WAR AND PEACE

A bravura masterpiece

Bondarchuk’s War and Peace
was the glory of the glorious
Eighth Montreal Film Festival
(since killed in its moment of
triumph by near-sighted film
elitists that were in control).
War and Peace, the English-
language distribution rights of
which were sold to a New York
firm, fortunately has suffered no
such eclipse. Unacknowledged as
the grand event of MIFF’s
Expo year by the petty bour-
geois snobbery that dominates
such milieux, War and Peace did
draw capacity crowds and gasps
of admiration both andible and
in print. In the result, MIFF is
deceased while War and Peace is
alive and well and showing in all
the world’s capitals.

When the first three parts of
this Soviet masterpiece were
showing in Montreal in August
1967, the last was still being fin-
ished for premiere during the
50th Anniversary celebrations in
Moscow. Nevertheless, Bondar-
chuk took time out for a per-
sonal appearance, accompanied
by his wife Irina Skobtseva, who
also had a role in the film.

Concluding with Napoleon’s
retreat from Moscow in the win-
ter of 1812-13, this was an ex-
ceptionally appropriate choice
for the young socialist republic
that has twice in its existence
also suffered massive invasions
of its territory. Based on one of
the giant novels of world litera-
ture, War and Peace was both
dedication to rich artistic tradi-
tions of the past and strong
contemporary comment.

It was moreover a truly fes-
tive burst of enthusiasm and
planning. Perhaps the costliest
film ever undertaken, the four
full length features took more
than five years to make. Includ-
ed are full scale reproductions of
the Battles of Austerlitz and
Borodino, the burning of Mos-
cow and Napoleon’s retreat from
Russia. Logistics: 120,000 extras,
30 stars, scores of bit parts, 100
indoor sets, 172 outdoor sets,
props from 40 museums and lib-
raries, 2,000 costumes and 16,500
uniforms (47 enterprises worked
on them), 7,000 swords and dag-
gers. Battle effects required 23
tons of gunpowder, 16,000 hand
grenades and 400,000 litres of
kerosene. j

Statistics can be deceptive and
usually are in the hands of U.S.
film promoters. There they un-
derscore the gross emptiness of
big business “art” (like an Amer-
ican travesty of War and Peace
made in Italy some years ago).
The Soviet War and Peace suf-
fers neither from bombast nor
from any of the other insensi-
tivities endemic to “free world”
Super - productions. The huge
marshalling of forces was in
the hands of a sensitive artist
— Sergei Bondarchuk — who

also co-scripted (with Vasili

Soloviov) and played the central
role of Pierre Bezhukoy. The
gigantic resources were there
not for cheap thrills a la box
Office américaine, but as neces-
sities for the central purpose of
the script.

Bondarchuk’s first considera-
tion was to express the philo-
sophical and other content of
Tolstoy’s monumental novel. His
second consideration was to do
visually what the novel does in
narrative: to re-create the Russia
of the Napoleonic decade up to
the War of 1812. Bondarchuk
has succeeded brilliantly without
a hint of nouveau riche flaunting
of invested fortunes. When a

 ——., ites

point has been made, he cuts
away to the next business with-
out lingering on the scene to
demonstrate how clever he is. It
is great film art to match the art
of a great novel.

Part 1—Natasha and Andrei—
was seen in a French-dubbed ver-
sion at the MIFF (Part 2: The
Battle of Austerlitz and Part 3:
Natasha and Pierre were in the
original Russian); but if cuts had
been made they were effected
with a good taste that has been
sustained in the present version.
Part 4: The Burning of Moscow.
viewed here now for the first
time, gives the impression of
eliminations from Napoléon’s re-
treat; but at 97 minutes the cuts
were not likely extensive. War
and Peace is being shown in Can-
ada in consecutive weeks in two
halves of just over three ‘hours
each.

Natasha Rostov, the fresh,
scintillating girl who grows to
womanhood through the widest
range of human emotion, is given
a vivid personification by Lud-
milla Savalieva (an international
star in her first role)—a trium-
phant combination of profound
and exacting direction with res-
ponse to that direction as fault-
lessly poised as one could dream
of in so lengthy and demanding
a role.

Bezhukov is the most pro-
found and complex character in
the novel, Tolstoy’s protagonist,
yet because of his reticent per-
sonality probably the most diffi-
cult to realize dramatically.
Bondarchuk’s performance can-
not be faulted. ;

The same may be said for
Boris Zakhava’s marvellous im-
personation of Marshal Kutuzov
and Viatcheslav Tikhonov’s more
sombre Prince Andrei Bolkon-
sky. Indeed, it is hard to find
anything negative to say about
any dramatic part, small or large.
It would be hard to spot in any
case, with so much going on. It
is a canvas full of the life and
struggle of an entire epoch.

A possible fault of War And
Peace—wonderful fault!—is that
everything operates at such a
high level of perfection and in-
tensity, that it is difficult to find
sufficient nervous energy to sus-
tain the constant peak. Some
color processing difficulties are
apparent in the U.S. version, par-

PACIFIC TRIBUNE—APRIL 3, 1969—Page 10

+

ticularly in some Battle of Boro-
dino sequences, which I do not
remember in the Soviet print.

Running through the four sec-
tions in random memory, per-
haps these set pieces stand out!
Natasha’s first appearance and
the great ball. Pierre’s duel and
reaction when he fells Dolokhov.
The evening Natasha and her
brother spend at the uncle’s
modest estate (Mikhailovka),
when a balalaika played by an
unseen coachman gives way to
the uncle’s guitar for Natasha’s
Russian dance. The battles are
incredible in their expanse —
120,000 extras in formations as
far as the eye can see!—and in
the immersion of the cameras in
intimate personal detail; espec-
ially at Borodino, which ends
Part 3. The blood, carnage and
din are overpowering, as men
fight, suffer, die; and the sky
darkens with explosions and
clouds of gunpowder fumes. Men
fight, suffer and die horribly; and
it is scarcely possible to tell one
side from the other, except from
the “rags” they fly as banners.
In chilling contrast with blood,
mud and death below, high rank-
ing officers stand or sit on over-
looking hills. Cannonballs roll
harmlessly up to their feet. Na-
poléon and Kutsov are served
meals on silver plate by liveried
lackies.

We leave the battle as the
camera withdraws higher and
still higher, beyond the clouds,
until not only men and battle
details fade but the very outline
of the battlefield, graveyard of
tens of thousands, disappears in-
significantly into the surround-
ing terrain. The Russians lose,
the narrator tells us in Tolstoy’s
words, and Napoléon’s “cloud-
ed intellect found justification
in the fact that among the
hundreds of thousands of men
who perished, there were
fewer Frenchmen... The French
army could still drag on to Mos-
cow, but there, without fresh
effort on the part of the Russian
army, its ruin was inevitable, as
its life-blood ebbed away from
the deadly wound deal’ it at
Borodino . . . For the first time at
Borodino, was laid the hand of a
foe of stronger spirit . . . And
not for that hour and day only
were the mind and conscience
darkened in Napoléon on whom
the burden of all that was being

a
i
4

@

Cayce

~*~

The question is often asked,
sometimes in jest, sometimes
with a touch of satire, often
in deadly seriousness; what
will Canada look like one hun-
dred years from now?

Since a lot of us won't be
around to see what it will look
like, we'd hetter start getting
our portraits done now—just
in case?

The noted folksinger Tom
Lehrer in one of his record-
ings entitled “That Was The
Week That Was,” comments
on some of the popular songs
which came out during World
Wars I-II, like “It’s a Long
Way To Tipperary” and simi-
lar well-known hits. Lehrer’s
considered opinion is that if
any such songs are to come
out of World War III, we'd
better get busy with them now
— before it starts; the general
idea being that there won't
be anyone around to sing
them—if it does start.

Starting from where we are
in this “year of our Lord”
(A.D.) 1969, we can safely
say that in an insane nuclear
age, the most popular theme
of conversation at the highest
levels of government, general-
ly centers around the topic of
who or which “side” has the
greatest nuclear bomb cap-
ability of blowing the world
to hell and gone in the short-
shortest possible time.

In his most recent anti-bal-
listic missile (ABM) program,
which will greatly facilitate
Canada’s reduction to ashes
first, (with of course a gut-
less “Oui, oui, mon_presi-
dente) from M. Trudeau, U.S.
president Tricky Dicky Nixon
has upped the possibilities
considerably.

Such being the case there
may not be much point in
wracking what brains we have
to visualize what Canada—or
the rest of the world may look
like one hundred years from
now.

Possibly those men of sci-
ence who have given the
class-infested lunatic crest of
modern society the “know-
how” for such devastating de-
struction and human annihila-
tion—who will go boom with
the rest of us, may describe
the results of their ill-directed
discoveries as “a scorched and
lifeless planet hurtling along
in the infinity of space, with
nothing to show it had ever
lived.” In any case should
such a catastrophe happen—
and the horror is that it can,
it won’t matter two hoots one
way or another how these
“wise men of science” (?)
describe it.

Then again, in seeking to

end this nuclear insanity ang
the lust to kill or “over-kil)”
which means _ snuffing huma-
nity out by the millions, it js

still possible to quarantine
this deadly sickness by 4
united and determined people
who seek to survive, to live,
to create. To build a new
world and a new Canada.

I think it was the English
novelist and socialist Robert
Blatchford who said some.
thing apropo of the ruling cir.
cles of his day, afflicted with
the lunacy of a man running
around brandishing a double.
bitted axe, with no clear idea
of its proper uses. The simile
fits well with the nuclear ly.
natics of today, much more
dangerous because they are
armed, not with an axe to
crack some poor individual's
skull, but with an arsenal of
H-bombs and a megalomani-
ac’s trigger finger. Blatchford
emphasized that when such
lunatics are at large menacing
the public, society locks them
up to insure their and its own
safety. The moral is clear.

What for instance moti-
vates the insistence to keep
Canada tied to the NATO.
NORAD ‘“Made-in-the-USA”
war conspiracies if not a lust
for killing? Certainly it isn’t
“defence” for two reasons;
viz, that no one (except the
U.S.A.) is likely to attack
Canada, secondly, that even
the lunatics themselves are
aware there is no defense
against nuclear destruction.
So it would seem, if Canada
is to have a future in a second
century, that the people had
better begin planning, and
soon, to do a bit of “locking
up,” or at the very least, ren-
dered harmless,

With all the science and
knowledge already available
to the people just for the tak-
ing, a bounteous production
of all the necessities of life
can be more than fulfilled ina
ten-hour work week, the bal-
ance of the time dedicated to
the pursuit of knowledge, cul-
tural advancement, _ recrea-
tion, health and _ happiness.
Even with much of Canada’s
vast wealth of nature’s gifts
already stolen, ravaged, raped
by a ruthless monopoly ban-
ditry, the scientific husbandry
of a strong und vigorous peo-
ple will sti!l fulfill the ancient
dream of making “the desert
bloom like a rose.”

But the first pressing chore
that needs to be done to make
possible a full portrayal of a
Canada one hundred years
from now—is to isolate and
render harmless the lunacy
that menaces Canada’s pres-
ent and future .. . now.

aemeenill

done lay even more heavily than
on all the others who took part
in it. Never down to the end of
his life, had he the least compre-
hension of good, of beauty, of
truth, of the significance of his
OWN acu. o,

After this, even The Burning
of Moscow and Napoléon’s re-
treat from Russia are almost
anti-climactic—almost.

War and Peace makes magni-
ficent use of the most advanced
techniques: of color, widescreen,
sound; and deploys vast artistic
resources. Fast-paced and cram-

med with events, it yet remains
leisurely enough to encompass FF
all manner of detail. There is 4" |
incredible beauty of visual com
position and historical truth. |
The feel of authenticity is such
that one begins to suppose—
illogically—that this must some
how be the real thing, or at least
animated paintings from life.

This has to be the definitive ”
film War and Peace—a bravura
masterpiece to be seen and seen
again .. . if you can afford t

Go to the matinees!
( ati oud E. Story