Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 alpha 4/15/85; site leadsv.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!genrad!decvax!decwrl!greipa!pesnta!amd!amdcad!cae780!leadsv!sas From: sas@leadsv.UUCP (Scott Stewart) Newsgroups: net.movies Subject: Re: _1984_ (spoiler) Message-ID: <485@leadsv.UUCP> Date: Mon, 24-Jun-85 11:51:51 EDT Article-I.D.: leadsv.485 Posted: Mon Jun 24 11:51:51 1985 Date-Received: Sun, 30-Jun-85 00:50:02 EDT References: <2107@ut-sally.UUCP> Distribution: net Organization: LMSC-LEADS, Sunnyvale, Ca. Lines: 60 Summary: Mild flame and comment In article <2107@ut-sally.UUCP>, kelvin@ut-sally.UUCP (Kelvin Thompson) writes: > > > _1984_ > > by Kelvin Thompson > Having not seen the movie, I will not argue you opinion of it. But, from those comments I've extracted below and capitalized, I get the feeling you don't even know the literary source of thsi movie. If you don't, I'll kindly inform you that it is George Orwell's classic novel "1984", written in 1948 (last two digits of the year the story was written were reversed to arrive at the title of the book). > To be sure, the plot of the movie does have the broad outline of a love > story. A man, John Hurt (_The_Elephant_Man_, _A_Man_for_All_Seasons_), > meets a woman, played by an unknown British actress, and they embark on a > difficult relationship. Unfortunately, the "difficulty" in their > relationship is that they live in a futuristic, totalitarian society > which forbids love. (IT IS UNFATHOMABLE WHY THE MOVIE IS ENTITLED > _1984_, WHEN IT IS SO OBVIOUSLY SET IN THE FUTURE.) > > > THESE PRISON SCENES ALSO GIVE THE WRITERS A CHANCE TO REALLY CUT LOOSE > WITH THEIR ANTI-HUMANIST, SKINNERIAN PHILOSOPHY. Between tortures Hurt > and his jailer, the late Richard Burton (_The_Wild_Geese_), talk about > the society they live in, and Hurt loses every debate. Time and time > again Hurt raises a point about love or kindness or hope, Burton bats it > down, AND WRITERS CHOOSE NOT TO HAVE HURT RAISE A COUNTER POINT. > Finally, after a particularly brutal torture (which the viewer is all but > forced to look away from) Hurt gives in and truly renounces his love for > the girl. > You are correct in feeling that the movie shouldn't be billed as a love story, it's not. It's a story about a society and the love story is used as a foil to fully illustrate the societies evil, by our standards. As mentioned above, Richard Burton's character manages to defend every evil of the society as being the good of the society. It depends on your point of view and personal morals. What's so depressing about the scene above is that, as a reader, you find it hard to battle the arguments also. You don't want to believe any thing the "Torturer" tells you, but you are unable to not believe it. The novel is a very depressing and frightening story, and this is what makes it endure so well. It captures much truth of social systems and their capabilities and possibilities. (An aside, I heard that the U.S.S.R. has finally recognized this book, stating that it is a statement against the evils of Capitalim. ) Your review makes it appear that the movie follows the book very well, conveying much of the same emotions the book expresses. "1984" is a classic novel, and very depressing and frightening view of our possible future. It is book based much on ideas, and because of this, I don't feel any movie could do it real justice. But, please, when you criticize any movie, get your information straight and assign your criticism to those wh deserve it, whether good or bad. Scott A. Stewart LMSC