SnoReptilePlenty Memorable, crazy movie

Moustroll Good movie but grossly overrated

Console best movie i've ever seen.

Kamila Bell This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.

zif ofoz Even though this masterpiece was created in 1928 it will completely blow you away in today's high tech computer graphic world! Even if you do not care for the story Directors: Grigori Aleksandrov and Sergei M. Eisenstein have created a photographic dream, almost surreal silent imagery, that will have your eyes locked to the screen.If you want a more studious look into the background of this historical movie there are other writers here in the review section that have written wonderful reviews of this move. But if you want to feel the emotion, the peasants frustration, the activist anger, the boredom of the lazy uncaring ruling class, then please watch and absorb this wonderful movie.It is a privileged to see this film and thank goodness it has been preserved as so many films from the early 20th Century have deteriorated or are completely lost.

Teodor Georgiev October is a masterfully done film, covering the history of the October Revolution. While it is still technically a silent film, its sound track attempts to sync up with the events on the screen, adding gunshots and yells where appropriate. In that sense, the film is not too different from modern day action movies, provided the audience can ignore the black/white. It is definitely much more advanced than the Dying Swan and Man With A Movie Camera. The actual film itself is a fascinating piece of history, as the title suggests. It was funded by the Soviet government in honor of the 10th anniversary of the 1917 October Revolution. That said, one can gripe about historical accuracy. The ruling class is often portrayed as completely corrupt and sluggish, while the revolutionaries as noble and just. Statues reassemble themselves and soldiers fighting for the "evil" side join the revolutionaries with pride and are welcomed with open arms. Despite this, it does show the revolution as it was portrayed to the Soviet public at the time. The scene of Lenin leading the revolutionaries has in fact become how most people imagine the moment to have happened. An interesting note is that the film did not enjoy commercial success during its time but has gone on to become a symbol of both Eisenstein's ability and the bringing of a historical epic to cinema. Since then however, it has been accepted as one of the best films of the time period. Looking at it now, I can't see why it ever wasn't viewed as a masterpiece.

thisissubtitledmovies Commissioned to honour the tenth anniversary of the October Revolution in Russia, Eisenstein's October is a detailed war film of epic proportions that is shot in chronological real time depicting the events of 1917. A man who was forced to denounce his own work publicly, it is a testament to Eisenstein's strength and dedication to his art that he continued to produce experimental and surreal aspects in his films. And after watching October, it is clear that if Eisenstein had listened to his critics, it would have been a great disservice to cinematic history to have altered his creations.

cutsman-2 October by Sergei Eisenstein is one of the first films in the Russian Montage movement but neither as good nor memorable as his other Russian propaganda film, Battleship Potempkin. It shows in a sort of stylish documentary style way, the fall of the monarchy and the rise of the Bolsheviks. It is a really interesting movie to watch, mainly because it is 80 year old propaganda, but also because it is something that Americans probably don't look back fondly at. But this is painted in such a light that it is easy to support the cause, to cheer on the Bolsheviks as they raid the castle and kill those that stand in their way. The performances from the lead are all good or I guess so, it's a bit hard to gauge, as most of the extras were people actually there. Are they acting or merely just being themselves? Anyway, the movie looks beautiful and can be enjoyed on a surface level.The problem with the film is that it would be difficult to take it in on a much deeper than surface level. A lot of the famed montage shots, where you show one thing and then another quickly as if they are related, are too specific to the time I was completely lost on nearly all the references. Also the film doesn't do the best job introducing characters as if the film was made almost entirely for a set of people that will cheer when an unnamed character is shown because they get the reference. Which I'm not sure is a fault, was Eisenstein even thinking this film would be distributed, or even still available 80 years later? October isn't the best Russian propaganda film, but I'm sure it isn't the worst. It is likely best viewed by the huge cinephiles that are studying film movements.