Onegin (1999) movie review

A good movie follows the book closely, right?  Usually.  But a movie that follows the book closely does not necessarily equal a good movie. 

For tech writing class, I was assigned to review a movie new to me, and my review had to imitate the Rolling Stones magazine's review style.  But truth be told, I don't care for that style, and my review didn't say all I wanted to say (of course!).  So here is my brand-new review of Onegin, just for you.  ^_^


 (in lieu of a trailer--this music video is actually better than the movie!)
Onegin (1999)
My rating: 3 out of 5 stars
 
Things to know: 

• Onegin is based on the book Eugene Onegin, by Alexander Pushkin.  This is one of the most (if not the most) famous Russian classics in Russia, while still greatly unknown in the U.S. (compared to War and Peace, Crime and Punishment, etc).  
• The book is short and written entirely in poetic verse.
• The book is one of my top 5 favorites ever and my favorite romantic story.

I'm not a purist.  I'm totally ok with some changes; sometimes changes are for the vastly better (e.g. A&E's Hornblower).  But all that's neither here nor there, since there were no major changes in Onegin.

My reaction to the movie was lukewarm.  This was particularly atrocious, since I've read the book twice in the last year and both times found myself having a good cry at some point or other.  Movies typically convey as much emotion as their book inspirations.  Onegin is atypical in this regard.

I quote my first review for the synopsis:

The only non-silent, non-operatic movie adaptation of Eugene Onegin, by Alexander Pushkin, deviates little from its inspiration. . .Ralph Fiennes as Eugene Onegin escapes from a decadent life in St. Petersburg to his countryside inheritance, only to befriend trespasser and poet Vladimir Lensky (Toby Stephens) at gunpoint, literally. In the same breath, Onegin unconsciously wins the heart of his neighbor Tatyana Larina, played by Liv Tyler (of The Lord of the Rings fame). Belittling Tatyana's love letter and Lensky's code of honor, Onegin suddenly finds himself on the road to disaster as he struggles with fate, or, as he learns, his own brutal cynicism.

This movie is all head and no heart, in a bad way.  It basically follows the book's plot to the letter, but the spirit of the book is missing.  You know when you watch Great Expectations, or Pride and Prejudice, or North and South, and you get a sense of atmosphere and setting?  There was none of that here.

The dialogue is probably the chief culprit.  It's very minimalist. . .in a bad way.  So very little is said, while a ton of time is spent on the visuals, which alone are not effective in conveying what's going on and what the characters are thinking.  It was frustrating and mind-numbingly dull to watch, and the chemistry between characters was weak.

Secondly, plot pacing is pretty bad.  The "filler" scenes were painfully slow, and the pivotal scenes were greatly skimmed-over.  Also, the dream sequence was omitted, which is a real shame since it is one of the most dramatic parts of the book.  The book is so short--there was no need to cut that scene or add-in an awkward husband & wife scene (dear me, if you must expound upon the book, there are better aspects to expound upon). 

My third major gripe was the casting of Ralph Fiennes as Eugene Onegin.  There's just something wrong if Fiennes is more likeable as Hades in Wrath of the Titans, one of his most recent roles.  Now, Onegin isn't a good guy in the book, but he is certainly charismatic and three-dimensional.  On the other hand, Fiennes's Onegin is one-dimensional, apathetic, and--too old (Onegin is supposed to be twenty-six).  For the majority of his screentime, he comes across as very unlikeable and, in the final scene, just plain creepy.  I don't blame Fiennes.  I do think he was horribly miscast. 

So, what did I like?

The plot accuracy is excellent.  I was glad to see that the ending was not typical-Hollywood style, but exactly like the book.  This is the essence of the story, so it's good they got it right.

The cinematography was really nice, very artistic; they certainly put a lot of effort into it.

Casting in general is a bit of a grey area.  I dislike British & American actors portraying Russian characters; it's very distracting.  However, Liv Tyler deserves credit for her portrayal of Tatyana.  The scriptwriters chose to emphasize Tatyana's girlish naivete (which I question), but keeping this in mind I think Tyler did an excellent job.  Also, Toby Stephens was splendid as the idealistic, irrational Vladimir Lensky, making him more personable to a 21st-century audience than the book does. 

The content was overall ok (more in-depth content review here, but beware of spoilers).  I fast-forwarded Onegin visiting his lady friend and the husband & wife scene, but they didn't show anything objectionable, that I could tell.  I also fast-forwarded the duel.  Apparently, the duel is the main reason the movie is rated R.  I'm pretty squeamish, but if you're watching it on DVD with the remote handy, it shouldn't be a problem.  Personally, it would bother me more if they tried to sugarcoat it. . .Pushkin himself died in a duel, and by showing a premeditated duel as it is, at least we show how twisted and childish the "code of honor" really was.

Onegin was not the worst movie I've ever seen.  Still, it feels like a missed opportunity--with even just a better script, it could have been a good movie.  As it is, I don't necessarily recommend it to non-book-firsters, as it might give you a wrong impression of the story.  It is also a very slow movie, even for those of us who enjoy 3+ hrs long BBC dramas.