2 parts. At the end of part one film one, most of the attendees got up, thinking part one was completed. That is how bizarre the first part was. It made no sense for it to be over but nothing made any sense to that point either, so why not end it there? When the screen showed, "part 2" there was a mix of emotions, sorry it was to continue and the vague hope things might be made more clear.
Part 2: This part seemed less fellini-esque, slightly more relatable. I began to get the slightest glimmer of insight as to who the characters were, but still not very much. Even so, after the first part, I was glad to have anything to hang onto. That gave me hope for the rest of the parts and I had renewed energy to continue, hoping the next two parts would enlighten me even more.
Part 3: War, war and more bloody war. Why, I have no idea. There were times when I couldn't figure out what side we were even looking at, the Russians or the French...who was winning and who was losing. I remember watching this week's game of thrones "after the episode" when I came home. The creators spoke of how they had to mix things up because too much unending war gets boring after awhile even with the best special effects. I had to note, that is what happened here.
Part 4: War, war and more bloody war. There continued to be no effort at describing the many relationships between the main characters. It was as if we were supposed to have read the book and knew everything and everyone ahead of time. Even so, most of part three consisted of marching, stuff blowing up, men screaming in pain, flying severed limbs, etc., and most of the time I still had difficulty understanding which side was which...who was fighting who. And the music mixed with the shouts of war were so loud I had to literally plug my ears for much of this part (and part 3 too.).
The only solid takeaway I got from this viewing experience was, I could surmise which character was the one that Audrey Hepburn played in the Hollywood version. Even though I had not seen that film before, the actress they chose resembled a "poor man's version" of Audrey Hepburn. I am now interested in getting that version to see if I might be able to understand a little more what the book was about.
After the third part, I was so frustrated by my experience I spoke with another attendee who seemed to share my POV. Her explanation was, "men!" She seemed to think that as the director was a man a lot more time was spent on depicting war than describing relationships or characters.
The dialogue and relationships made no sense to me. Fathers who were cruel to their children were worshipped by their kids, kissing the father's hands and crying like babies when the fathers died. And there was a part where the field Marshall grasped one of his underlings in a passionate embrace that just seemed silly to me. There was a lot of that kind of thing, people crying their eyes out for circumstances that did not appear to warrant it. It could be that this part was difficult for me to understand as it might have had something to do with Russian culture. Could be they worship their elders regardless of how they were treated. Also, the dialogue was stilted and not relatable. I hoped to remember some of the oft repeated phrasing but cannot. Suffice it to say there were some phrases repeated over and over and over again that never made any sense.
So often throughout my experience I kept noticing my hand reaching for the unavailable remote in the hopes of fast forwarding through it. Had I been at home I could easily have fast forwarded through this massive effort and not lost what little understanding I was able to glean. Probably 90%. So my recommendation for this film is, if after reading my review you still want to watch it, only watch it on dvd where you can have a remote in hand. Don't go to the theater four nights in a row and waste so much of your life as I did.
I gave it 3 stars for their effort in redoing the film. Had I rated it on how much I enjoyed it, I would have had to give it 1 and 1/2 stars, if that was possible, as I did enjoy seeing the beautiful costumes and gorgeous marble floors in the ballroom scenes. And I liked how they dressed the women in flats during the dance scenes instead of seeing them in stilettos.
Part 1: I thought I was watching a Fellini film. Everything seemed nonsensical and bizarre. Nothing was explained and all the characters were treated as if we already knew who everyone was. I almost got up and walked out many times but as I had already paid for all four installments I decided to stay. Funnily enough, the first part was broken into 2 parts. At the end of part one film one, most of the attendees got up, thinking part one was completed. That is how bizarre the first part was. It made no sense for it to be over but nothing made any sense to that point either, so why not end it there? When the screen showed, "part 2" there was a mix of emotions, sorry it was to continue and the vague hope things might be made more clear.
Part 2: This part seemed less fellini-esque, slightly more relatable. I began to get the slightest glimmer of insight as to who the characters were, but still not very much. Even so, after the first part, I was glad to have anything to hang onto. That gave me hope for the rest of the parts and I had renewed energy to continue, hoping the next two parts would enlighten me even more.
Part 3: War, war and more bloody war. Why, I have no idea. There were times when I couldn't figure out what side we were even looking at, the Russians or the French...who was winning and who was losing. I remember watching this week's game of thrones "after the episode" when I came home. The creators spoke of how they had to mix things up because too much unending war gets boring after awhile even with the best special effects. I had to note, that is what happened here.
Part 4: War, war and more bloody war. There continued to be no effort at describing the many relationships between the main characters. It was as if we were supposed to have read the book and knew everything and everyone ahead of time. Even so, most of part three consisted of marching, stuff blowing up, men screaming in pain, flying severed limbs, etc., and most of the time I still had difficulty understanding which side was which...who was fighting who. And the music mixed with the shouts of war were so loud I had to literally plug my ears for much of this part (and part 3 too.).
The only solid takeaway I got from this viewing experience was, I could surmise which character was the one that Audrey Hepburn played in the Hollywood version. Even though I had not seen that film before, the actress they chose resembled a "poor man's version" of Audrey Hepburn. I am now interested in getting that version to see if I might be able to understand a little more what the book was about.
After the third part, I was so frustrated by my experience I spoke with another attendee who seemed to share my POV. Her explanation was, "men!" She seemed to think that as the director was a man a lot more time was spent on depicting war than describing relationships or characters.
The dialogue and relationships made no sense to me. Fathers who were cruel to their children were worshipped by their kids, kissing the father's hands and crying like babies when the fathers died. And there was a part where the field Marshall grasped one of his underlings in a passionate embrace that just seemed silly to me. There was a lot of that kind of thing, people crying their eyes out for circumstances that did not appear to warrant it. It could be that this part was difficult for me to understand as it might have had something to do with Russian culture. Could be they worship their elders regardless of how they were treated. Also, the dialogue was stilted and not relatable. I hoped to remember some of the oft repeated phrasing but cannot. Suffice it to say there were some phrases repeated over and over and over again that never made any sense.
So often throughout my experience I kept noticing my hand reaching for the unavailable remote in the hopes of fast forwarding through it. Had I been at home I could easily have fast forwarded through this massive effort and not lost what little understanding I was able to glean. Probably 90%. So my recommendation for this film is, if after reading my review you still want to watch it, only watch it on dvd where you can have a remote in hand. Don't go to the theater four nights in a row and waste so much of your life as I did.
I gave it 3 stars for their effort in redoing the film. Had I rated it on how much I enjoyed it, I would have had to give it 1 and 1/2 stars, if that was possible, as I did enjoy seeing the beautiful costumes and gorgeous marble floors in the ballroom scenes. And I liked how they dressed the women in flats during the dance scenes instead of seeing them in stilettos.