the karamazov brothers on screen
back
The work of F. M. Dostoyevsky has been constantly drawing the attention of theatrical as well as film artists. His novels were influenced by his dramatic experience with the movement to abolish serfdom in Russia (1861), when he realized that the dark side of the old order not only continued to exist, but seemed to grow even stronger, developing and multiplying. He felt the tragedy of the moral descent of society, and this feeling was intensified by his own terrifying experience in prison (1850-1854). It brought him to advocate human dignity. Even in his late works when he portrays modern society in its disunity and barbarity, Dostoyevsky sticks to his ethical ideals. These contrasts can be best traced in his last and unfinished novel, The Brothers Karamazov. It is a synthesis of Dostoyevsky’s views of man and morality, the climax of his attempts to show a complex conception of the world. Here, Dostoyevsky plumbs the depths of the inner life of human beings, especially that of the Russian man in the second half of 19th century. Bitter life experience, physical traits and physiological features had predestined Dostoyevsky to permeate his own pains and dramas into the aching inner selves of his protagonists. Thus, he expresses not only the existential tragedy of most Russian people but also the incommensurate nature of Christian ideals which he himself worshipped. It is also this urgently religious topicality that makes him, next to Tolstoy, the most translated Russian writer of his time, as well as a center of attention when it comes to adapting works for theatrical or cinema purposes.
Concentrating on The Brothers Karamazov, out of the many Dostoyevsky works filmed, it is especially Russian directors who adapt this novel. For example Viktor Turzhansky (who later emigrated) grasps the topic as a conventional pageant in 1915. A German movie version from 1920 by C. Froelich and D. Buchowetzki also provides an attractive illustration of the novel, accenting the most sensational moments of the plot with a cast marked by expressionists (F. Kortner, E. Jannings, W. Krauss). Another Russian immigrant Fedor Ocep, in his adaptation from 1931, made also in Germany, encloses his point of view of the multi-layered novel in the movie title, Der Mörder Dimitri Karamasow. He concentrates on Dostoyevsky’s favorite criminal involutions, which work as a source of narrative tension as well as a handle for analysis of characters. We shall leave aside the dull Italian attempt I fratelli Karamasoff by G.Gentilomo (1947) but mention an American movie version by Richard Brooks, who eliminated plot elements in much the same way as Ocep did. Brooks stakes his 1958 movie The Brothers Karamazov on the exotic appearance of Yul Brynner (Dmitri) and the popularity of Austrian actress Maria Schell (Grushenka). Unfortunately, the film's artistic quality is nowhere close to that of his adaptations of American authors, especially Tennessee Williams (Cat on a Hot Tin Roof, Sweet Bird of Youth).
In terms of Soviet cinematography, it is quite significant that its interest in Dostoyevsky’s work was contingent on the measure of his „ideological“ acceptability by official literary critics. His original theme of „poor people“ which could be interpreted as a criticism of the dark reality in the czarist empire was acceptable for the regime, unlike his timeless thematic concerns of revealing the presence of evil and the inconsistency of human beings. Rehabilitation of the man and re-publishing his work came about at the end of fifties, in the time of Khrushchev’s „thaw“. It was also in this time when his work returned to the stages and screens of Soviet theatres. The greatest enthusiast was Ivan Pyryev who made a not very successful Part One of The Idiot (1958) and White Nights (1960). However, his last movie The Brothers Karamazov (1968) was a very pleasant surprise. It was actually completed after his death by actors Mikhail Ulyanov (Dmitri) and Kirill Lavrov (Ivan).
The realization of this three-part film was preceded by a long preparation period consisting of recomposing its main motives. While the novel involves a wide range of problems, the movie is much more modest in this respect. The lively, though sometimes short-tempered, director did not forget about expressing the basic themes: a ravenous craving after harmony; and pain and suffering facing cruelty and injustice. The whole composition corresponds to the spirit of a historical and moral parable. Father Fyodor Pavlovitch personifies the old morals, the cruelty of feudal bad manners. Ivan’s ardency discharges itself in the rational sphere. A dropout, he denies the divine and the earthly world, and he takes a cruel Creator to task over the deaths of millions of innocent victims. A spontaneous and depraved Dmitri succumbs to emotional passion, believing that a man in his unselfish love for another can reach salvation no matter what he does. Religious Alyosha is portrayed as an ideal character who could –similar to Prince Myshkin – revive mankind. The family portrait offers one more character: the slimy by-product of the debauched father, Smerdyakov. Pyryev makes use the inner monologue which Dostoyevsky had truly mastered. The characters lead inner fights with themselves and often act against their own will. As a result, the analysis of feelings and attitudes of Pyryev’s movie characters blend perfectly with the inconsolable Russian reality and the ambiguity of human instinct.
I know that Evald Schorm saw this trilogy. Undoubtedly, the impression of this movie influenced his magnificent adaptation with its thrifty approach to the plot. He must have been drawn to the work by its brilliant interpretation of moral dilemmas and the inner struggles of the key characters, all of which reveals their timeless topicality and validity. We can actually feel the same spirit from the recent enterprise at the Dejvické Theater.
Galina Kopanìva
back