"War and Peace (1965)" Movie Review Essay & Film Analysis

Is it possible to perceive the film as a kind of separate and independent piece of cinema? Of course not. See this film, without being familiar with the book, there's no point, since this creature Bondarchuk rather be taken as an illustration to the novel. But is it worth to put in the negative to this film? I try to formulate his thoughts this way: if there is such a work as 'War and Peace', a grand, all-encompassing, the director need only have the utmost respect to approach him, to take the most important thing in any case do not change anything and do not add, and try to only visualize It is what Tolstoy wrote. Using his talent and his ability to 'show', focuses on the way to shoot, some techniques, the music, the color of the transmit thus emotions, feelings heroes of the novel. It is up to the task Bondarchuk coped as well as possible. Yes, some of the books was not reflected in the film, namely, points are very important, but what was filmed Bondarchuk, after watching it leaves the feeling of globality, enthusiastic, and that was after reading.
First of all I want to write about the stunning shooting a bird's eye when the viewer's eyes appear fields, woods, river, sky. All this could not be true to the spirit of the world is its greatness, the idea that we are part of it and that it is within us, that human thought has to cover it all, recognize and love. These images appear in those episodes where without them does not reflect the state of the characters. In conversation with Pierre Prince Andrew, where Pierre says that he is part of the harmonious whole; in an episode of the lunar night, Natasha experienced the delight of her beauty; When Prince Andrew looked at the grenade and first felt the threat of death; at the time of realization Pierre captive his inner freedom. And at the end of the film, a grand music, under the exclamation 'Long live the whole world!' in different languages, the shooting - this is the correct and right that could be shown. That is the greatness consists Bondarchuk as a director, it is the ability to show such complex mood, complement the visual is what Tolstoy wrote.
As it is felt in the grand battle scenes, the scene of the fire and looting in Moscow, the flight of the French from Russia. But at the same director as opposed to such a huge episodes it allows the viewer to feel the emotions of the individual. For example, in the scene when the battlefield, which is all the smoke and can not see the sky, the ringing of bells in combination with singing lullabies goes one soldier. I personally was moved to tears, as if feeling his fatigue, lack of understanding of what all these murders, the desire to be in silence. War is ugly. And then shows Napoleon, grimly counted the battlefield, and the voice of Bondarchuk, reprove his insignificance. For me, this episode - one of the most powerful of all is viewed in the film at all
mesmerizing almost the entire movie.. Attention chained imperceptible at first details that affect most of the subconscious. For example, the death scene of the old Prince Bolkonsky, and later his son, shown in empty white room, as if thereby showing detachment from something earthly, filled with color and life in general. After the death of old Prince viewer sees the avenue through which he walked every day, though the emphasis is on the fact that people go around but nothing changes. Episode Kuragin appearance in the life of Natasha: It appears as if through a prism, in the flickering light of candles, a rare sound of crystal bells, felt something fragile that just about will break, which is what happened to Natasha. And then, when Pierre first confessed his love, remember how at the time more was music: a thin, neat, which carries the hope of Natasha's rebirth and new life. Impressed even unpleasant runaway Helene's voice during an argument with Pierre, giving the viewer understand what kind of beauty and grandeur of this woman hiding her meanness and ugliness. This is a film that really need to be able to see.
If dismantling of the actors, they all matched as well as possible, and they played very impressively. They feel that it was read in the book. As the Natasha stared at Pierre at the end of the film, her smile, facial expression itself - wise, been through a lot and changed a girl, is not that what the viewer sees it in the beginning of the film - a fun, easy, easy flying girl. Most importantly - there is visible change. Prince Andrew by Tikhonov - yes, this is the person who represents at the time of reading: a lot of thought, stingy on emotion, renounced happiness and then to recognize him. At the end of a good sense of his rejection of life, indifference and care, the most moral, despite the fact that the heart continued to beat, and he continued to breathe. As for the Pierre, it is a pity that the film is not shown all of his intellectual work, only a few moments. But as they say 'for those who have read'. The viewer may not know about all this from the movie, but it can be the most important thing - to feel Pierre. For example, when something died in him when he observed the execution, paralyzing horror of 'order', and then a meeting with Karataev. Pierre gradually came back to life, then to then cry out: 'And all this in me, and all that I am!' I believe that Pierre eventually became the Decembrists, and looking at the game Bondarchuk, it seems that it can not be otherwise. I fell in love with Princess Mary by Shuranova actress if she had been born for the realization of this image. A simple person who does not have a special beauty, but soulful, gentle. And most importantly: her eyes. Those same - radiant, penetrating to the heart. Kutuzov seems right native, so well played by an actor of his senile touching combined with the spiritual greatness peculiar to that person. The Prince Bolkonsky it is felt the severity and nature of the iron, which eventually give way to the old man's softened at the scene of the meeting and his son before his death. Dolokhov Kuragin - a very attractive man and at the same time repel themselves as individuals. In general, to be sure:. of the Soviet cinema color - from the main characters to the very small roles
For me this film and the book is now an inseparable whole, Tolstoy wrote - Bondarchuk shown. Yes, illustrations, may be they do not have the integrity and consistency. But oh, how grand this movie, how it is a distinct addition to the book gets to the heart and inspires. Animates - the most accurate word for this film, the best thing that can give a person cinema.

How to cite this essay: