Frequently bought together
Customers who viewed this item also viewed
Customers who bought this item also bought
A sumptuous film version of Boris Pasternak's Nobel Prize-winning novel. It features younger actors in the key roles and stays truer to the novel than the 1965 film. Keira Knightley and Hans Matheson are incandescent as Lara and Yury, Sam Neill shines as the villainous Victor Komarovsky. Even if you adore David Lean's film, this Andrew Davies adaptations is a must.
Top customer reviews
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
Who can ever forget the scene of Zhivago struggling against a bad heart to escape the tavern as he runs after Lara and the boy?
Can anyone forget Lara's arrest as her little son watches? She tells him to run.
I'm struggling with the names; but I would recommend this version to anyone. If it's a lower-cost version; that makes it even better. The revolution was not some sort of romantic fantasy. https://www.amazon.com/review/RRGH4R60273C0/ref=cm_cr_ryp_del_cmt?ie=UTF8&ASIN=B008220C38#wasThisHelpful
However, this 2002 version is more intimate and shows these people more as Pasternak probably intended. For example, Keira Knightley is 17 years old when she made this movie which is the age that Lara is when we first meet her. This is very helpful because Knightley carries off the virginal Lara being defiled by Komarovsky much better than the more worldly Julie Christy played Lara in 1965. Sam Neill's Komarovsky feels much more menacing and reprehensible as he manipulates Lara into an inappropriate sexual relationship. Another point I like about this 2002 version is that Hans Matheson looks like he could be Russian. Omar Sharif who played Dr. Zhivago in the 1965 version is a much superior actor to Matheson but he physically looks too dark for the role. I keep thinking of his magnificent performance in Lawrence of Arabia whenever I see Sharif playing Zhivago. Lastly, I thought the actor who plays Pasha/Strelnikov in the 2002 version much superior to the corresponding performance in 1965. Similarly, I thought the actress who played Dr. Zhivago's wife in the 2002 version is superior to Geraldine Chaplin's performance in 1965.
Also, there are numerous details to the story that are different. For example, Yuri Zhivago loses his father to suicide at the beginning of the 2002 version, instead of losing his mother to an unexplained cause of death in the 1965 movie. I found these numerous details fascinating and it causes me to want to read the book.
On balance, the cinematography and Alex Guiness' performance make the 1965 version of Dr. Zhivago one of the best movies ever made. I think this 2002 mini-series just fills some of the gaps that we do not learn in the 1965 version, but it is still very enjoyable and I highly recommend it.
On balance, the 1965 version is much better because of its cinematography
the movie seem like its actually happening.