Bergorks If you like to be scared, if you like to laugh, and if you like to learn a thing or two at the movies, this absolutely cannot be missed.

Nayan Gough A great movie, one of the best of this year. There was a bit of confusion at one point in the plot, but nothing serious.

Kien Navarro Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

Ortiz Excellent and certainly provocative... If nothing else, the film is a real conversation starter.

eziovantaggiato This new version of Doctor Zhivago cannot be considered a remake of David Lean's previous film. You cannot make comparisons: they are both beautiful movies, interpreted and directed very well, with beautiful scenery and music. In this version Campiotti goes more in detail, is more faithful to Pasternak's novel, and at the same time provides a new very original interpretation. It's a moving film, a film about love that prevails over the adversities of destiny.. The performances of Keira Knighteley (Lara), Hans Matheson (Yuri) and Sam Neill (Komarof) are excellent, but the other actors are really good too. The direction is very careful and precise. The ending has been changed to give hope to those who see the film. It is hope in a better future, written by the poet Zhivago, aka Pasternak. It deserves an Oscar.

Timbuktu5 There are innumerable reasons why this version pales in insignificance to David Lean's 1965 classic. To begin with, not a single actor in this 2002 version can come close to competing with his or her equivalent. Sam Neill trying to compete with legendary Rod Steiger as Victor Komarovsky?! Oh, please. Worse, Kris Marshall challenging Academy Award Winner, Tom Courntenay. Just painful.For budget-reducing purposes, this newer version includes quality-reducing period black-and-white footage in scenes that necessitate large crowd scenes.The newer version also includes unnecessary filler scenes such as the respective wedding ceremonies of Yuri and Tonya and Lara and Pasha. What purpose is served by these boring, meaningless film footages? The worst scene is reserved for the story's finale. Lara is about to be captured by the secret police. With her is her son (by Yuri) who looks incredibly like Yuri when he was a little boy. Well, he SHOULD look like the father because it's the same child actor who we see in the beginning of the film! The audience cannot help feel as if the child has been transported by a time machine to the present.Nevertheless, Lara, just before being captured by the authorities, tells her son to run for his life. As she is driven away in the back of the police car, she sees her little boy running desperately down the street in the middle of post-war Moscow. Despite the fact that her vulnerable son's chances of survival in such a forbidding environment are next to zero AND her own fate destined for a concentration camp, Lara, undaunted, breaks out in a huge smile of satisfaction and contentment! Anyone who has not seen David Lean's version is truly short-changing their viewing pleasure.

de_niro_2001 This version is a lot more faithful to Pasternak's book than David Lean's version. It is great. It doesn't have to compete with the David lean version. It stands up very well on its own. Ludovico Einaudi's score is every bit as good as Maurice Jarre's. I also think that Keira Knightley is better as Lara than Julie Christie was. I also think she's better than Andrea Corr would have been and I'm a dyed in the wool Corrs fan. It was sensible casting young actors who are the age the characters are meant to be at the outset of the story and then ageing them via makeup. One is a bit incredulous when one sees David Lean's version and Pasha says Lara is 17. Julie Christie looks the age she was when the film was made, namely mid-20s. Each actor puts a different interpretation on his or her character from the 1965 version. Bill Paterson makes Monsieur Gromyko less pompous than Ralph Richardson did. He's also quite charming where he pretends a knotted handkerchief is a rat for the children at the beginning. Sam Neill makes Monsieur Komarovsky more menacing and sinister than Rod Steiger did. He also doesn't have the paternalistic streak that Rod Steiger had. Mr Neill has also given older guys carte blanche to wax lyrical about Keira Knightley. He's done scenes with her and he's about 40 years older than her. Kris Marshall doesn't portray Pasha Antipov as Tom Courtenay's angry young man. He's shown to be quite a fun guy when he swings about ringing church bells which are standing in frames in the street to amuse Lara and her classmates. But he still becomes just as psychotic and unfeeling as Tom Courtenay's interpretation. But, as in the 1965 version, Zhivago is portrayed as a throroughly decent guy who starts off very well in life and his life ends sadly. This version also shows some grim aspects of the revolution such as mutilation, children being murdered and cannibalism, which of course was referred to by Alec Guinness in the 1965 version. This is a very good adaptation which I would recommend to fans of the 1965 version and even more so to fans of the book.

rboon33455 This was an utterly compelling interpretation which really captured the spirit of the Pasternak novel.I appreciated the almost architectural beauty and large landscape of the David Lean film of my generation, yet there was an emotional intensity and a depth of character exploration in this version which was missing from the earlier film. The central characters were complex and believable and not understated icons in an icy landscape. Sam Neill as Komarovsky was a compelling figure and this time you could see why Lara was attracted to him despite the abusive nature of their relationship.Pasternak's central character, Yuri Zhivago,was depicted as a passionate but not bombastic hero. Hans Matheson captured the almost passive poetic romantic whose emotions are torn by the situations in which he finds himself which are reflected in the age of political turmoil that surrounds him.Strong performances by Keira Knightley as Lara and Alexandra Maria Lara as Tanya gave real substance to the tensions he experiences.I had never heard of Keira Knightley when I first saw this production and was amazed at the range which her intelligent acting achieved.Her real age was consistent with that of the young Lara yet she convincingly bridged the gap to the young mother of the later part of the novel. The love scenes were tender, yet passionate and Director Giacomo Campiotti is to be congratulated on his sensitive rendering of these.The relationship between Yuri and Lara truly reflected the sadness of Pasternak's poem,"The Parting."I only bought the DVD after almost casually coming across this made for TV movie on the box.It's emotional landscape and authentic sets are strong enough to warrant a proper release at the cinema.I suspect Boris Pastenak would have much preferred it to the David Lean film and so did I !