War and Peace BBC1

[Mary Chambers]

How many respondents to this thread have read the novel? I read it in 1967, doing little else for 2 months. Interesting to read that Davies had not read it before embarking on his interpretation.

PS I'm afraid James Norton is forever typecast for me as the chilling psycho from Happy Valley (as which, apparently, he will be returning )

I never managed to finish the novel. I doubt if the adaptation was very high quality, but I quite enjoyed it anyway .

James Norton is supposed to be playing Peter Pears in a film about his early relationship with Britten, made by the people who did Grimes on Aldeburgh Beach. In the snippets I've seen he's very good. I'm wondering if the film will ever happen, though. He seems to have become a big name with a lot of work.

[Petrushka]

I didn't watch the 1972 version but dimly remember watching (on a poor-quality TV) the Bondarchuk four-part film version with subtitles which was shown on British TV in the late 1970s. This reflected the sprawling scale of the novel. I watched intermittently last night, being busy in the kitchen, it looked OK but (reduced to the size of a Jane Austen serial) can only be a brutal filleting of the novel, with wholesale massacre of characters, plotlines, philosophical digressions and overall loss of scale.... Which isn't to say it shouldn't happen, it just becomes something else.

How many respondents to this thread have read the novel? I read it in 1967, doing little else for 2 months. Interesting to read that Davies had not read it before embarking on his interpretation.

PS I'm afraid James Norton is forever typecast for me as the chilling psycho from Happy Valley (as which, apparently, he will be returning )

I've read the novel twice! I usually thoroughly dislike TV and film adaptations of books I've enjoyed but War and Peace, Tinker Tailor and Smiley's People are exceptions.

The 1972 BBC version was some 15 hours in length and was on every Thursday for what seemed an age. It was repeated again in 1975. I find this version the most faithful to reproducing the epic scale of the novel with the time needed to build on characterisation so that you know very quickly who is who. The new version is 6 hours long so lots of sub-plots, characters etc are going to have to be ditched with the core of the story remaining. The Bondarchuk film is utterly magnificent and while this, too, is just over 6 hours long it has the splendid advantage of being in Russian and with Russian actors so is as authentic as you can get. The music is pretty good too!

I find it a tad distracting to see well known faces amongst the new BBC cast and that's another plus for Bondarchuk. We're only one episode in so let's give it time and reserve judgement. The really big moments are yet to come!

[Nick Armstrong]

I find it a tad distracting to see well known faces amongst the new BBC cast and that's another plus for Bondarchuk.

I know what you mean - Rebecca Front being in particular so ubiquitous these days, and indelibly printed in my mind from The Thick of It, that I have trouble suspending disbelief; ditto Adrian Edmondson... It wasn't too much of a problem with the other actors, as I haven't seen much/anything they've been in (save for Broadbent and Dano, whose superior acting skills allow them to be chameleonic which removes the problem).

I guess it was also a problem with the earlier BBC version - e.g. Maigret playing Count Rostov. I pulled out my DVD set of that 1972 version - it has its faults too, some stemming from that static, studio-bound cardboard-set look of 70s TV productions seen by modern eyes. Hopkins remains enthralling though.

The Bondarchuk film is utterly magnificent and while this, too, is just over 6 hours long it has the splendid advantage of being in Russian and with Russian actors so is as authentic as you can get.

For me, the principal authenticity of the current adaptation derived from the use of real locations in and around St Petersburg itself...


... and other Eastern European countries (certainly not open to the previous BBC production!). Having like others here spent some time in and around the city (in the days when it was still Leningrad), I was instantly transported and could almost breathe the icy air.

As to the Bondarchuk being authentically in Russian: a couple of commentators I've read point out that ironically that's not authentic - the people featured in War & Peace would by and large have been speaking French.... I'm not expert enough to know if that's correct, but it sounds as if it might be.

[Richard Tarleton]

As to the Bondarchuk being authentically in Russian: a couple of commentators I've read point out that ironically that's not authentic - the people featured in War & Peace would by and large have been speaking French.... I'm not expert enough to know if that's correct, but it sounds as if it might be.

Didn't Pierre refer to this in the (first?) salon scene - how people didn't even talk Russian? But yes. And the aristocracy all looked rather well scrubbed. Macaulay described the Russian ambassador and his entourage in London in the 1830s as "dripping pearls and vermin".

We needed Bondarchuk for the battle scene - was that Austerlitz, it looked like a minor skirmish? Perhaps Austerlitz is next week. The thing is so compressed, characters merely hinted at....(Tolstoy spends a lot of time on General Prince Bagration for example).....

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

I've read the novel twice!

Describing it on this Forum as "the greatest ever written" or similar, I seem to recall? Sufficient praise for me to attempt it (in the Anthony Briggs translation) around this time last year. And ... I agree! (With the proviso that I was reading a translation - but I can imagine nothing finer than this.) Last year turned into a Tolstoy year, ending with Anna Karenina - which is also the greatest ever written!

Sorry - OT (I haven't seen episode 1 yet); but it reminded me that I owe you a considerable debt, Pet, for guiding me towards two of my most wonderful reading experiences which I'd meant to acknowledge long before this.

[Petrushka]

Agree about the St Petersburg locations. I went there in December 1979 when it was b....y freezing but quite wonderful. Our hotel was right opposite the cemetery where Tchaikovsky is buried but was frustratingly closed while I was there.

I understand that the Russian intelligentsia of the period did converse in French which was a second language and parts of Tolstoy's original text reflect this.

Ferney: Glad to have my uses! It gives great pleasure to know that I've guided someone towards a rich literary or musical experience. To anyone else thinking of tackling the novel please omit the final part of the book which is a tiresome monologue about history. Better to let the story end where it does at which point you should feel emotionally drained and in awe at what you have read.

[silvestrione]

I might be ahead here: I've read it three times! I watched the first episode, but shall not be continuing....too distracted by consternation at the outrageous freedoms taken.

Not too keen on Andrew Davies. His ear for dialogue is not strong, yet he does not use any of the original (I'm thinking of Dickens and Jane Austen: older adaptations recognised that both created dialogue that worked very well on screen). He shamelessly reduced Pride and Prejudice to 'popular historical romance' level.

Got that off my chest.

[vinteuil]

... some tasty uniforms and some nice frocks.

[Mary Chambers]

Agree about the St Petersburg locations. I went there in December 1979 when it was b....y freezing but quite wonderful. Our hotel was right opposite the cemetery where Tchaikovsky is buried but was frustratingly closed while I was there.



.

I've been there. There were frozen roses on his grave, which struck me as very poetic somehow. It was only November, but snowing. Petipa was there as well, and I think Glinka - I can't quite remember now.

[Historian]

Didn't Pierre refer to this in the (first?) salon scene - how people didn't even talk Russian? But yes.

We needed Bondarchuk for the battle scene - was that Austerlitz, it looked like a minor skirmish? Perhaps Austerlitz is next week. The thing is so compressed, characters merely hinted at....(Tolstoy spends a lot of time on General Prince Bagration for example).....

I believe that French was still the language of European 'polite society' at the time. Often the vernacular was restricted to speaking to servants.

The 'battle' was quite small scale and didn't strike me as altogether 'realistic' in terms of the formations used. It was a depiction of the Russian rearguard action of Schoengraben (also known as Hollabrun). We'll see what they make of Austerlitz in the next episode.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

I believe that French was still the language of European 'polite society' at the time. Often the vernacular was restricted to speaking to servants.

Do you mean "Russian", Historian?

[Historian]

Do you mean "Russian", Historian?

Well, I believe that French was also used elsewhere in the early 19th century, certainly in court circles, for example in Prussia and Austria. It was also the international language of diplomacy. My, slightly tentative, assertion was based on memories of long-ago studies. However, I am sure there are several members who would be able to give a better-founded explanation. It would also be interesting to hear if there was a reaction against the use of French by the nobility as a result of growing European nationalism during the 19th century.

Maybe I should stick to military history! One of the joys of this forum is learning so much from other people. We'll see if anyone picks up the gauntlet.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Well, I believe that French was also used elsewhere in the early 19th century, certainly in court circles, for example in Prussia and Austria. It was also the international language of diplomacy. My, slightly tentative, assertion was based on memories of long-ago studies. However, I am sure there are several members who would be able to give a better-founded explanation. It would also be interesting to hear if there was a reaction against the use of French by the nobility as a result of growing European nationalism during the 19th century.

Maybe I should stick to military history! One of the joys of this forum is learning so much from other people. We'll see if anyone picks up the gauntlet.

Oh no - it was a genuine question (my own memories are also from "long-ago studies" ). I'd known about French being the language spoken in Russian court (and "educated") circles - but not that this was also true of the Prussian and Austrian court circles. (I've seen some contemporary scores of Beethoven with "par Louis van Beethoven" on the cover, but had presumed that they were for a French edition.)

[Serial_Apologist]

Oh no - it was a genuine question (my own memories are also from "long-ago studies" ). I'd known about French being the language spoken in Russian court (and "educated") circles - but not that this was also true of the Prussian and Austrian court circles. (I've seen some contemporary scores of Beethoven with "par Louis van Beethoven" on the cover, but had presumed that they were for a French edition.)

Having seen the Russian film while I was working in Switzerland in 1967, I seem to recall that much of the dialogue was in fact in French, with subtitles presumably catering for the Swiss audience on and off the screen. It was shown in two episodes, over two consecutive days, in Zurich's main cinema.

[Richard Tarleton]

The 'battle' was quite small scale and didn't strike me as altogether 'realistic' in terms of the formations used. It was a depiction of the Russian rearguard action of Schoengraben (also known as Hollabrun). We'll see what they make of Austerlitz in the next episode.

'Phew. Thanks for that. I too was wondering about the formations - the tiny French force seemed to scramble to form itself into something that was neither a column nor a line nor a square to face the equally tiny cavalry charge, but it was purely academic, the numbers involved were simply too small on both sides for any sort of realism. Did Mack really deliver the news of Ulm to Kutuzov in person? He was later court-martialled by Francis ll.....

Depressing spoiler in the new Private Eye....