The trouble with this epic is the story...

Rating: Null/10 (1 September 2002)

Shakespeare said it best when he said "the play's the thing." The trouble with DR. ZHIVAGO is not that the direction can be faulted--nor the performances--nor the magnificent photography (photographed in Finland and Spain) that captures the look necessary for the time and setting of this sluggish tale of romantic escapades in the life of Dr. Zhivago. The tale is told against the background of the Russian revolution (1910-20s) and is easily one of the most ambitious projects David Lean ever tackled.
Individual scenes are striking but the plot is tries to cover too much territory and there is an assortment of characters that we never really get to know. Unlike what Selznick did in giving his Civil War epic GONE WITH THE WIND a sharper focus than the novel, the screenplay remains faithful as possible to the sprawling novel without giving the film the structure it needs to succeed on cinematic terms. Long stretches are dull in dialogue despite camera set-ups that are always fascinating and artistic, almost as if to distract us from the fact that the script is loosely written, trying without success to encompass a great deal of matter within the framework of a lengthy epic. It all seems sprawling and disconnected.
Maurice Jarre's score is impressive and Omar Sharif does a superb job of introspective acting as the central character. His expressive face, often shown in close-up without dialogue but reacting to situations around him, proves the old adage that a picture is worth a thousand words. He definitely deserved an Oscar nomination for his Yuri.
The rest of the cast is competent enough but none of the characters have the sort of definition needed to connect with an audience--nor are they likeable enough to deserve our rapt attention. Julie Christie's Lara shows weakness of character from the very beginning when she exhibits what can only be described as sluttish behavior--and although she is somewhat redeemed by her true love for the married doctor, her romantic heroine never quite overcomes being an alienating creature. Geraldine Chaplin, on the other hand, is strikingly attractive in her more sympathetic role. Rod Steiger, in an unpleasant but well-written villainous part, gives a full-bodied performance. Alec Guinness is wasted but Tom Courtenay takes advantage of a showy supporting role.
A film of epic proportions, it lacks the story-telling power of a certain Civil War epic already mentioned here which managed to capture audience attention for an even longer running time while dealing with four central characters.