Stometer Save your money for something good and enjoyable

Mjeteconer Just perfect...

Acensbart Excellent but underrated film

Intcatinfo A Masterpiece!

eziovantaggiato This new version of Doctor Zhivago cannot be considered a remake of David Lean's previous film. You cannot make comparisons: they are both beautiful movies, interpreted and directed very well, with beautiful scenery and music. In this version Campiotti goes more in detail, is more faithful to Pasternak's novel, and at the same time provides a new very original interpretation. It's a moving film, a film about love that prevails over the adversities of destiny.. The performances of Keira Knighteley (Lara), Hans Matheson (Yuri) and Sam Neill (Komarof) are excellent, but the other actors are really good too. The direction is very careful and precise. The ending has been changed to give hope to those who see the film. It is hope in a better future, written by the poet Zhivago, aka Pasternak. It deserves an Oscar.

emmalouise262 I don't understand why people say that the attraction between Yury and Lara in this version is not as obvious as in the original. The chemistry between them is undeniable, Keira is beautiful and tragic and portrays a real need to be saved which i think would completely appeal to Yury. Alexandra Maria Lara, while pretty, does not possess the same obvious beauty as Keira and i think she does a brilliant job of playing the needy, average housewife. Lara and Yury have a deep connection, which even as they travel along separate paths, still brings them together throughout their lives. The end scene where Yury sees Lara for the last time is incredible. The look in Hans Mathesons eyes as he watches her walk past the window is so poignant that i don't believe anyone watching it could fail to be moved. So magnificent was the acting between these two throughout i had to remind myself at times that they were only actors. Keira is strong and weak all at the same time, she is suitably seduced yet repulsed by victor and i think this is important as she does not just appear as a victim which adds a new dimension to their relationship and almost makes the story slightly more sordid and less pure. The one problem i had as a viewer with the original was that Julie Christie's performance made Lara appear as a innocent victim rather than a strong woman who survives through one of the most turbulent times of Russian history whilst constantly fighting against the manipulative Victor.

de_niro_2001 This version is a lot more faithful to Pasternak's book than David Lean's version. It is great. It doesn't have to compete with the David lean version. It stands up very well on its own. Ludovico Einaudi's score is every bit as good as Maurice Jarre's. I also think that Keira Knightley is better as Lara than Julie Christie was. I also think she's better than Andrea Corr would have been and I'm a dyed in the wool Corrs fan. It was sensible casting young actors who are the age the characters are meant to be at the outset of the story and then ageing them via makeup. One is a bit incredulous when one sees David Lean's version and Pasha says Lara is 17. Julie Christie looks the age she was when the film was made, namely mid-20s. Each actor puts a different interpretation on his or her character from the 1965 version. Bill Paterson makes Monsieur Gromyko less pompous than Ralph Richardson did. He's also quite charming where he pretends a knotted handkerchief is a rat for the children at the beginning. Sam Neill makes Monsieur Komarovsky more menacing and sinister than Rod Steiger did. He also doesn't have the paternalistic streak that Rod Steiger had. Mr Neill has also given older guys carte blanche to wax lyrical about Keira Knightley. He's done scenes with her and he's about 40 years older than her. Kris Marshall doesn't portray Pasha Antipov as Tom Courtenay's angry young man. He's shown to be quite a fun guy when he swings about ringing church bells which are standing in frames in the street to amuse Lara and her classmates. But he still becomes just as psychotic and unfeeling as Tom Courtenay's interpretation. But, as in the 1965 version, Zhivago is portrayed as a throroughly decent guy who starts off very well in life and his life ends sadly. This version also shows some grim aspects of the revolution such as mutilation, children being murdered and cannibalism, which of course was referred to by Alec Guinness in the 1965 version. This is a very good adaptation which I would recommend to fans of the 1965 version and even more so to fans of the book.

Stefan Dimov everything in this movie is outstanding and exceptional. The play of Hans Matheson and Keira Knightley is much more than good,it is simply perfect. And tell me ... isn't Keira the best actress,she's only 16/17 in this movie and she plays like she was born for this role,and Hans Matheson,i haven't heard of him till yesterday,but now,i'll be looking for his movies because as you saw,he is not just mediocre actor,he is something more ... and he deserves attention. I haven't watched the original Doctor Zhivago and haven't read the book of Boris Pasternak but after i watched the movie,i have no desire to read and watch the originals because this "Doctor Zhivago" has run into my brain so deeply that it can hardly come out of there ...