First World War and popular cinema : 1914 to the present / edited by Michael Paris. [0813528240 (alk. paper)] New Brunswick, N.J. : Rutgers University Press, 2000.
Call#: Van Pelt Library D522.23 .F57 2000
Call#: Van Pelt Library D522.23 .F57 2000
Film is a media that will always respond to global events. But the way in which films represent these events may change over time. One aspect of Doctor Zhivago that fascinated me was its particular stance on the Great War, as the film depicts it. David Lean portrays the First World War in a very grim manner, and suggests that the Russians simply used the conflict as a tool to spark a revolution at home. Michael Paris's novel, The First World War and Popular Cinema, sheds light on international cinema's changing perception of World War I. In chapter three, entitled Enduring Heroes: British Feature Films and the First World War, Paris explains how British filmmakers changed their portrayal of the Great War in cinema between the years of 1920 and 1970. I found this section of the book particularly applicable to the making of Doctor Zhivago, because it was filmed with a largely British cast, and most importantly, by a British director. Paris begins by stating that in the 1920's, a large amount of the World War I literature being published depicted the conflict as a justified event, and one that would provide another glorious page for Britain's history books. And so filmmakers followed suit with these beliefs, often putting memoirs to film. In fact, British audiences loved the idea of war films. Many people wanted to know what it had been like on the Front, and their falsely romanticized impressions of the Great War heightened their curiosity. Films such as Comradeship (1919) and Mademoiselle from Armentieres (1926) were extremely successful among British audiences, and internationally as well. But as with any social movement, there arose a backlash against the conventional portrayal of the War in film. Independent directors argued that popular culture was emanating a false impression of the Great War, and they began releasing films with a more realistic interpretation of events, and films that stressed the futility of the war. In response to this, audiences started to question the actual motives for the first world war and by the 1960's, films began to break away from the traditional portrayal of a noble hero in an inevitable war. Instead, directors began pointing fingers to corrupt politicians and British imperialism as the causes for the war. This notion is reflected in David Lean's portrayal of the first world war in Doctor Zhivago, which was filmed in the midst of this 1960's, anti-war movement. Instead of heightening its importance, he refers to it as a result of a corrupt national agenda. At one point, Yevgraf even states "The ones who got back home at the price of an arm, or an eye, or a leg, these were the lucky ones...even comrade Lenin underestimated both the anguish of that 900 mile long front, and our cursed capacity for suffering". In Doctor Zhivago, the politicians are blamed for the futility fo the war, and this view is precisely in line with Paris's study of 1960's British film. The First World War and Popular Cinema clarifies David Lean's particular stance on the war in his film.

