Customer Reviews

Ten Days That Shook the World [VHS]

5 star:		(8)
4 star:		(8)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

Rating and reviewing movies like these are often difficult for the average critic. On one hand, they're done absolutely brilliantly done in ways that take one's breath away; on the other hand, how much credit can you give to a movie that is pure propaganda, especially propaganda for something the reviewer doesn't agree with?

This "realistic re-enactment" of the events of October 25th, 1917, is actually anything but realism. Instead, it is a harrowing and amazing Romantic experience. This is not to say it's bad--it's brilliant! The direction and editing on this film are much more refined than Eisenstein's previous and much-more-heralded film, Brenonsets Potyemkin (Battleship Potemkin), and it has a whole lot more symbolism and focus on literary devices. His fast-paced cutting is not as disjunctive as previously; instead, it works to shock the viewer with the juxtapositions. I don't think I shall ever get the quick back-and-forth cutting between that one soldier's face and the firing machine gun ever out of my mind. It's just that powerful.

This movie is so good, in fact, that it makes me proud to be a Bolshevik... and I'm not, not in any way or form! How's that for being a powerful, well-done movie? The Birth of a Nation didn't effectively make me proud to be a Klansman, for a comparison...

Because of its intense political alignment, I can't see everyone appreciating this film. There will always be those out there who say, "Ah, it's only Communist propaganda" (which is right) "so it's not even worth watching..." (which is wrong). For those who are looking for a magnificent cinematic experience, however, this movie is a fine choice indeed.

--PolarisDiB

This movie is not exactly designed for casual enjoyment. It's no surprize that it was not very popular when it was first released. Eisenstein takes a fairly intricate, if not convoluted, episode in history and recreates it through a maddening pace of of montage intercut, while establishing no particular characters to build any story around. So the film must be appreciated almost solely for the technique of its brilliant director (along with an excellent Shostakovich soundtrack). Not a great date flick, this is an ideal DVD for students of film history to challenge themselves.

October shows both the revolutionary nature of Eisenstein's cinematic style, and the revolutionary nature of the story told. His further use and development of montage (after "Strike" and "Potemkin") allow Eisenstein to discuss one of the most profound events of modern history, the Russian Revolution. Though the rise of Stalin obscured Eisenstein's ability to accurately depict the revolution, the original version stands out as one of the more detailed and accurate accounts (One note: the actual insurrection, the storming of the Winter Palace, resulted in less bloodshed and death than did the filming). Eisenstein portrays the tsar and his bureaucracy as corrupt, inept and cynical; and portrays the provisional government as a bunch of opportunistic liars, bound to the forces of domestic and foreign capital. The force which was able to defeat the old rulers thus became the mass of workers and peasants, led by the Bolsheviks (note: daringly enough, Stalin is accurately left out of the leadership of the Revolution, with Lenin, Trotsky, and the Party as the leadership of the Revolution). A must see for those interested in social change and the labor movement, cinematic and artistic brilliance, or a combination of the two.

Despite being a propaganda film created under the "overall" leadership of Joseph Stalin, this description of Lenin's rise to power is even-handed. Lenin is portrayed as a dedicated revolutionary, but not as a figure of a personality cult. While the Tsarist regime is criticized, it is not heavy-handed. Even Kerensky, the most memorable leader of the short-lived interim republic is portrayed in an honest way. Finally, Stalin appears only in a minor role, appearing as simply another of the band of core Bolsheviks.
From the historical perspective, the film is also surprisingly accurate. There are no outlandish tales of proletarian heroism, only the description of a political system that fell under the weight of an archaic feudal structure and the strain of a terrible war. Granted that there are some excesses in the tale and none of those of the Bolsheviks is mentioned, overall it is better than most documentaries. One wonders what Stalin had in mind when he allowed it to be made in this manner.
As a piece of film, the work is also first rate, given the state of the art at the time. Armed with a historical knowledge of the events, one cannot help but be caught up in the action. The backdrop adds to the power, as you are seeing it at the exact locations. Almost as if a film about the president of the US was shot in the oval office. It doesn't have the precise look of a movie set, but the realism more than makes up for it.
Lenin was one of the few people of this century who truly changed the world, although surprisingly, it didn't last the century. Much like the quiet way that the Tsarist state vanished, no one would have believed that after 60 years, the communist government in the Soviet Union was pass away so easily. It was ten days that shook the world, but from the viewpoint of long-term history it was a quick shake.

.. I won't go into the propaganda nature of this film. It's obvious &, to me, unimportant in enjoying this movie as entertainment. What I will say is that this picture has left a mark on my mind & it's not due to any inherent political nature- it's because it's a very entertaining film. The story of an indigenous man who gets placed in power (after almost being killed) by a group who attempts to use him to get what they want only to be overcome in the end by "the masses" is fantastically displayed in this silent film. The lack of vocals only seems to add to it's quality. This movie contains one of the funniest scenes ever put to film & it could've only been done in a silent film using font size- the 1st meeting w/ the reincarnation of the Dali Lama. Oh, my. I had to watch it 3 times in a row the 1st time I saw it. Plus the soundtrack that was added works perfectly. Sometimes this isn't the case w/ DVD/VHS releases of silent films.. Don't be afraid if you couldn't pick Eisenstein, Pudovkin or Kalatozov out of a line up. Buy it, rent it, whatever. Just watch it.

October is a re-telling of the events of the Russian revolution. However, it was commissioned as a propoganda piece so that the only "character" that stands out is Lenin, who, of course is idolized. There are the populace and soldiers who are on the side of the Bolsheviks but they are basically nameless and faceless as is the other side (mensheviks). However, its not the plot that makes the movie fascinating but the use of montage and imagery, sometimes dizzying. Not quite as good as Battleship Potemkin but still fascinating. Certainly, not as morally disturbing as Triumph of the Will (which it influenced) but still, a film made to support a government sanctioned point of view. However, the crowd shots and the quick cuts from one scene to the next in a rapid but still coherent fashion, resonates through current film and even music videos.

A minimally adequate version of this film on DVD would be (1) in widescreen (2) with the original Russian title cards plus subtitles. This version of the film is "modified to fit your screen." The English titles -- with frequent typos -- are white on black with about 400% more contrast than the rest of the film. The result is unwatchable; as much as I love Eisenstein and this film's St. Petersburg settings, I've never watched more than ten minutes of this DVD. Hopefully it won't be too long before somebody (Criterion, hint, hint?) gives this another try. Until then, I suggest you wait.

I was reluctant at first to write a review about Eisenstein due to the very hot political nature he is still regarded under...that being said I feel his first three films are absolute masterpieces of cinematic art. His ability to create tension through sequencing and visual narrative make him an uncanny choice for the greatest director of all time. He was making these films under very primitive conditions. However, Eisenstein has an incredible sense of knowing how strong the visual medium can be and is not afraid to go places in his directing where no one has gone to since.

Sadly time has been somewhat unkind to him. I also read that his last years were very unhappy and he was shadowed by the Stalin regime. As to Nevsky and Ivan the Terrible I am less defernetial...they are obviously not as close to Eisenstein's heart as the first three..Strike, October and Battleship P>

Great film, version comes as described, but often subtitles aren't readable--same color as background, simply get lost.

I have reviewed Russian revolutionary Leon Trotsky's definitive three-volume work The History of the Russian Revolution that covers this same topic elsewhere in this space. (See April 2006 archives.) Trotsky's work gives a sweeping literary expression to the ebb and flow of the revolution much as the film under review, October 1917, does so cinematically under Eisenstein's masterful direction. I noted in the Trotsky review that his work represented partisan history at its best. One does not and should not, at least in this day in age, ask historians to be `objective'. One simply asks that the historian present his or her narrative and analysis and get out of the way. That same standard is also applicable to the film director Eisenstein's work to which he was commissioned in order to commemorate the 10th anniversary of the Russian Revolution in 1927. Although Eisenstein has taken the usual cinematic license in presenting his epic that one has come to expect from that medium and furthermore was working in the period of the Stalinist consolidation of political power it is no the worst political documentary produced in that era, not by a long shot.

Eisenstein was the master of montage, stage direction and reenactment of historical scenes. That skill does not fail him here. In scenes such as Lenin's literally whirlwind arrival at Finland Station from exile in April 1917, the brutal response of the nefarious Provisional Government during the 'July Days', the Petrograd proletariat's response to the counter-revolutionary attempt to seize power by General Kornilov and the events surrounding the storming of the Winter Palace and the transfer of political power to the Soviets Eisenstein uses every trick of the cinematic trade. It shows in the faces of the actors used to portray the various participants. One may criticize this work as being too didactic in its portrayal of the `good' and `bad' guys but my friends that is what this film is all about. It is a propaganda film made in the 1920's and reflects the state of the art and the state of working class politics. The hoary-handed Petrograd worker, the star-struck Siberian peasant and the steely-eyed Kronstadt sailor were not society's `beautiful' people. And that is exactly the point. The intent of the revolution was to turn that world upside down with the forces that the Bolsheviks had to work with, warts and all.

I have endlessly pointed out that the October Revolution was the definitive political event of the 20th century. The resulting change in the balance of world power with the demise of the Soviet Union in the 1990's is beginning to look like a definitive political event for the 21st century. I have urged those interested in the fight for socialism to read, yes to read, about the Russian Revolution in order to learn some lessons from that experience. Trotsky's history is obviously a good place to start for a pro-Bolshevik overview. If you are looking for a general history of the revolution or want an analysis of what the revolution meant for the fate of various nations after World War I or its affect on world geopolitics look elsewhere. E.H. Carr's History of the Russian Revolution offers an excellent multi-volume set that tells that story through the 1920's. Or if you want to know what the various parliamentary leaders, both bourgeois and Soviet, were thinking and doing from a moderately leftist viewpoint read Sukhanov's Notes on the Russian Revolution. For a more journalistic account John Reed's classic Ten Days That Shook the World is invaluable. If, however, you want a quick overview of the revolution and view the film with that purpose in mind then Serge Eisenstein's masterpiece is not a bad place to start.