MovieChat Forums > Doctor Zhivago (1965) Discussion > Why is this film NOTconsidered one of th...

Why is this film NOTconsidered one of the greatest films of all time?


Why is this not up there with Citizen Kane, Vertigo, 8 1/2, The Godfather, 2001 a Space Odyssey, Jules and JIm etc?

I just watched it and am just awestruck. This is right up there in my all time favourite list. What a movie. I am reading the book now and I am going to revisit this once I am done with the book.

reply

Well it might not be as highly rated as Citizen Kane, you can find Doctor Zhivago on almost any top rated list, best movies, AFI 100, 1001 movies you must see before you die etc.

But let's face it, Lawrence of Arabia will always remain Leans most recognizable and highest rated movie.

reply

It is. It ranks #8 according to All Time Box Office (adjusted to inflation). That's higher than any of the other films you listed.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/adjusted.htm

reply

[deleted]

1. The film is too long and boring
2. They are no romance/chemistry between Omar Sharif and Julie Christie at all.
3. There are no acting (soap opera-like acting instead)
4. The critics don't like it (can you blame them), but the fans and the Academy like it.
5. It not a good film at the begin.

reply

This is pure art - it is one of the most beautiful movies ever filmed or scored. The acting is uniformly very good with Rod Steiger turning in his best performance IMO. The story telling is captivating especially the way that Lara and Zhivago's lives are presented against the backdrop of the Russian Revolution. But there is no doubt that into hour three it begins to drag a bit. It was the best date movie of all time (in my experience)!

reply

Why is this film NOT considered one of the greatest films of all time


Because at best, it's an average film. Not only that, there are lot of other flaws that go against it, things like:

1. The lack of onscreen chemistry between Sharif and Christie, whose "epic romance" formed the heart of the movie, made worse by Christie's frigid ice blonde persona.

2. The fact that when you get down to it, there's nothing at all remarkable about the "love story" that warranted being stretched out into a three hour plus epic.

3. The poorly executed framing device. Every time I see this movie, I get startled when I see Alec Guinness reappear in the middle. It's not because I was so engrossed in the love story that I forget that it's really about Zhivago's daughter, but because the framing device itself is so clumsily done.

4. The fact that other movies in this genre did the whole prewar/postwar things a lot, lot better (War and Peace, Gone with the Wind).

5. Bad direction in some scenes. I am always driven crazy by that one scene where we see Zhivago witnessing the clash between the protesters and army, and the movie just closes in on his face. It never looks like the closeup is done for dramatic effect. It looks cheap, like Lean just did that because he didn't want to go through the trouble of actually filming the clash as it happened and just decided to substitute a long reaction shot from Sharif instead.

---
Emojis=💩 Emoticons=

reply

It feels, sort of flat. It is a beautiful movie, but the characters aren't all that great. Maybe that is intentional, it is after all about a poet, and what inspires his poetry. So I guess you could call it poetic. It is an acquired taste, I really like it, but not everyone will.

It is also longer than the other movies you mentioned. And from my experience the other movies were more engaging. I haven't seen Jules and Jim.

I might have loved it if it had more scenes like the scene shot through a window (those who have seen the movie will remember), that scene has some of the most ingenius framing and blocking I have ever seen.

I am an *beep* but my friends compensate for that.

reply

Personally, I find it a bit slow and dull, and none of the characters appeal to me much, nor does the story. But then I feel the same way about the other films you mention.

reply

Why is this film NOT considered one of the greatest films of all time

Bad soap operas rarely are considered such.

Get the facts first - you can distort them later!

reply

I think it's a good film, but not one of the greatest, or anywhere near. The directing (some astoningly beautiful shots) and the supporting actors and their characters (especially Steiger and Guiness) save it. but the central love story is wanting, the acting from Shariff and Christie is mediocre and they lack chemistry.



"When life presents you with lemons, squeeze out the juice and squirt it in your enemies eyes."

reply