Crime and Punishment (Film)

[Mrs Vindecco]

Sorry Woofy

I found these and just HAD to share.

The first is a review of the film which has been half cut off, but I really liked because of the photo of Peter and Marion Marsh.




The other is from the Radio Times Film Guide 2010 and is by David Oppendisano.

"Made on a relatively low budget at Columbia, this dark, semi-expressionist version of the Dostoyevsky classic is pared to the bone with an austerity and religious purity. Peter Lorre, in a rare leading role and appearing unusually beautiful ;D, is subtly compelling as the University graduate struggling to overcome his spiritual arrogance, while Edward Arnold is well cast as the resolute inspector who pokes and prods at Lorre's guilt."

No matter if you agree with the review or not the unusually beautiful comment made me happy. I don't think I've heard a professional critic, a male one at that, ever make a positive remark about Peter's appearance.

[woofy]

Well, I could write a dissertation on adaptations of Russian novels. This isn't a bad film. In fact, if you're unfamiliar with the novel, it makes for pretty decent cinema. I thought Edward Arnold is magnificent as the inspector. (I've never seen a bad performance from Arnold. He was one of the very best.) But Peter Lorre was woefully miscast as Raskolnikov. He was much too old for the part. And von Sternberg kind of missed the point of the novel.
Okay, it seems I'm starting to write that dissertation, so I'll cease for the present.
[If you're interested in naming conventions, it might interest you to know that the Russian work raskol means split or schism. A raskolnik in Russian culture is a member of the Old Believer sect that split off from the Orthodox Church and fled to the wilderness. By calling his character Raskolnikov, Dostoevsky was implying that the character "didn't fit in" with his surroundings.)

[Mrs Vindecco]

Peter was too old for the role, but I do enjoy it. Out of curiousity Woofy, who would you have cast at the time?

In the novel, the whole notion of Raskolnikov not fitting in, is certainly evident in the final Siberian scenes. I also thought he knows this in the dream sequence when he is recalling a memory from childhood about a dying mule? Am I right about that? What is the symbolism of that chapter because I felt that is a turning point in Raskolnikov.

[woofy]

Sept 16, 2012 18:46:01 GMT Mrs Vindecco said:

Peter was too old for the role, but I do enjoy it. Out of curiousity Woofy, who would you have cast at the time?

In the novel, the whole notion of Raskolnikov not fitting in, is certainly evident in the final Siberian scenes. I also thought he knows this in the dream sequence when he is recalling a memory from childhood about a dying mule? Am I right about that? What is the symbolism of that chapter because I felt that is a turning point in Raskolnikov.

I think the casting problem was secondary to the adaptation problem. Rodion's part should be played by someone in his early 20s at most (or at least someone who "looks" that age). Finding such a star to play the part would have been problematic and finding a studio that would have taken a chance on such an actor would have been even more so. (BTW, John Hurt was 39--older than Lorre was in 1935--when he played Raskolnikov in the 1979 British series. That's a pretty good adaptation in the sense that it is more faithful to the novel's intent.)

As far as the mule episode is concerned, you might find this edifying:

www.popgoesthevegan.com/2010/02/08/beating-an-almost-dead-horse-in-dostoevskys-crime-and-punishment/