Nineteen Eighty-Four
Tags: brainwashing, alternate reality, satire, dramatic

Plot synopsis:
Winston Smith is a man who lives in Airstrip One, the remnants of Britain broken down by war, civil conflict, and revolution. A member of the middle class Outer Party, Winston lives in a one-room London apartment flat. His sustenance consists of black bread, synthetic meals, and "Victory"-branded gin. Telescreens in every building, accompanied by microphones and cameras, allow the Thought Police to identify anyone who might compromise the Party's regime. Children are encouraged to inform the officials about potential thought criminals, including their parents.
Winston works at the Ministry of Truth, or "Minitrue", as an editor. He is responsible for historical revisionism; he rewrites records and alters photographs to conform to the state's ever-changing version of history itself, rendering the deleted people "unpersons"; the original documents are destroyed by fire in a "memory hole". Despite being good at his job, Winston becomes mesmerized by the true past and tries to get more information about it. In a place beside his flat's telescreen where he believes he cannot be seen, he begins writing a journal criticizing the Party and its enigmatic leader, Big Brother. By doing so, he commits a crime that, if discovered by the Thought Police, warrants certain death. Julia, a young woman who maintains the novel-writing machines at the ministry and whom Winston loathes, surreptitiously hands Winston a note confessing her love for him. Winston and Julia begin an affair after Winston realizes she shares his loathing of the Party, first meeting in the country, and eventually in a rented room at the top of an antiques shop. They believe that the shop, being located in a proletarian neighbourhood of London, is safe, as the room has no telescreen.
Weeks later, Winston is approached by O'Brien, an Inner Party member whom Winston believes is an agent of the Brotherhood—a secret underground society that intends to destroy the Party. They arrange a meeting at O'Brien's flat where both Winston and Julia swear allegiance to the Brotherhood. A week later, O'Brien clandestinely sends Winston a copy of "The Book", The Theory and Practice of Oligarchical Collectivism by Emmanuel Goldstein, the publicly reviled leader of the Brotherhood. The Book explains the concept of perpetual war, the true meanings of the slogans "War is peace", "Freedom is slavery", and "Ignorance is strength", and how the Party can be overthrown through means of the political awareness of the proles (proletarians).
In a surprising turn, the Thought Police capture Winston along with Julia in their rented room. The two are then delivered to the Ministry of Love (Miniluv) for interrogation. Mr. Charrington, the shopkeeper who rented the room to them, reveals himself as a Thought Police agent. O'Brien is also an agent of the Thought Police. He is part of a special sting operation used by the police to find and arrest suspected thoughtcriminals. O'Brien interrogates and tortures him with electroshock, telling him that Winston can "cure" himself of his "insanity"—his manifest hatred for the Party—through controlled manipulation of perception. Winston confesses to crimes that O'Brien tells him to say that he has committed, but O'Brien understands that Winston has not betrayed Julia. O'Brien sends him to Room 101 for the final stage of re-education, a room which contains each prisoner's worst nightmare. Winston shouts "Do it to Julia!" as a wire cage holding hungry rats is fitted onto his face, thus betraying her.
After being put back into society, Winston meets Julia in a park. She admits that she was also tortured, and both reveal betraying the other. Later, Winston sits alone in the Chestnut Tree Cafe, troubled by memories which he is sure are lies. A raucous celebration begins outside, celebrating Oceania's "decisive victory" over Eurasian armies in Africa, and Winston imagines himself as a part of the crowd. Winston feels he has at last ended his "stubborn, self-willed exile" from the love of Big Brother—a love Winston returns quite happily as he looks up in admiration at a portrait of Big Brother.

Review: And the great Cyril Cusack does a classic turn as Charrington, the pawnshop proprietor.Right from the opening scene, in which we look in on a screening of a short propaganda film, brilliantly conceived and executed by Radford, during the daily "two minutes hate", climaxing in Dominic Muldowney's memorable, genuinely stirring national anthem of Oceania played behind the gigantic image of Big Brother, we are catapulted headlong into Orwell's nightmare vision.
Most of the other reviewers have stated just about everything about this wonderfully gritty, dark, foreboding movie that still remains an eerie parallel to our lives today, especially in the last 2 years...But I'm confused by the number of people who have commented that claim to be put off by "the gratuitous nudity" by the two characters of Winston and Julia.
There is less emphasis on the novel's musty, well-worn-and-endlessly-picked-over polemical import and more focus on the stark human element, and indeed, the actors bear such uncanny resemblance to Orwell's descriptions they practically seem born for their roles.With his quiet, brooding eloquence and haunted eyes peeking out of a gaunt, cadaverous frame like a tubercular, ashen-faced Egon Schiele figure, John Hurt is ideally cast as Winston Smith.
In an exquisite, maliciously Swiftian twist of irony, Burton's famous voice, with its rich, mellifluous Welsh inflections and descending cadences of Shakespearean sonnets and Dylan Thomas poetry, becomes a cruel herald of the willful, systematic destruction of the human spirit -- of `the worst thing in the world' that waits in Room 101 in the fated `place where there is no darkness.'  When O'Brien tells Winston, `you are thinking that my face is old and tiredand that while I talk of power I am unable to prevent the decay of my own body,' Burton's sagging, weary face speaks volumes.In the lesser roles, Gregor Fisher's Parsons literally resembles a sweaty frog, James Walker's Syme is the classic image of a squirrelly, mealy-mouthed hack-intellectual, while Andrew Wilde cuts the most chilling figure as the bespectacled, unblinking company man,' Tillotson.
Whilst the year 1984 may be long past us, the essential themes of George Orwell's best known work still remain as timely and as relevant as ever.Winston Smith (John Hurt) is a drone worker in the Bureau of Information, and his job is to edit the news in accordance with the needs of the governing Party (which is in continual, seemingly endless war with Eurasia and other opposing states).
Suzanna Hamilton is gentle and quirky as Julia and "Rab C Nesbitt" actor Gregor Fisher appears as Winston's ill-fated friend, Parsons.Veteran actor Richard Burton lends a cold charisma to government enforcer O'Brien and he too excels in the film's final moments, as he coolly and sadistically tortures Winston, subjecting him to severe physical pain to subdue him, casually pulling a tooth out of his rotting mouth, then exposing him to the horrors of Room 101, all the while exhorting obedience to the Party and love to Big Brother.
Whilst the term "Big Brother" is now synonymous with the ridiculous "reality" TV shows of the same name, others like the Two Minutes Hate (in which the workers are coerced, through a two-minute broadcast, into hating the enemies of the state); the idea of a government waging a perpetual war to advocate "peace" (especially relevant in the aftermath of September 11) as well as the editing of news and the abuse of language in order to suit the needs of government and disguise its true agendas are ideas that are chillingly present in today's society.All of this is powerful and thought-provoking stuff, and helps to make "Nineteen Eighty Four" an accurate and powerful rendering of a still very timely piece of work..
Merely a few days after finishing my read of George Orwell's fantastic 1948 novel "Nineteen Eighty-Four", I was immediately keen on looking to rent the modern film version, "1984" - filmed, appropriately enough, not only during the actual YEAR of 1984, but also during the exact same short span of months that the story took place in.
I read the book in Portuguese, where the new words of the Newspeak were perfectly translated.The film "1984" is a magnificent transposition of the novel to the cinema, with a remarkable screenplay by Michael Radford and top-notches performances of John Hurt and Richard Burton in his last work.
The awesome direction of Michael Radford gives a perfect idea of this novel about a dystopian society and the political theories of this society subdue by the powerful, feared and omnipresent Big Brother and is so careful that "1984" was filmed between April and June 1984 in London, in the same period and location George Orwell wrote in his novel.
At the center of this terrifying satire is the performance of Richard Burton who is both subtle and mind blowingly horrifying in his indescribably villainous role, while John Hurt provides a sometimes timid, sometimes paranoid, and other times absolutely petrified protagonist that attempts to escape from the norms of the totalitarian society he is forced to live in.While not necessarily a "horror" movie, there is no doubt that "1984" is among the most genuinely SCARY films that I have ever seen.
It deals with the basic and most important issues in life, society, government, wars, religion, education, brain-washing, the place of the individual, the hardship of being alone (physically and mentally), the concept of holding two contradictious thoughts at the same time, the position of the individual in history, the nothingness of being human, love, family, loyalty and betrayal, the instinct of any animal in nature to survive, and so much, much more.Being so complicated, I think it's impossible to bring all the concepts of the book to the big screen ("Naked Lunch", anyone?
I think that together they "complete" each other, in the sense that the former "brings life" to the latter: When I read the book (at least 4 times by now) I "see" and "hear" the characters as they appear in the movie.
Roger Deakins' cinematography and film-processing is excellent, giving the film the required atmosphere and aging look.And of course, Michael Radford, who also made the adaption, directed the movie flawlessly.Well, if you read this review up to here, you understand how good I think the movie and novel are.
As most people, the novel of which we all know is an excellent portrayal of a non-conformist man living and breathing in the pinnacle of totalitarianism.The movie is a nice adaption, however hampered as most most movies were back then and today by lack of sufficient time to grasp you fully as the book did.The movies strong points are the three main actors.
And Richard Burton who resonates coldness as the all-knowing Inner Party member O'Brien.The cinematography is great, the music is also very good.However, the movie just cannot capture the entire strength of the novel.
"Power is tearing human minds apart and putting them back together in new shapes of your own choosing." I think it's easy enough to say that the book by Orwell of 1984 is still valuable because, simply, it is, from the quote above to many, many others, its a cultural touchstone - though there's two things that may be taken for granted: first, that the film itself gets to the dark, horror-movie tone of paranoia and grime and decay and moral impoverishment (and the desperate search for it) that was in the book, and secondly that for all of the lines that people quote, people may not fully grasp how much emotion is conveyed in this story, that when one looks at the *people* there's so much to mine there.
This is actually what makes the book so great, and the film too, though it's one of 'those' great films I'm not sure when I'd have the heart to watch again (Brazil, a massively looser version, is more-so but then thats a comedy in a lot of ways, but I digress).What I think Radford does so well along with Roger Deakins's soaked-in-a-dirty-rag cinematography (which I mean as a sincere compliment) is get us into this world and it's one of oppression, devastation, and totalitarian control and keeps us there, so that when it comes time to see the "green world" of that landscape with the trees and those hills, it's more impactful and more like Winston (and us by proxy) being exposed to what is closest to...
But, again, the actor is fully organic in this world.If I could nitpick (or maybe it's a legit criticism, I may feel different about the movie later on or even tomorrow), I wondered if there could have been *more* Big Brother imagery - we get that one face in the screen looking on, and then the woman's voice, coming in like the rancid school-marm, on the intercom.
Exciting rendition that picks up every mote of bleak despair George Orwell's novel of a totalitarian future society in which a man whose daily work is rewriting history tries to rebel by falling in love .
In a futuristic, state-run society controlled by "Big Brother" in which love is outlawed, employee of the state Winston Smith (John Hurt) falls for Julia (Suzanne Hamilton) , and is tortured and brainwashed for his crime .
This is one of a number of dystopian, Orwellian and Kafaesque films made during the early to mid 1980s , the pictures include 1984, Terry Gilliam's Brazil, Ridley Scott's Blade Runner , Pink Floyd The Wall , Season of the Witch and Giorgio Moroder version of Fritz Lang's Metrópolis .Very acting by John Hurt as the tragic figure who dares to fall in love within a totalitarian society where emotions are outlawed and Suzanne Hamilton ,she was perfectly cast as Julia , her uncommonly bold, affecting performance, earned her some notoriety and a bit of a minor cult and she is frequently seen in full-frontal nudity .
However , the movie achieved mediocre box office , but following over the years as the film's reputation has steadily grown.Other adaptations about this classic novel are the followings : ¨1984¨ (1956) by Michael Anderson with Edmond O'Brien as Winston Smith , Michael Redgrave as O'Connor of the Inner Party , Jan Sterling as Julia of the Inner Party , Mervyn Johns as Jones and Donald Pleasence as R.
Very faithful adaptation of George Orwell's dystopian vision of the "future" world of 1984 - perhaps closer to reality today than ever before.The sets and cinematography are minimalistic and sufficiently bleak and gritty, which really evokes the hopelessness found in the novel.
The acting is also good (especially Burton), although I felt that Hurt's Winston got a bit too whiny at times.The biggest problem, however, is that the success of the film relies too heavily on the having read the book.
Smith falls in love with a woman named Julia; which is of course against the rules of the totalitarian society.The movie takes more time instilling the situation of the future than it does on the actual characters; so while we get a chilling portrait of how this modern society is ran and the rules that govern it; we are unfortunately not given much in the way of reasons to care about our main characters' plights.
The story itself has some very interesting points to make, however; and depending on your stance, you may well believe that modern society is moving ever closer to the 'Big Brother' of this film; here in the UK we are already being threatened with the prospect of ID cards, security cameras and ISP's spying on our internet connections, so maybe Orwell's vision is not such a distant possibility.
The masses must publicly demonstrate their loyalty to Big Brother, personal relationships are banned, and any ideas contrary to Party Policy are thought-crimes punishable by death.The film's protagonist, Winston Smith (John Hurt), is a nondescript Party apparatchik whose job it is to review historical documents and insert alternative facts to suit ever-changing Party policy.
The use of a desaturated and depressive colour palette creates vivid contrasts with scenes where Winston imagines what the real world must have looked like.Some may wonder how the depicted extreme nihilism of Orwell's 1984 can have any relevance to politics today.
The director seems to think that everyone watching the movie has read the book, because he makes no attempt to demonstrate WHY the characters act and feel the way they do.
It's a movie adaptation of a book, of course (a book I read many years ago) and so there can be quibbles about how well or how poorly Michael Radford (who directed this and wrote the screenplay) captured the novel - but I thought that certainly in terms of the mood he created he did a marvellous job.
The film's only redeeming features are the visuals, which convey well the bleak, homogeneous nature of this society, and the interesting soundtrack, which has a similar effect, also bringing a spooky, futuristic quality to the aesthetic.I know that an adaptation is a work of art in its own right, and should be regarded separately from the book, but with this sacrilegious desecration of Orwell's work it is impossible.
John Hurt is appropriately painful to watch as the doomed Winston Smith, and Richard Burton redeems himself from the dreck he produced in his last years with this frightening (because chillingly understated) portrayal of O'Brien, his last film role and one of his greatest.
His script adaption of the story is truly worthy of the source material, in fact this adaption to screen is so faithful that many may be put off by it's relentless bleakness and sense of despair and hopelessness as presented by Radford (and as originally conceived by Orwell), but those willing to take this journey will be rewarded with a truly powerful film experience unlike just about anything committed to film previously or since.The acting is superb on all accounts, with John Hurt and Suzanna Hamilton both perfectly cast as the lovers seeking comfort in each others arms despite the fact that their very love is punishable by torture and execution, however the best performance of the film comes from the late Richard Burton (in his final screen role) as the calmly menacing O'Brien who managed to seem both chilling and human and the same time.
In this film, the leading actor John Hurt gives an unexceptional performance as Winston Smith, a man from the proletarian area, who is devastated and oppressed by a totalitarian government that uses power to control people through screens all day long in a near-future dystopia.
Pure Light, not the absence of light...In the 1984 version of the George Orwell adaptation of 1984, despite being purposefully overboard to capture the essence of symbolism, it's difficult to find anything lucrative about this particular totalitarian government in which most of the people are forcefully, methodically content...The dilapidated streets resemble bombarded post-War Germany, and on giant movie screens is the image of a man that looks like Adolf Hitler, somewhat, and there's no turning off the repetitious propaganda ranging from battle front updates to how much chocolate will cost "next week." Meanwhile, the people confess their "sins" to the leader and to "Big Brother," especially those who have read a book by a man named Goldstein (no, he doesn't play basketball at Carver High): his philosophy attempts to delete this horrendous future with no value whatsoever.
This version of George Orwell's classic story about a "big brother is watching you" type society of the near future is not perfect but it is very good and very underrated, with some great performances by the leading me.Richard Burton is excellent and John Hurt gives maybe one of the very best performances of his entire career, which is saying a lot because he has given some great performances in his time.
I think Radford does a decent job of captivating the right visual cues from the book, I just felt the characters wandered too much during the first half and I felt very disconnected with them by the time I'm suppose to feel pity for them in the second half."1984" Is still worth a watch if you're a fan of political dramas, but I doubt it has ever had the impact on its viewers the way Orwell's writing impacts his readers.
I think this is the greatest edition between all the other adaptations, good plot and screen shots, and it took all details into considerations, John Hurt has successfully transmitted the message of George Orwell's novel through his extraordinary expressions and emotions, but the only thing that stops me from giving it a ten is that it's kind of a mysterious watching because it needs more explanation about the happening events throughout the film, I thought this adaptation was filmed only for those who have read the novel, a person who hasn't read the novel won't get the message from it, and as I'm sure 1984 is the most relevant novel to our days, but people nowadays barely read and that's the thing that might stop this film from spreading to them, also the whole soundtrack thing is not relevant to the movie and wasn't as powerful as the screenplay was..
John Hurt is an amazing actor and the only face I myself could see as Winston Smith.What angers me the most are the people in IMDb that called this "The Best Adaptation Ever" without even reading the book!
This 1984 version of Orwell's novel is meant to be seen after reading the paper version rather than the usual Cliff Notes premise of seeing the film instead of reading the book.With a breathtaking and often despairing authenticity the casting, acting, writing, production and set design bring even more life into the mental picture of Oceania and give subtle detail to one of the century's great works.
I haven't read the book by George Orwell or seen any of the other film adaptations of it, so I can't comment on how accurate this is compared to any other version.