The Brothers Karamazov

I first read this novel as a 13 year old at my dad's recommendation! I loved it and reread it many times as a teen-ager. I was young, impressionable, and brought up in an "Orthodox" home...I was spiritually moved and felt a kinship with Dostoyevski's religiosity. I saw the movie at age 19 and was prepared to hate what Hollywood might have done to commercialize my favorite novel! Instead I was transported to 19th century Russia and was totally mesmerized. I forgave the "deletions," I forgave the "alterations"...Dostoyevski was still there and talking!!! I fell in love with Maria Schell and nearly swooned during her Gypsy dance! Alexei was the young monk who personified what it means to be a generous and forgiving Christian; Ivan the spiritually conflicted and deeply honest man of science; Dimitri the tortured deeply human soul who takes on suffering...I even understood and cried when the saintly Starets knelt before Dimitri in the powerful scene at the monastery and asked for his blessing! If only some of our US citizens who explain their draconian political notions as manifestations of their religious beliefs could learn spirituality from Father Zosima! I am now 68 years of age and thrill with each reviewing of this classic. All actors were perfect in their role and for me Schatner will always be vulnerable young Alexei...not the omnipotent Kirk!

Hollywood rendition of the classic novel by Feodor Dostoyesky deals about the Karamazov family. It starts in Ryevsk, 1870, the father named Fyodor is a selfish libertine , he brutalizes and mistreats his sons . His four grown sons are Dimitri(Yul Brynner), an attractive, wealthy officer who is betrothed to rich Katya (Claire Bloom), the monk is named Alexi(William Shatner), a writer named Ivan (Richard Basehart) and the bastard (Albert Salmi). Dimitri falls in love with a beautiful woman named Grishenka(Maria Schell), but she's the father's lover. Then emerge the tensions , drama and tragedy when brothers and father struggle with their desires for the same women.

One of the most interesting films based on the novels by the fascinating Russian writer Feodor Dostoevsky - Crime and punishment-. The writers Julius and Philip Epstein -Casablanca- kicked out most of the psychological undertones of the original. This overlong picture is confined by the demands of melodrama and packs some flaws and gaps. Nevertheless it is full of masterly touches and unexpected flashes of intelligence. Nice performances by all star cast , especially by Richard Bashehart, William Shatner and Lee J. Cobb does an overacting. And Maria Schell who does a sensible and smiling performance as Grushenka, whose role Marilyn Monroe attempted desperately to get. Colorful cinematography by John Alton, a noted cameraman expert on noir cinema.

Good and intense direction by Richard Brooks. He was a fine writer/director so consistently mixed the good and average which it became impossible to know that to expect from him next. Firstly he worked regularly as a Hollywwod screenwriter. After that, his initial experience of directing was one of his own screenplays called ¨Crisis¨. The Richard Brooks films that have the greatest impact are realized during the 50s and 60s as ¨Cat on a hot tin roof, Something of value, Elmer Gantry, Sweet bird of youth, In cold blood, Lord Jim and the Professionals¨ and of course ¨The brothers Karamazov¨ .

As happens so often with film adaptations of great novels,we have a screenplay that will focus on the events of a novel,rather than on the underlying philosophical tenets and theories that seem to be involved.Perhaps it is inevitable that this be the case.The Karamazovs are,in actuality,the fragmented aspects of the author's

personality;a.)brutishness;b.)impulsiveness;c.)intellect;d.)spirituality;e.) depravity.(To wit;Feodor;Dimitri;Ivan;Alexis;Smerdyakov).And the real hero of the novel is Alexis.We are witnessing his growth and development as a hero against the sordid story of his family and the murder of their lustful,wicked father.It is development,particularly regarding the testing of his faith in the hard and often callous world,that marks the real journey of the story.This is minimalized in the film.I guess that this probably wouldn't have sold in 50s America.The adaptation ,given my observations,is really quite impressive.We can't fault any of the production values,efforts,and activities.And,with one exception,the cast is excellent.My one fault in this respect is with Lee J.Cobb.This outstanding character actor is much too young,virile,and attractive to portray accurately the character the author intended.Feodor Karamazov is supposed to be about 65,a physical wreck,sinister,and depraved.His physically debauched condition is intended to mirror his moral corruption.And,yet,given these attributes,he in nevertheless fascinating to women.(At least,certain kinds of women.I shudder to think what their agendas are if they find an old villain like this attractive.They must be as needy as all get-out,and viewing him through a fantasy veil that keeps out all accurate perceptions.)In my opinion,the late Donald Pleasence would have been a much more realistic choice for the part.Otherwise,given my criticism,this is a highly enjoyable film.

After watching this film for the first time I can see where Jerome Weideman got the inspiration for the novel that became the basis for the films House Of Strangers and Broken Lance. The Menottis of the first film and the Devereauxs of the second were definitely inspired by The Brothers Karamazov.

The feelings for the father are the only thing that unite these four distinctly different brothers. Lee J. Cobb is a hard drinking, hard wenching, two fisted patriarch who is determined to beat everyone else in the game of debauchery. He's getting good competition from son Yul Brynner and it arouses some jealousy even though Brynner is engaged to a nice girl in Claire Bloom who also has a father giving both of them a run at that game. Things do come to a head when Brynner takes an interest in another woman who Cobb is currently keeping company with. In fact Inger Stevens and Cobb have a complicated scheme to get Brynner under their thumb through his gambling debts so he's forced to marry Bloom and start living respectively.

The other brothers are unique individuals themselves. Richard Basehart is a reporter for a radical newspaper with budding revolutionary thoughts. William Shatner is a pious novice monk, he and Basehart are a study in contrasts. Finally there is Albert Salmi who claims Cobb as his father and who Cobb treats like a doormat. Not that this brutish sadistic thug is worthy of anything. All of the sons suffer from a lack of a strong father figure.

The climax is when Cobb is murdered and Brynner is arrested for the crime. Fyodor Doestoyevsky is not Agatha Christie, people who like murder mysteries will have that solution figured out. But Doestoyevsky was writing this novel as a character study. Each of these brothers represent an extreme in terms of a way of living be it radical politics, religion, debauchery, or even brutish strength. An amalgam character of all of them would be a well adjusted man.

The Brothers Karamazov got one Oscar nomination, Lee J. Cobb for Best Supporting Actor. Papa Karamazov is certainly the kind of role that one cannot possibly overact in and Cobb feasts on enough scenery for three films. He lost the Oscar sweepstakes to another patriarchal portrayal that which Burl Ives did in The Big Country.

After over 50 years The Brothers Karamazov holds up very well, it's a good film and a good introduction to the works of Doestoyevsky. Try and see it back to back to back with House Of Strangers and Broken Lance.

The optimum method for bringing a major literary work to the screen is the mini series, (though the television adaptation of Dostoyevski's "Crime and Punishment" was not to my liking.) There's no possible way a novel of the length and complexity such as "Brothers Karamazov" can be done justice to by the cinema, even given 145 minutes.

This 1959 Hollywood version deserves full marks for summarizing and depicting the plot faithfully, but since so much of the essence of the book is missing one cannot help feeling the pointlessness of the entire exercise.

Director Richard Brooks manages to sustain the emotion intensity of the piece, keeping the proceedings on an intimate scale, (David Lean no doubt would have blown it up to epic proportions). The cast are largely satisfactory with Yul Brynner is at his charismatic best as Dmitri and Claire Bloom is spot on as Katya. Iridescent Maria Schell is far too genteel for the earthy Grushenka, a part Marilyn Monroe somewhat misguidedly felt she was born to play, according to Hollywood lore. Lee J. Cobb tends towards hamming it up and an almost unrecognizably young William Shatner is a pleasant surprise as the mystically inclined Alexi.

While there is some enjoyment to be gained from this movie, one can only wholeheartedly offer the recommendation – read the book.