1984 | 
| Director: Michael Radford
Actors: John Hurt, Richard Burton, Suzanna Hamilton, Cyril Cusack, Gregor Fisher
Studio: MGM (Video & DVD)
Category: DVD
Buy New: $24.98
New (10) Used (19) Collectible (1) from $24.96
Rating:  145 reviews
Sales Rank: 7488
Format: Anamorphic, Closed-captioned, Color, Dvd, Subtitled, Widescreen, Ntsc
Languages: English (Subtitled), Spanish (Subtitled), French (Subtitled), English (Original Language)
Rating: R (Restricted)
Region: 1
Aspect Ratio: 1.85:1
Number Of Discs: 1
Running Time: 113 Minutes
Shipping Weight (lbs): 0.2
Dimensions (in): 7.3 x 5.4 x 0.6
ISBN: 0792854969
UPC: 027616884220
EAN: 9780792854968
ASIN: B00007KQA3
Theatrical Release Date: December 14, 1984
Release Date: March 4, 2003
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
| |
| Similar Items:
|
| Editorial Reviews:
Amazon.com
Michael Radford's adaption of George Orwell's foreboding literary premonition casts John Hurt and Suzanna Hamilton as lovers who must keep their courtship secret. Aside from criminalizing sex and interpersonal relationships, the ruling party in their country Oceania both fabricates reality and reconstructs history for the sake of oppressing the masses. They brainwash their citizens via large, propaganda-spewing TV monitors installed in their living rooms, which also inspect everyone's activities. Hurt and Hamilton are among the few we see desperately trying to fight the system by keeping control of their thoughts and beliefs. While the atmosphere becomes a bit too stifling at times, the images are quite striking with their muted colors and dilapidated sets. In an interesting bit of casting, Richard Burton costars (in his final role) as a government agent who surreptitiously exposes Hurt to the ideas of resistance. Unlike many like-minded films, 1984 does not offer a flashy vision of the future, but then that aspect makes it feel all the more real. In an age when more and more of our everyday activities are being scrutinized, Big Brother may not be so far off after all. --Bryan Reesman
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 140 more reviews...
 1984 July 2, 2009
Sci-fi watcher (USA)
We have not watched entire movie yet although this is a DVD we having been wanting for a long time after seeing snipets.
 A Horrible Adaptation of a Classic Novel May 28, 2009
Robert McMurray (Bothell, WA USA)
In many respects, this adaptation of George Orwell's "1984" should stand out as an example of how you don't adapt a novel for the big screen. No film version can ever match the depth and detail of the original novel upon which it is based, but when a film is done this badly it demands an answer the obvious question, "What was the director thinking?"
To be fair, I like director Michael Radford's treatment of the external world of London as bleak and almost lifeless, although I think that the neighborhoods of the proletariat should have been much darker and more foreboding. Their environment seemed poor, but didn't evoke the same emotions as Orwell's well-written descriptions of dark alleys and the myriad of pubs that are filled with the down-trodden masses of non-party members. And with that same thought in mind we begin to see the first of many departures from the novel - aside from the antique shop and Winston's prostitute encounter there are no portrayals of any of the other scenes that make up more of the surrounding story in the proletariat world.
I realize that a director only has so much time to work with when creating a movie, but this director left out large chunks of the story in order to make it fit the time frame, and I feel sorry for anyone that hasn't read the book because so much of the movie won't mean anything. This movie could almost represent a condensed version of the original, except that it shows scenes out of order, it doesn't explain why so much of the story is actually occurring, and it changes a great deal of the detail in ways that are unforgivable. Here are just a few examples: In the novel Winston worked for Minitrue (Ministry of Truth), although in the film it mentions Winston working for Minirec (Ministry of Records). In the novel Winston does not exclaim that he hates Julia before discovering that she secretly loves him. In the film, Winston's vision of Julia undressing in a field occurs just before their first romantic encounter, not some weeks earlier in a dream as in the novel. I could go on and on, but there are a great number of these scenes that are not simply errors or a failure of attention to detail, they are the director's deliberate attempts to place his stamp on someone else's work. I believe in artistic expression, but if you want to make your own mark - create your own story; don't create a hatchet-job of someone else's work.
One of my largest complaints is the deliberate omission of a great detail of information surrounding the Socialism and Communism themes that are so prevalent in the novel; Ingsoc is never explained as a newspeak amalgamation of English Socialism, everyone is called brother or sister instead of comrade, and the recurring treatment of society's failed attempts to obtain even the most basic of necessities of life due to the government's ineptitude at production are missing. What's more infuriating is the portrayal of Winston's day-to-day activities at Minitrue/Minirec - you're vaguely aware that he is doing SOMETHING, but the film version manages to omit what that actually is. Having read the book we know that he was altering the past, but the film doesn't convey that. In fact, the film conveys very little - if you have read the book then the film simply gives you fleeting images to go along with the story line that you already know, but in most respects the film's failure to align with the novel begins to interfere with what you remember about the story.
Much like "Animal Farm", which is George Orwell's other treatment of communism, "1984" is supposed to be a sharp arrow piercing through the utopian vision of a communism by portraying a world where a corrupt government cannot live up to its promises, but this adaptation completely misses the target. At the time this movie was created the Cold War was still raging, and I can only surmise that the director toned down the communist-themed overtones in order to appease the Soviet Union; if that's the case - that's a really weak argument.
I truly feel sorry for someone that sees this film and has never read the book. After watching this movie I got the feeling that the director, Michael Radford, was trying to create a visual masterpiece like Stanley Kubrick did with "2001: A Space Odyssey", but unfortunately Michael Radford is NOT Stanley Kubrick, and as a result he created a film that is little more than an insult to the original novel, and my only take-away from this film is the feeling that I have lost two hours of my life.
1984 "1984" May 15, 2009
Bartley Rejrat (Baltimore, MD USA)
Fairly good movie (1984 made in "1984"), better then the 1956 version of 1984 but still not worth the $40 + price tag!
 Being A Minority Of One Does Not Make You Mad March 22, 2009
Martin Asiner (Jersey City, NJ)
1 out of 1 found this review helpful
1984 is simply one of the best filmed adaptions of any novel. This particular version filmed in 1984 works so well on so many levels that one is led from one scene to another in a manner that leaves one breathless even for those familiar with the book by George Orwell. Let me begin with a rarely mentioned level of criticism--the quality of the film itself. Though shot in color, director Michael Radford was careful to mute the colors such that what the audience sees seems more black and white, thus intensifying the crushingly grim reality of life in Oceania. London itself is presented as a city in disrepair, with cracked paint and corrosive rust ubiquitous. And in the midst of this urban miasma is the protagonist Winston Smith (John Hurt), one who is Everyman for the 1980s. There is absolutely nothing special about him. Even his last name reinforces his anonymity, though his first name implies a reaching out for that which is just beyond reach. Smith works as a history re-writer, a job that well enables him to see up close one of the Party's most sacred rules: "Those who control the Present control the Past. Those who control the Past control the Future." He knows by rote these and similar rules, but to him they are verbal effluvium, phrases that do not touch his essence. Everyone else in Oceania is similarly verbally constructed.
Into his life enters Julia (Suzanna Hamilton), a sex-obsessed female who instinctively recognizes the nihilistic emptiness of English Socialism (Ingsoc). She seduces him, knowing all the while that in their common agreement that "They are the Dead," and must suffer the inevitable fate of exposure by the Thought Police. O'Brien, supremely played by Richard Burton in his last role, seduces Winston psychologically, though in the book he confronts both. In the film, he uses his softly modulated voice to seem the very pinnacle of reason, never more reasonable than in the torture scenes when he positions himself as Winston's pseudo-father figure who wants only to return Winston to a politically correct right reason.
1984 in both book and film considers a host of issues that resonate as well today as back in the 1940s when first it hit print: what is an individual, how can we trust, what is common sense, and ultimately what is it that Winston refers to in Room 101 as that evanescent Spirit of Man that will triumph over brute dictatorship? When Orwell has O'Brien intone that man is infinitely malleable, he wanted O'Brien to suggest that man's spirit can be shaped and reshaped in any manner the interrogator wishes. But on some deep and buried level in Winston, Orwell also implies that this malleability need not be permanent. If Winston and Julia could sin before their conversion, then it is only a matter of time before they relearn that their inner natures are truly malleable and that they can "snap back" with a sheer act of will. The closing scene where Julia suggests that they must meet again is an ironic commentary on their ultimate ability to do just that no matter what viciousness O'Brien heaped on both of them. 1984 is a stark yet unforgettable punctuation that the Spirit of Man will live on after all.
Great Buy January 15, 2009
Angel Hartman (Des Moines, IA USA)
This product came in very good condition and was just in time for a birthday present. Thank you!
|
|
|
