The film is well-made but has nothing to do with Pasternak

Rating: 7/10 (7 May 2006)

I am originally from Russia and have heard lots of claims that Americans or British can't make films about Russia because they don't understand a thing about Russian soul. I don't really support this point of view. If the Soviet screen version of 'Hamlet' is admired by many cinema people of Shakespeare's motherland, there is no reason why an English-speaking artist can't make an admirable film on a Russian book. Of course, in some Hollywood films about Russia there are funny mistakes and clichés, but the Soviet films about America and other foreign countries are not less funny. Anyway, one episode in Dr. Zhivago really made me laugh. It's when Yuri and Lara arrive to this house which is all covered with ice, Yuri approaches a table, opens a drawer, takes out the paper and a bottle of ink and STARTS WRITING! But if the house is so frozen from the inside,the ink had to turn into ice as well, there is no other way. What on Earth was it made of? The episodes with balalaika are also funny, it does not exist in the book and is probably used as a typical Russian attribute.
And now to the serious matters. Dr Zhivago is not the best work of Boris Pasternak (his poems are a lot more powerful), anyway, it is much more than a simple love story, but much of its social and philosophical message gets lost in the movie, even though the film itself seemed to me a way too long. Omar Sharif might be a good actor, but he is not Yuri. Lara in the novel is not just a beautiful woman, she is a very tragic figure from the beginning, and this is what I hardly saw in Julie Christie's character. Besides, I felt no chemistry between Yuri and Lara, and this is unforgivable. If you transform a complex novel into what some call 'A Russian version of GONE WITH THE WIND', your protagonists should be at least convincing as a couple. There was a great potential in Yuri and Lara's story and it wasn't used despite all the screen time they were given. The role of Tonya, Komarovsky and other supporting characters in the book is much more important than what we see in the film. One might get a peculiar thought that it was done on purpose, because if these characters were given more screen time, them would easily eclipse the protagonists. Geraldine Chaplin is much better as Tonya (compared to Julie Christie's Lara), even though it's not her best role (and I love this actress). Ah, I also loved Klaus Kinsky, he is so memorable in his tiny role, with his riveting eyes. The music score is very good too.
In general, the movie is really well-made. Despite all the things I disliked, I would never say that is's a bad film, it would be plain unfair. But maybe it's better to watch it as a love epic and not as a screen adaptation of the novel, otherwise you might be disappointed.