The movie is beautifully photographed, costumed, acted and directed--so why was this such a let down to see?
Granted, Nabakov's book is very cerebral and driven by the inner turmoil of Luzhin's mind. Translating such mental dynamism to a movie would be very difficult. Alternately, the approach taken by the film seems like it could have worked on its own level, and one has to wonder why it was allowed to fail. My guess is that there was pressure to cut this movie down to a shorter length, perhaps figuring that audiences could only take so much of the tortured main character's wailings. There are numerous instances of poorly done cuts (not in keeping with the rest of the film) where scenes look as if they were chopped short in mid-stride, as if to get to the end faster. I don't mean to be flip here either, but there are such significant gaps in character development that one has to imagine that the released film is not what the directors and writers had in mind. As a result, we never appreciate fully either the nature of Luzhin's inner torment, or the motivations of the villainous Valentinov (who is just so cruel that his motivations demand some fleshing out).
The sentimental ending (which predictably is not based on anything in Nabakov's novel) fits in awkwardly with the rest of the film, though it does at least fit. Considering the movie's terse treatment of its characters, the more pointed ending supplied by Nabakov would have come off as unsatisfying and hollow.
Granted, Nabakov's book is very cerebral and driven by the inner turmoil of Luzhin's mind. Translating such mental dynamism to a movie would be very difficult. Alternately, the approach taken by the film seems like it could have worked on its own level, and one has to wonder why it was allowed to fail. My guess is that there was pressure to cut this movie down to a shorter length, perhaps figuring that audiences could only take so much of the tortured main character's wailings. There are numerous instances of poorly done cuts (not in keeping with the rest of the film) where scenes look as if they were chopped short in mid-stride, as if to get to the end faster. I don't mean to be flip here either, but there are such significant gaps in character development that one has to imagine that the released film is not what the directors and writers had in mind. As a result, we never appreciate fully either the nature of Luzhin's inner torment, or the motivations of the villainous Valentinov (who is just so cruel that his motivations demand some fleshing out).
The sentimental ending (which predictably is not based on anything in Nabakov's novel) fits in awkwardly with the rest of the film, though it does at least fit. Considering the movie's terse treatment of its characters, the more pointed ending supplied by Nabakov would have come off as unsatisfying and hollow.