Customer Reviews

Crime and Punishment [VHS]

5 star:		(2)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(4)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

The performances in this film are adequate, but the characters have little resemblance to thier counterparts in Dostoevsky's masterpiece. This film proffers a Roskolnikov who is little more than a Marxist Robin Hood. Gone is the brooding, conflicted student of the novel. Moreover, Julie Delpy's Sonya, while well-acted, is not the vulnerable and saintly figure that appears in the novel. Instead, she is a rather proud and dignified young woman. So many of the supporting characters, particularly Luzhin, are robbed of their complexity in order to fit the brief, simple presentation of this film. For example, in the novel Dostoevsky challenges us to determine if Luzhin's designs on Dunya are entirely ignoble. Yet, in this film Luzhin appears as an absurd fop who is worthy only of contempt. The director has compromised Dostoevsky's creation too much to be credited with a worthy effort. I do not believe that a successful adaptation of "Crime and Punishment" is not possible. However, this film is too flawed an adaptation to be considered successful.

I just finished reading the book then rented the movie. I looked at the length of the movie (89 minutes) and figured it would cut out a lot of the book. But I did not expect it to cut out so many of the extremely vital events, conversations, characters and stories. The plot in the book is extremely thick and the movie is merely a portion of a shodow of the book. Needless to say I was very disappointed in this movie. If you have read the book, don't waste your money or time on this movie. However, if you haven't read the book, this may be a mildly entertaining movie for you. But don't write a book report from this movie and don't expect the same deep moral storyline that is in the book. If you seen this movie, don't let it deter you from reading the book. The book is a great book.

It is not fair to compare a 90 minute picture and its contents to that found in a 400 page novel. If you do, you will invariably be disappointed. This film takes only the main elements of the book (how could it do otherwise ?) and packs them tightly into a psychologically suspenseful cocoon of innocent ambitions, sinister evil, and ultimately- - regenerative redemption. The story is a classic, and this Hallmark Hall of Fame Presentation does a fine job of transporting the viewer to turn-of-the-century Russia to see the conflict of good vs. evil unfold. Patrick Dempsey and Ben Kingsley both give strong performances that make this film one for the home shelf. ...

It's not the condensed story that really disappointed me. Surprisingly, this made-for-TV film retains ALL the crucial episodes of the original Dostoyevsky novel. Rodya's killing of an old pawnbroker, his sister's plight in her hometown, his friendship with Dimitri, and his faithful love Sonia (with her poverty-stricken family). And Siberia, bullet in the head, oily Inspector Porfiry and his 'trap.' I found every episode that impressed me while reading the book. What I couldn't find is, psychological depth that makes Dostoyevkey's book one of the greatest novels of the world.

The story is a famous one, so I don't write it here. All I can say about it is that, instead of changing or deleting the episodes of the original, they stick to the course of the major events surrounding the guilt-ridden hero Rodya Raskolnikov, and moreover, speed up the development of the plot (that consists more than 500 pages in ordinary paperback form).

That means, if you have not read the book yet, you might have some trouble in following the fast-paced story. Who is this guy? Why is he acting like that? How could she have a pistol in her bag? Before you know it, Sonia's mother vanishes in the air. What happened to Rodya's sister? What makes a certain character commit suicide? It's like reading a summery, not the novel.

I know the film is not novel (and the data at imdb suggest that the film underwent a heavy cutting before released on video.) However, the fact remains that the film reminds me of a soap-operaish potboiler that goes without ever explaining the inside of the characters. In this film, when Rodya commits crimes, he does it too abruptly. At least it looks like that, so he suddenly decides to do what he does, like, after something flashing in his eye, with contorted facial expressions, Booom! there he goes, like a Grade-B serial killer movie. His guilt is expressed with the lopside camera and fast-cut flashbacks and close-ups of people's faces looking into his eye -- including that of Ben Kngsley with strange beards.

With this script, you just cannot blame anyone involved in the film. Patrick Dempsey's Rodya is so-so, Ben Kingsley's Porfily is just OK, and Julie Delpy as Sonia is too beautiful for the role, like Heather Graham in 'From Hell.' The constant use of actors' heavy accent has only detracting effects, and as to the location, oh, it's too obviously felt that it is not the 19th century Russia (it's today's Hungary).

I understand the difficulty of handling the huge material like Dostoyevsky. This made-for-TV, however, manages to contain all the main episodes, but fails to capture the spirit of the novel. It surely traces the crimes and their consequences, but doesn't present the characters while we really want to know them more, especially, Rodya and Sonia.

Since there are many other reviews here, I don't find it necessary to make a summary of the movie, I'll skip right to my opinion about it.

In my eyes the most important thing was whether, or to what extent the main character managed to display the noble and high-spirited mind of the person that Dostoevsky describes. Patrick Dempsey, who plays Raskolnikov, did't manage this at all. He's more of a melodramatic actor-kind of guy, as opposed to the deep, philosophical person that I imagine Dostoevskys main character to be, with a glint of irony in the eyes. The person that Dempsey displays is simply not the kind of person that Dostoevsky would've wanted to describe, and thus it doesn't seem likely that he would act the way he does. So, I'm not really dissatisfied with the acting, rather the actor. (If that's not the same thing..). However , I must say that Ben Kingsley is the right guy for his role, he definately is the only one saving this movie from the one star-rating..

Together with this movie I purchased the miniseries Brideshead Revisited from 1981. After watching Jeremy Irons, who plays one of the main characters, I must say that he'd been great for the role as Raskolnikov.. then. But unfortunately it's too late now..

This TV version of one of the great psychological novels ever is terrible. One main problem is that one can't condense a 500 page book into a 2 hour TV movie and make it good at the same time. Avoid it, but see it only if it comes on TV once again. Not worth the rental price.

This is the version that NBC aired as a two-part mini-series. Amazingly, it's half-decent at capturing some of the sense of the novel. The director does a good job of emphasizing some of the central scenes from the book. Ben Kingsley is pretty good as the detective.

You could watch this adaption of Dostoevsky's masterpiece rather than reading the book. Although, I'm not sure why you would want to. It's not a bad adaption, but you would be doing yourself a great favour to read the book first.

However, I must say that Patrick Dempsey plays a better Raskolnikof than I would have expected, considering that... well it's Patrick Dempsey. And credit must go to the casting of Julie Delpy: the actress with whom I personally envisioned the role of Sophia, when I read the novel.

This TV movie is an excellent adaptation of the classic novel by Dostoyevsky. This is the story of Rodya Raskalnikov (Patrick Dempsey), an intellectual who is suspended from University and is living in poverty in 19th century Russia. Raskalnikov believes that in order for great men like Napoleon to accomplish great things, they must be above the law.

With this as a psychological backdrop, he gets the news that his sister has been discharged from her governess position and she is considering marrying a rich man she doesn't love to keep the family from starving. He reasons that he, being a great man, must take action to prevent this travesty. So he decides he should kill his pawnbroker, a despicable woman who preys on the misfortune of others, and take her money to save his sister from prostituting herself in this terrible marriage. He reasons that the pawn broker deserves to die anyway, and that his sister's future is far more important. The remainder of the story is a study in the torment and guilt he feels, and from which he cannot escape intellectually.

The film remains true to the novel, which is one of the classics of Russian literature. It is well directed, filmed in Poland to give it an authentic eastern European look. Joseph Sargent does an excellent job of capturing the rank poverty of the time in contrast to the opulence of the privileged.

This is Patrick Dempsey's shining moment, by far the best I've ever seen him. He does a terrific job of capturing the overwrought Rodya's agony and emotional distraction. Although Dempsey was sometimes overly manic in his portrayal, this is one of the most complex characters in literature and it is impossible to imagine anyone getting him just the way Dostoyevsky wrote him. Dempsey has come a long way since the Woo Woo Kid ("In The Mood", 1987).

Ben Kingsley was also terrific as the wily police chief who suspects Rodya of the crime, but with no evidence, cleverly manipulates his psyche to make the guilt unbearable.

I rate this film a 9/10. It is no substitute for reading the novel, but in comparison to most of what is on the market, this is a gem. Most refined viewers will not regret seeing this film.

You call this a correct adaptation of Dostoevsky's wonderful and chilling novel, I dont think so.This is even worse then the 1930's version. I know that it was hard taking a 500 pg. novel and turning it into a 90 minute film, but for Christsakes why didnt he just make a 3 hour version. I found myself wondering throughout the movie what happened to the vulnerable, scared, depressed, excitied, and strange characters that Fyodor created. This is what I call a disaster of a movie.