The movie that we viewed today seemed to have a very "wild west" feel to it for me. It seemed that this movie was made just before John Wayne. The hero was killed at the end, but he was a fighter and beloved by men around him. It did seem win that the General was killed as he was running away. Even if that was the true ending, I'm not sure I would have killed off the hero in that way. Just to be clear, I do not know whether or not the movie was made to be historically accurate or to entertain. Of course if the goal of the movie was to be completely accurate and Chapaev did in fact die crossing a river running away, then it must be in the film.
The relationship that Chapaev and the Commissar have is very interesting. As a commander, who is well respected both by his men and the men above him, to all of a sudden have a baby sitter would have upset me too. When the commissar disciplines the soldiers who are taking advantage of the peasants, it shows great compassion for the cause of the army. General Chapaev is quite taken aback when the village people come to thank him for something he had no part in. It was at that point that the General realized Commissar Furmanov was on his side; it was the beginning of a friendship. I think the commissar really helped to develop Chapaev as a character. The relationship gave the audience something to identify with and latch onto.
It is that reason why I believe that the movie was a blockbuster. Good movies always allow the audience to relate to what's going on in the film.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
"Baby sitter" is a nice way to describe the way Chapaev would be tempted to view Commissar Furmanov in the beginning...before their relationship eventually begins to verge on a friendship. I also wonder whether Chapaev helps develop Furmanov a bit as a character and to pull him out from being simple just a schoolmarmish corrector of behavior.
ReplyDeleteHistorically, Chapaev had been last seen swimming across the river. His body was never recovered--a fact which tended to only enhance his reputation. If you notice at the end, the film doesn't explicitly show him getting killed by the gunfire--it only implies that it probably happened. Perhaps leaving a touch of ambiguity?
I definately agree with this. It reminds me of a old western movie. Also some movies more resent to our years like Platoon or the wild bunch. It seemed like they were more interested in entertain the poeple and keeping them on the end of there seat. Yes exactly what i saw. the commisioner is on his side the whole time.
ReplyDelete