93 reviews
'Station' mixes farce and tragedy to fairly good effect
This Station is all Clear...
If you took a Leo Tolstoy class in college or read one of his works during your time at the library and wanted to know a bit more about the man, don't really look to The Last Station. Does that make it a poor film? Not by a long shot.
The film follows the story of Leo (Christopher Plummer) and Sofya Tolstoy (Helen Mirren), married couple for 43 years, and the battle that raged between them at the end of Leo's life. As Leo's health is ailing, his long time friend Vladimir Chertkov (Paul Giamatti) urges Leo to write a new will, renouncing his material possessions, leaving his wife and family with nothing. All of this is in order to have Leo's movement of peace to go to the majority. Chertkov sends a young follower of the Tolstoyan movement, Valentin Bulgakov, to investigate and inscribe all of Sofya's exaggerated and histrionic antics to work against her campaign.
Firstly, the film is A-typical period piece with all the correct elements of that type of film. Art Direction by Mark Rosinski and Heike Wolf, stunning costume design by Monika Jacobs, and a score to die for by Sergei Yevtushenko is pitch perfect and exalted brilliance. Nothing is wrong with this film technically.
An extraordinary narrative beautifully adapted by the director Michael Hoffman is one of the crowning achievements of his career. Dedicating his all for the sake of the art form, Hoffman writes and directs the screen with meticulousness and accuracy. Playing that extra special detail to smooth out an rough edges paid off for Hoffman immensely.
The cast presented in The Last Station is stellar and one of the best cast ensembles of the 2009. James McAvoy, proving once again, that you don't just lay down the words of your acting, you let the spirit fight its way through your soul and remain a tangible entity for your audience to engage. McAvoy proves he's one of Hollywood's most outstanding talents. Helen Mirren, riding the see-saw with her viewers, never declares any type of emotion until the bitter end. Mirren shows no apparent ambiance of mood or expression. She sizzles through the film, igniting every scene on fire along the way. Christopher Plummer as the lovable Leo is amiable, captivating, and entrancing. Plummer, a talent long overdue for Oscar recognition is enticing. Paul Giamatti, in a more villainous role we haven't seen of him before, is always dependable and alluring. Anne-Marie Duff and Kerry Condon are both enthralling in their roles respectively.
The Last Station is a definite contender for a Best Picture nomination. It's a delightful film full of heart, love, and heartbreak. The temptation of the films aura will lure you in and surely leave you in tears.
***½/****
The film follows the story of Leo (Christopher Plummer) and Sofya Tolstoy (Helen Mirren), married couple for 43 years, and the battle that raged between them at the end of Leo's life. As Leo's health is ailing, his long time friend Vladimir Chertkov (Paul Giamatti) urges Leo to write a new will, renouncing his material possessions, leaving his wife and family with nothing. All of this is in order to have Leo's movement of peace to go to the majority. Chertkov sends a young follower of the Tolstoyan movement, Valentin Bulgakov, to investigate and inscribe all of Sofya's exaggerated and histrionic antics to work against her campaign.
Firstly, the film is A-typical period piece with all the correct elements of that type of film. Art Direction by Mark Rosinski and Heike Wolf, stunning costume design by Monika Jacobs, and a score to die for by Sergei Yevtushenko is pitch perfect and exalted brilliance. Nothing is wrong with this film technically.
An extraordinary narrative beautifully adapted by the director Michael Hoffman is one of the crowning achievements of his career. Dedicating his all for the sake of the art form, Hoffman writes and directs the screen with meticulousness and accuracy. Playing that extra special detail to smooth out an rough edges paid off for Hoffman immensely.
The cast presented in The Last Station is stellar and one of the best cast ensembles of the 2009. James McAvoy, proving once again, that you don't just lay down the words of your acting, you let the spirit fight its way through your soul and remain a tangible entity for your audience to engage. McAvoy proves he's one of Hollywood's most outstanding talents. Helen Mirren, riding the see-saw with her viewers, never declares any type of emotion until the bitter end. Mirren shows no apparent ambiance of mood or expression. She sizzles through the film, igniting every scene on fire along the way. Christopher Plummer as the lovable Leo is amiable, captivating, and entrancing. Plummer, a talent long overdue for Oscar recognition is enticing. Paul Giamatti, in a more villainous role we haven't seen of him before, is always dependable and alluring. Anne-Marie Duff and Kerry Condon are both enthralling in their roles respectively.
The Last Station is a definite contender for a Best Picture nomination. It's a delightful film full of heart, love, and heartbreak. The temptation of the films aura will lure you in and surely leave you in tears.
***½/****
- ClaytonDavis
- Dec 2, 2009
- Permalink
You've Got Plummer and Mirren; Now Give Them More to Do
"The Last Station" should have been great, but it settles for being merely good. Despite its impressive cast and juicy subject, something about it just doesn't quite click.
Christopher Plummer and Helen Mirren play Leo Tolstoy and his wife in the days leading up to the writer's death, and the tumultuous relationship they shared, she feeling brushed aside by the author because of his commitment to his work and the Tolstoyan movement that developed around it. James MacAvoy plays a young man who scores the job of being Tostoy's assistant and becomes witness to this domestic drama and an unwitting accomplice to the machinations of Tolstoy's close friend and business adviser (Paul Giamatti) to wrest copyright of Tolstoy's works away from his wife upon the writer's death. If all of this sounds like a delicious set up for great acting and suspenseful intrigue, you'd be right; unfortunately, the movie is so much less than what it could have been.
Plummer and Mirren are wonderful in their roles, and the movie's best scenes are the ones of them together. However, they're not in the movie enough, and their relationship, which is the most interesting thing about the story, takes a back seat to the politics of the Tolstoy movement and MacAvoy's reactions to them. MacAvoy is a terrific actor and I've liked him in everything I've seen him in, including this. But I simply didn't care as much about his character as I did Tolstoy and his wife, and I spent the whole film itching for the screenplay to give Plummer and Mirren, two great British actors, more to do.
Paul Giamatti's character is oily and unlikable; indeed, there's something about Giamatti the actor that I find unlikable in general and actually makes it hard for me to watch him. Kerry Condon, on the other hand, in a smaller role as MacAvoy's love interest, is lovely.
Grade: B
Christopher Plummer and Helen Mirren play Leo Tolstoy and his wife in the days leading up to the writer's death, and the tumultuous relationship they shared, she feeling brushed aside by the author because of his commitment to his work and the Tolstoyan movement that developed around it. James MacAvoy plays a young man who scores the job of being Tostoy's assistant and becomes witness to this domestic drama and an unwitting accomplice to the machinations of Tolstoy's close friend and business adviser (Paul Giamatti) to wrest copyright of Tolstoy's works away from his wife upon the writer's death. If all of this sounds like a delicious set up for great acting and suspenseful intrigue, you'd be right; unfortunately, the movie is so much less than what it could have been.
Plummer and Mirren are wonderful in their roles, and the movie's best scenes are the ones of them together. However, they're not in the movie enough, and their relationship, which is the most interesting thing about the story, takes a back seat to the politics of the Tolstoy movement and MacAvoy's reactions to them. MacAvoy is a terrific actor and I've liked him in everything I've seen him in, including this. But I simply didn't care as much about his character as I did Tolstoy and his wife, and I spent the whole film itching for the screenplay to give Plummer and Mirren, two great British actors, more to do.
Paul Giamatti's character is oily and unlikable; indeed, there's something about Giamatti the actor that I find unlikable in general and actually makes it hard for me to watch him. Kerry Condon, on the other hand, in a smaller role as MacAvoy's love interest, is lovely.
Grade: B
- evanston_dad
- Aug 25, 2010
- Permalink
The return of big cinema
The Last Station is described as a melodrama - and I would say that's a fair description. It's the kind of film they don't really make any more. The spirit of David Lean lives on. It's beautiful to look at, for a start, and the music is genuinely incidental, lushing away in the background. We all know that Leo Tolstoy wrote a book, although few of us have the nerve to actually sit down and get to grips with War And Peace. But there was more to the great man than that - in his time he was regarded as godlike, and enjoyed a fairly big cult following, the Tolstoyan Movement, devoted to goodness, purity and equality - as long as it didn't mean the end of the deferential lower classes.
Tolstoy's young secretary Valentin is dropped into this, at the deep end. The 19th century Russian hippies, the fanatically devious disciple Chertkov who wants the great man to sign away the rights to his work, to the Russian People; the hard-pressed but manipulative wife determined to keep it in the family. And the girl who introduces the young man to the pleasures of the flesh. It's a great cast, headed by the unrecognisable Christopher Plummer, and the always marvelous Helen Mirren. The constant undertone in Tolstoy's saga is the disparity between his wish for a good life for the peasants, and the sight of those peasants beavering away in the background while the upper classes get on with their lives of pampered angst.
It's the growing struggle between the disciple and the wife, with the secretary pulled between new and conflicting loyalties, that will grab your attention. You really will care about these people. And what follows is the melodrama. I will say no more, except that it's a big story, told big. Just what Norma Desmond told us we had lost.
Tolstoy's young secretary Valentin is dropped into this, at the deep end. The 19th century Russian hippies, the fanatically devious disciple Chertkov who wants the great man to sign away the rights to his work, to the Russian People; the hard-pressed but manipulative wife determined to keep it in the family. And the girl who introduces the young man to the pleasures of the flesh. It's a great cast, headed by the unrecognisable Christopher Plummer, and the always marvelous Helen Mirren. The constant undertone in Tolstoy's saga is the disparity between his wish for a good life for the peasants, and the sight of those peasants beavering away in the background while the upper classes get on with their lives of pampered angst.
It's the growing struggle between the disciple and the wife, with the secretary pulled between new and conflicting loyalties, that will grab your attention. You really will care about these people. And what follows is the melodrama. I will say no more, except that it's a big story, told big. Just what Norma Desmond told us we had lost.
- cliffhanley_
- Feb 11, 2010
- Permalink
Tolstoy's final drama
The American director Michael Hoffman, in adapting Jay Prini's semi-factual novel about the last year in the life of the great 19th century Russian writer Leo Tolstoy, makes as his central character not the famous author but his wet behind the ears 23 year old secretary Valentin who is hired by Count Tolstoy's devout admirer Vladimir Chertkoff to both work for Tolstoy and spy on the countess, Sofya. She is not sympathetic to her aging husband's anarcho-Christian leanings, nor to the movement based on his philosophy, and fears the family will be deprived of the benefit of Tolstoy's copyrights.
Valentin, played fetchingly by James McAvoy, is a bewildered witness to the crisis in the stormy relationship between Tolstoy and his wife, which results in Tolstoy fleeing Sofya and his estate, only to die at a lonely railway station many miles away, with the world's media (such as it was in 1910) looking on. Unfortunately Valentin, based on a real person, is not only green but rather ineffectual and he is in the story as a witness rather than as an actor. One of the features of Tolstoyans was that they all seemed to have kept diaries and these provided Parini with most of his material. You can see why Hoffman made Valentin the central character, but his ineptitude is rather tiresome and his seduction by the lovely Tolstoyan Masha (Kerry Condon) (in contradiction to Tolstoyan-mandated chastity) is all a bit beside the point. It is the relationship between Leo (Lev) and Sofya that provides the real drama here, and the final scenes between them are genuinely moving.
Helen Mirren as the histrionic Sofya is alone worth the price of admission and Christopher Plummer as Tolstoy is convincing, though he demonstrates a lot more personal warmth than the real Tolstoy apparently did. Despite most of the filming being done in Germany the Russian atmosphere and countryside were well-evoked though I did wonder whether the serfs were real – none of them seemed to speak. There were also some inconsistencies in the screenplay – in one scene Valentin is at the Tolstoyan commune "two hours" from Tolstoy's estate at Yasnaya Polyana, yet in a later scene he rides between the two places seemingly in a few minutes.
Apart from the love story (and Tolstoy did maintain that love was all that really mattered), the other theme is the contrast between high ideals and the personal power play evident in the "movement". The Chertkoff character (slyly played by Paul Giamatti) is a Machiavellian schemer, unlike his real-life model, and even if Sofya had been more level-headed she had something to fear. But in the end the politics peter out and what remains is the rather sad end of a great literary figure feeding a media frenzy. Tolstoy was not actually Mother Teresa or Mahatma Gandhi (with whom he corresponded) but he deserved a more dignified death – he valued peace, not war.
Valentin, played fetchingly by James McAvoy, is a bewildered witness to the crisis in the stormy relationship between Tolstoy and his wife, which results in Tolstoy fleeing Sofya and his estate, only to die at a lonely railway station many miles away, with the world's media (such as it was in 1910) looking on. Unfortunately Valentin, based on a real person, is not only green but rather ineffectual and he is in the story as a witness rather than as an actor. One of the features of Tolstoyans was that they all seemed to have kept diaries and these provided Parini with most of his material. You can see why Hoffman made Valentin the central character, but his ineptitude is rather tiresome and his seduction by the lovely Tolstoyan Masha (Kerry Condon) (in contradiction to Tolstoyan-mandated chastity) is all a bit beside the point. It is the relationship between Leo (Lev) and Sofya that provides the real drama here, and the final scenes between them are genuinely moving.
Helen Mirren as the histrionic Sofya is alone worth the price of admission and Christopher Plummer as Tolstoy is convincing, though he demonstrates a lot more personal warmth than the real Tolstoy apparently did. Despite most of the filming being done in Germany the Russian atmosphere and countryside were well-evoked though I did wonder whether the serfs were real – none of them seemed to speak. There were also some inconsistencies in the screenplay – in one scene Valentin is at the Tolstoyan commune "two hours" from Tolstoy's estate at Yasnaya Polyana, yet in a later scene he rides between the two places seemingly in a few minutes.
Apart from the love story (and Tolstoy did maintain that love was all that really mattered), the other theme is the contrast between high ideals and the personal power play evident in the "movement". The Chertkoff character (slyly played by Paul Giamatti) is a Machiavellian schemer, unlike his real-life model, and even if Sofya had been more level-headed she had something to fear. But in the end the politics peter out and what remains is the rather sad end of a great literary figure feeding a media frenzy. Tolstoy was not actually Mother Teresa or Mahatma Gandhi (with whom he corresponded) but he deserved a more dignified death – he valued peace, not war.
Muddled ending
- Chris Knipp
- Feb 5, 2010
- Permalink
great performance by Mirren
"The Last Station" from 2009 looks at the last months of Leo Tolstoy's life.
Tolstoy (Christopher Plummer) finds his relationship with his wife of nearly 40 years, Sofya (Helen Mirren) untenable. At one time, Sonia was his partner, helping him with his writing. Now that's over, and she feels abandoned by her husband and the Tolstoyan movement which she feels is determined to disinherit her. One of the major Tostoyans, Cherkhov (Paul Giamatti) wants Tolstoy to change his will so that his work can be put in public domain.
Sofya, a jealous and angry woman, searches her husband's papers and tries to get people to spy for her to find out what Cherkhov and her husband are up to. She views Cherkov as she would another woman interfering with her marriage.
After the fights, tantrums, and suicide attempts, Tolstoy, a frail old man, can handle it no longer and leaves her in the middle of the night. But that doesn't stop Sofya from trying to find him.
This is a wonderful, passionate film with beautiful acting, particularly by Mirren, who has the showiest role as the irrational and crazed Sofya.
Excellent film, well worth watching.
Tolstoy (Christopher Plummer) finds his relationship with his wife of nearly 40 years, Sofya (Helen Mirren) untenable. At one time, Sonia was his partner, helping him with his writing. Now that's over, and she feels abandoned by her husband and the Tolstoyan movement which she feels is determined to disinherit her. One of the major Tostoyans, Cherkhov (Paul Giamatti) wants Tolstoy to change his will so that his work can be put in public domain.
Sofya, a jealous and angry woman, searches her husband's papers and tries to get people to spy for her to find out what Cherkhov and her husband are up to. She views Cherkov as she would another woman interfering with her marriage.
After the fights, tantrums, and suicide attempts, Tolstoy, a frail old man, can handle it no longer and leaves her in the middle of the night. But that doesn't stop Sofya from trying to find him.
This is a wonderful, passionate film with beautiful acting, particularly by Mirren, who has the showiest role as the irrational and crazed Sofya.
Excellent film, well worth watching.
Excellent Historical Drama
This was an excellent historical film based on the relationship between Leo Tolstoy (Christopher Plummer) and his wife, Sofya (Helen Mirren), during Tolstoy's final years. The film also explores Tolstoy's relationship with his Assistant, Valentin (James McAvoy) and his cabal of acolytes, lead by Vladimir Chertkov (Paul Giamatti). The main tension comes between Vladimir, who wants Tolstoy to bequeath his copyrights to "The Russian People" and Sofya, who naturally would like the copyrights reserved for herself and family.
Mirren earned an Oscar nomination for Lead Actress and Plummer received one for Supporting Actor. I believe both were well earned. I liked the performance from the entire cast, particularly McAvoy as the adoring Assistant to Tolstoy. The screenplay was excellent and the Director, Michael Hoffman, did an outstanding job bringing pre-Communist Russia to life. The time period is 1910 and the cinematography beautifully captured the era. During the closing credits, actual film of Tolstoy and his Wife was run, underscoring what a great job the Director did in filming this.
A great movie and well worth seeing or renting.
Mirren earned an Oscar nomination for Lead Actress and Plummer received one for Supporting Actor. I believe both were well earned. I liked the performance from the entire cast, particularly McAvoy as the adoring Assistant to Tolstoy. The screenplay was excellent and the Director, Michael Hoffman, did an outstanding job bringing pre-Communist Russia to life. The time period is 1910 and the cinematography beautifully captured the era. During the closing credits, actual film of Tolstoy and his Wife was run, underscoring what a great job the Director did in filming this.
A great movie and well worth seeing or renting.
A poor Tolstoy
- northumbia
- Sep 12, 2010
- Permalink
Wonderful film, this will go far
I just saw this at the Telluride Film Festival. It was just fantastic. The story and characters are very well drawn and engaging. Tolstoy is wonderfully presented as a man who is aware he cannot live up to his own ideals. It shows how his image and words are corrupted into the ideals and beliefs of others who have lost their way. The acting, cinematography, costumes, all was superb. It is a film about love. The portray and comparisons of old love and new love. Love of a man and love of an ideology. Well done to all who worked on it. I hope this does not get misunderstood as a dry drama, as it is a very funny and moving film. I cannot wait to see it again.
The Last Station-Needs An Express **1/2
A very enjoyable movie
There is nothing to fault in this movie, really, and pretty much everything to praise.
The script is very good. The characters are fleshed out and developed in complexity as the movie goes along. You continue to learn more about them, see more facets of their character.
And they are realized by first-rate performances. There is not a weak one in the batch.
The direction is also very fine. There is not really much of a plot here; it's more of a character study. Still, the director keeps things moving along, never veering into the sentimental or the cute. You grow to like these characters a lot, but there is no attempt to yank your emotions.
My only very slight reservation about this movie is just a personal preference. I went into it knowing virtually nothing about Tolstoy's life or the movement that was developed out of his later writings. I would have appreciated a little dialogue somewhere explaining more about that. I realize, however, that that is not the norm in modern movies, and I certainly had no problems following what was going on without it. Viewers such as myself will just have to go read a book about Tolstoy for that additional information, which is certainly not a bad thing.
This is not a film for the ages, a Citizen Kane or a Rules of the Game, a Potemkin or such. Still, it is a very well-crafted movie, one that I could easily watch again with no diminished pleasure. One that, as well, I can recommend to anyone who enjoys good acting and watching interesting characters being developed by and through it.
The script is very good. The characters are fleshed out and developed in complexity as the movie goes along. You continue to learn more about them, see more facets of their character.
And they are realized by first-rate performances. There is not a weak one in the batch.
The direction is also very fine. There is not really much of a plot here; it's more of a character study. Still, the director keeps things moving along, never veering into the sentimental or the cute. You grow to like these characters a lot, but there is no attempt to yank your emotions.
My only very slight reservation about this movie is just a personal preference. I went into it knowing virtually nothing about Tolstoy's life or the movement that was developed out of his later writings. I would have appreciated a little dialogue somewhere explaining more about that. I realize, however, that that is not the norm in modern movies, and I certainly had no problems following what was going on without it. Viewers such as myself will just have to go read a book about Tolstoy for that additional information, which is certainly not a bad thing.
This is not a film for the ages, a Citizen Kane or a Rules of the Game, a Potemkin or such. Still, it is a very well-crafted movie, one that I could easily watch again with no diminished pleasure. One that, as well, I can recommend to anyone who enjoys good acting and watching interesting characters being developed by and through it.
- richard-1787
- Mar 2, 2010
- Permalink
A Russian Tale from Blah-tovostok
On paper, The Last Station (2009) seems like the perfect movie for the older, fussier set to enjoy. It features the amiable talents of former Von Trapp patriarch Christopher Plummer and The Queen (2006) herself Dame Helen Mirren, in a true to life story about the last days of Leo Tolstoy. To further bolster Last Station's Oscar-bait pedigree, it costars Paul Giamatti as Tolstoy-ian neophyte Vladimir Chertkov and also features Professor X himself James McAvoy playing the audience's perspective a likely composite of multiple people. If only things translated well from paper to celluloid. For like many period pieces, The Last Station suffers from being a beautiful canvas with no moving parts.
Leo Tolstoy (Christopher Plummer) has been widely considered one of the best authors in the world, certainly among the best of the 19th century. By the time the movie begins, he had already written War and Peace, Anna Karenina, The Death of Ivan Ilyich and founded a utopian communal tenant farm in his boyhood home of Yasnaya Polyana. The leader of a new quasi-religious movement, Tolstoy's most outspoken critic is not Tsar Nicholas but his wife Sofya (Helen Mirren) who is upset by plans to give away their fortune and the copyrights of his novels to "the people".
As alluded to earlier, the plot is largely taken from the point of view of James McAvoy's character; a Tolstoy-ian with enormous respect for the aging author, scholar and theologian. His sympathies ping-pong between Tolstoy and his wife who still loves him but cannot get over the ideals he propagates but struggles to live up to. He struggles to see her perspective while she fails to take into account the changing times and a radicalized serf class that loathes nobility. It's all very complex emotionally, politically and philosophically.
At least it likely was in real life. In the film however, all the characters, subplots and attempts to frame things in a larger context are color coded and ranked for your convenience. Instead of giving his audience the benefit of free thought director Michael Hoffman insults the intelligence of his audience by making good characters speak in profound statements while villains dwell in cynicism and pomposity. The music swells when it should and our McAvatar wonders down hallways and fields where only narrow perspective can be applied. In The Last Station, it's impossible to truly sympathize or form an independent mindset of any character because all is seen through a non-objective perspective.
Now I'm not saying narrowly tailored movies are intrinsically bad. Most don't come from a place of omnipotence but enjoy subjectivity through the mind of a specific character, in this case Valentin. But his character arc is so bland as to make everything around it seem pedestrian. Patton (1970) and Malcolm X (1992) were biased in their treatment of the WWII era and the Civil Rights Movement respectively; yet the trials and tribulations of the central characters made for good drama. The fact that both films had strong social and political perspectives was almost beside the point.
The story of Tolstoy and Sofya is a tale worth telling and has been told before in films like Lev Tolstoy (1985) and Departure of a Grand Old Man (1912). Yet the movie isn't told from either person's perspective yet places itself clearly in Sofya's camp. As a result, the film has layers of Hallmark Channel sentimentality. As Sofya's plight becomes more immediate, the film devolves into a movie about a woman fighting for her rights in a divorce before divorce was a thing.
The Last Station was nominated for two Academy Awards: Best Actress for Helen Mirren and Best Supporting Actor for Christopher Plummer. In both cases their considerable talents were overshadowed by other admittedly better performances; Sandra Bullock in The Blind Side (2010) and Christoph Waltz in Inglourious Basterds (2010). I say considerable because their performances alone made The Last Station slightly more than a mediocre historical biography. Yet despite this, The Last Station will ultimately be remembered for giving Christopher Plummer his first Oscar nomination in a 54-year screen acting career. He would go on to become the oldest winner of a competitive Oscar only two years later for Beginners (2012). So I guess in his case this Oscar-bait flick helped him out.
http://www.theyservepopcorninhell.blogspot.com/
Leo Tolstoy (Christopher Plummer) has been widely considered one of the best authors in the world, certainly among the best of the 19th century. By the time the movie begins, he had already written War and Peace, Anna Karenina, The Death of Ivan Ilyich and founded a utopian communal tenant farm in his boyhood home of Yasnaya Polyana. The leader of a new quasi-religious movement, Tolstoy's most outspoken critic is not Tsar Nicholas but his wife Sofya (Helen Mirren) who is upset by plans to give away their fortune and the copyrights of his novels to "the people".
As alluded to earlier, the plot is largely taken from the point of view of James McAvoy's character; a Tolstoy-ian with enormous respect for the aging author, scholar and theologian. His sympathies ping-pong between Tolstoy and his wife who still loves him but cannot get over the ideals he propagates but struggles to live up to. He struggles to see her perspective while she fails to take into account the changing times and a radicalized serf class that loathes nobility. It's all very complex emotionally, politically and philosophically.
At least it likely was in real life. In the film however, all the characters, subplots and attempts to frame things in a larger context are color coded and ranked for your convenience. Instead of giving his audience the benefit of free thought director Michael Hoffman insults the intelligence of his audience by making good characters speak in profound statements while villains dwell in cynicism and pomposity. The music swells when it should and our McAvatar wonders down hallways and fields where only narrow perspective can be applied. In The Last Station, it's impossible to truly sympathize or form an independent mindset of any character because all is seen through a non-objective perspective.
Now I'm not saying narrowly tailored movies are intrinsically bad. Most don't come from a place of omnipotence but enjoy subjectivity through the mind of a specific character, in this case Valentin. But his character arc is so bland as to make everything around it seem pedestrian. Patton (1970) and Malcolm X (1992) were biased in their treatment of the WWII era and the Civil Rights Movement respectively; yet the trials and tribulations of the central characters made for good drama. The fact that both films had strong social and political perspectives was almost beside the point.
The story of Tolstoy and Sofya is a tale worth telling and has been told before in films like Lev Tolstoy (1985) and Departure of a Grand Old Man (1912). Yet the movie isn't told from either person's perspective yet places itself clearly in Sofya's camp. As a result, the film has layers of Hallmark Channel sentimentality. As Sofya's plight becomes more immediate, the film devolves into a movie about a woman fighting for her rights in a divorce before divorce was a thing.
The Last Station was nominated for two Academy Awards: Best Actress for Helen Mirren and Best Supporting Actor for Christopher Plummer. In both cases their considerable talents were overshadowed by other admittedly better performances; Sandra Bullock in The Blind Side (2010) and Christoph Waltz in Inglourious Basterds (2010). I say considerable because their performances alone made The Last Station slightly more than a mediocre historical biography. Yet despite this, The Last Station will ultimately be remembered for giving Christopher Plummer his first Oscar nomination in a 54-year screen acting career. He would go on to become the oldest winner of a competitive Oscar only two years later for Beginners (2012). So I guess in his case this Oscar-bait flick helped him out.
http://www.theyservepopcorninhell.blogspot.com/
- bkrauser-81-311064
- Jan 22, 2014
- Permalink
Like Reading People Magazine Instead of War and Peace
Silly, shallow, sleepy and slow, this sumptuous costume drama about the aging Leo Tolstoy and his long-suffering wife Sophy fails to do several things well.
It fails to give you any insight into why Tolstoy was one of the greatest writers who ever lived. Or why he wanted to give all his money to the poor. Or why he was so desperate to renounce sex. Or how any of this connected to what was actually happening in Russia at the time.
The movie spends hours and hours tittering and giggling over Tolstoy's earthy appetites -- as though it's so extraordinary that older people still enjoy having sex. But we don't get even five minutes of time with the people Tolstoy wants to help -- the Russian peasants. If we can't see them suffering, then Tolstoy's ideas just seem like charming whimsicality. Which is just what this movie wants -- to keep things shallow, so we can celebrate the joys of casual sex (and the gossip and glamor surrounding celebrity couples) and not get all hung up on heavy things like poverty, justice, and human suffering.
One moment sums up the whole problem. Early in the movie, Tolstoy and his wife actually have a rather interesting conversation about the people. Tolstoy says that if they give all their wealth to the peasants the peasants will embrace them as family and they'll all live peacefully in a world without hunger or injustice. Countess Sophy replies tartly that if the peasants ever got their hands on that much money they'd just spend it on whores and drink.
Neither of them brings up a third possibility -- that the peasants HATE them and do not WANT to live in brotherhood. The truth the movie ignores is that sooner or later the peasants will make the beautiful people pay for three hundred years of stealing their food, women, and land. The laziness, corruption, greed, and callousness of the Russian aristocracy -- which the real Count Leo Tolstoy knew only too well -- is entirely absent from this film.
As a result, we entirely miss the real tragedy of a flawed but courageous nobleman trying (too late) to make amends. Instead we get melodrama, sentimentality, and a lot of schoolgirl giggling about sex.
It's like reading PEOPLE magazine instead of War and Peace.
It fails to give you any insight into why Tolstoy was one of the greatest writers who ever lived. Or why he wanted to give all his money to the poor. Or why he was so desperate to renounce sex. Or how any of this connected to what was actually happening in Russia at the time.
The movie spends hours and hours tittering and giggling over Tolstoy's earthy appetites -- as though it's so extraordinary that older people still enjoy having sex. But we don't get even five minutes of time with the people Tolstoy wants to help -- the Russian peasants. If we can't see them suffering, then Tolstoy's ideas just seem like charming whimsicality. Which is just what this movie wants -- to keep things shallow, so we can celebrate the joys of casual sex (and the gossip and glamor surrounding celebrity couples) and not get all hung up on heavy things like poverty, justice, and human suffering.
One moment sums up the whole problem. Early in the movie, Tolstoy and his wife actually have a rather interesting conversation about the people. Tolstoy says that if they give all their wealth to the peasants the peasants will embrace them as family and they'll all live peacefully in a world without hunger or injustice. Countess Sophy replies tartly that if the peasants ever got their hands on that much money they'd just spend it on whores and drink.
Neither of them brings up a third possibility -- that the peasants HATE them and do not WANT to live in brotherhood. The truth the movie ignores is that sooner or later the peasants will make the beautiful people pay for three hundred years of stealing their food, women, and land. The laziness, corruption, greed, and callousness of the Russian aristocracy -- which the real Count Leo Tolstoy knew only too well -- is entirely absent from this film.
As a result, we entirely miss the real tragedy of a flawed but courageous nobleman trying (too late) to make amends. Instead we get melodrama, sentimentality, and a lot of schoolgirl giggling about sex.
It's like reading PEOPLE magazine instead of War and Peace.
- Dan1863Sickles
- Apr 8, 2010
- Permalink
fizzy and vapid
Rather than present at least a GLIMPSE of Tolstoy's brilliance, Christopher Plummer depicts him as a one-dimensional, gruff, lovable old coot. He hardly has any lines throughout the movie, and the other characters are equally devoid of any depth. Helen Mirren's character is supposed to be self-centered and calculating, but even she breaks down into saccharine lightness at the end. The entire film is a descent into maudlin, pretentious sentimentality, and is only atmospheric, not substantive. Instead of being an accurate portrayal of early 1900's Russia, we are given "Russia-lite." We don't have a clue about Tolstoy's inner thoughts and motivations, because we see only an affable geezer. This was a squandered opportunity to reveal the mind of a complicated, social visionary. The director chose cute over interesting.
A movie about love
Tiresom useless drama
But life can be that way for some people. Pretty dull and flatlined for me. At a point things moved fast, then it was nothing. It got predictable and it lost me. I tried to understand the message of the movie besides the obvious, but it just pointed to the cat & mouse chase and the grasp of happiness and material richness. As for the performances :Helen was great, almost like Joffrey, you can hate her character, so a well deserved nomination, as for Christopher, not so much, the name of the character and the shoulders lf the reputation might influenced, but for me wasn't enough, from my point of view he's the leading role, not her, but for the sake of the nomination, they might have switched, ha ha. Peace and love!
- margineanvladdaniel
- Jun 3, 2022
- Permalink
War and Peace (and Love)
Greetings again from the darkness. Have been hearing so much about the performances of Christopher Plummer and Helen Mirren, that I couldn't wait for this one to finally hit town. They are both nominated for Oscars (somehow, his first), though neither appear to be a front runner.
Based on Jay Parini's novel, director Michael Hoffman (One Fine Day) brings us a look at the last year in the life of Russian novelist Leo Tolstoy, who wrote two of the finest novels of all-time (War and Peace, Anna Karenina). Unfortunately, I am not sure of the point of the film. We are provided a glimpse into the marital challenges faced by Tolstoy and Sofya, but more of the story seems to be devoted to the scheming of Chertkov (Paul Giamatti) who wants the copyrights turned over to the Russian society ... he is a very strong believer in Tolstoy's newfound disgust with personal belongings (among other things).
James McAvoy is hired to be Tolstoy's personal assistant slash double agent. He is to report to Chertkov all that goes on, and in a twist, he is to report the same to Sofya, who fears that the "new will" shall leave she and the family destitute.
The first half of the film belongs to Plummer, who refuses to go overboard playing Tolstoy as the great man, not just great writer, that so many see him as. I doubt any of us today can really appreciate how this man was worshiped at the time, though the paparazzi and tears at the end give us some indication. The second half is Mirren's as she copes with being shut out, while still in a lifelong love.
I would have preferred more insight into Tolstoy the man, rather than the Tolstoyan movement, of which I found little interest. We certainly get a more defined character in Chertkov, but the maturing of McAvoy's character helps offset the harshness.
Based on Jay Parini's novel, director Michael Hoffman (One Fine Day) brings us a look at the last year in the life of Russian novelist Leo Tolstoy, who wrote two of the finest novels of all-time (War and Peace, Anna Karenina). Unfortunately, I am not sure of the point of the film. We are provided a glimpse into the marital challenges faced by Tolstoy and Sofya, but more of the story seems to be devoted to the scheming of Chertkov (Paul Giamatti) who wants the copyrights turned over to the Russian society ... he is a very strong believer in Tolstoy's newfound disgust with personal belongings (among other things).
James McAvoy is hired to be Tolstoy's personal assistant slash double agent. He is to report to Chertkov all that goes on, and in a twist, he is to report the same to Sofya, who fears that the "new will" shall leave she and the family destitute.
The first half of the film belongs to Plummer, who refuses to go overboard playing Tolstoy as the great man, not just great writer, that so many see him as. I doubt any of us today can really appreciate how this man was worshiped at the time, though the paparazzi and tears at the end give us some indication. The second half is Mirren's as she copes with being shut out, while still in a lifelong love.
I would have preferred more insight into Tolstoy the man, rather than the Tolstoyan movement, of which I found little interest. We certainly get a more defined character in Chertkov, but the maturing of McAvoy's character helps offset the harshness.
- ferguson-6
- Feb 12, 2010
- Permalink
Excellent cast in a gem of a movie!
I've been looking forward to this movie for a while now and finally saw it last night. I thoroughly enjoyed everything about it! The entire cast was excellent; both lead and supporting roles were strong and added such depth to the movie. McAvoy, Mirren, Plummer and Giamatti were especially brilliant in every aspect. They each showed the strengths and weaknesses of the characters they portrayed, and it was a pleasure to see them interact. Although smaller roles, Duff and Condon played significant characters and were also very good in their portrayal. Just an amazing ensemble cast. I was surprised, and saddened, that this movie didn't get more attention; two nominations (Plummer and Mirren) was not nearly enough.
I've heard others say the movie was too slow but I can't say that the pace of the movie bothered me much. I found the story quite interesting and the scenery and costumes added to the movie without being distracting. I would certainly see this emotional and thought-provoking movie again!
I've heard others say the movie was too slow but I can't say that the pace of the movie bothered me much. I found the story quite interesting and the scenery and costumes added to the movie without being distracting. I would certainly see this emotional and thought-provoking movie again!
- bleu_tulips
- Mar 8, 2010
- Permalink
station agency
Christopher Plummer and Helen Mirren received Academy Award nominations for their roles as Russian author Lev* Tolstoy and Countess Sofya Tolstaya, respectively. The movie focuses on the "War and Peace" author's last few weeks alive in 1910, and is told through the eyes of young Valentin Bulgakov (James McAvoy), a young secretary sent to work for Tolstoy.
I should say that the portrayal of Sofya's frustration with her husband's dying wishes (to leave his work to the Russian people, thereby leaving her nothing) was pretty over-the-top, but I could understand her feelings. I thought that the movie could have gone into Tolstoy's revolutionary sentiments that he expressed in his novels, but I found it to be a pretty good movie overall. I recommend it.
I should also note that I could hear some mispronunciations. They said soh-FEE-ya an-dray-EV-na, when the correct pronunciation is SOH-fya an-DRAY-ev-na. Also, the word for exit at the end of the movie used the modern spelling without the hard sign (which Russian dropped after the revolution).
But mostly it's a really good movie. Also starring Paul Giamatti, Anne-Marie Duff and Kerry Condon.
*In English, we usually say Leo Tolstoy, but Lev (Russian for "lion") is the name in Russian.
I should say that the portrayal of Sofya's frustration with her husband's dying wishes (to leave his work to the Russian people, thereby leaving her nothing) was pretty over-the-top, but I could understand her feelings. I thought that the movie could have gone into Tolstoy's revolutionary sentiments that he expressed in his novels, but I found it to be a pretty good movie overall. I recommend it.
I should also note that I could hear some mispronunciations. They said soh-FEE-ya an-dray-EV-na, when the correct pronunciation is SOH-fya an-DRAY-ev-na. Also, the word for exit at the end of the movie used the modern spelling without the hard sign (which Russian dropped after the revolution).
But mostly it's a really good movie. Also starring Paul Giamatti, Anne-Marie Duff and Kerry Condon.
*In English, we usually say Leo Tolstoy, but Lev (Russian for "lion") is the name in Russian.
- lee_eisenberg
- Mar 9, 2010
- Permalink
The Pick To Click As One Of The Best Films Of 2010
If you are familiar with the name,Count Leo (Lev)Tolstoy,but have never read 'War & Peace',or any of his other novels,fret not. It's not necessary to enjoy 'The Last Station'. A young man,Valentin Bulgakov (played by James McAvoy)is hired by Vladimir Chertkov (played by Paul Giametti,adding a touch of class to his already impressive backlog of film work),who oversees the written work of Count Tolstoy,to spy on him at his commune/ashram in the Russian country side,in the guise of Tolstoy's personal secretary. Bulgakov arrives to find a homestead overseen by the Tolstoy's,Leo (played to perfection by veteran,Christopher Plummer,who has come a long way since 'The Sound Of Music'),and his wife,Sofya (Helen Mirren-always welcome on screen). During his stay at the Tolstoy residence,Valentin finds out that things are not what he perceives (Tolstoy doesn't exactly practice what he preaches in real life). He manages to take a tumble to Tolstoy's youngest daughter,Sasha (played by Anne Marie Duff). All of the dirty laundry & family drama comes out to make this a tart,funny,entertaining film with winning performances by all. Michael Hoffman writes & directs the screenplay,from the novel by Jay Parini,in a film that will hopefully garnish attention beyond the art house screen. Rated 'R' by the MPAA,this film has some brief nudity & some sexual content.
- druid333-2
- Feb 6, 2010
- Permalink
Sad and Depressing Story
This movie has some pluses--it's well-acted and beautifully filmed--but the story itself is sad and depressing.
A man, Tolstoy, who teaches love and respect of others, is unable to practice such characteristics with his own wife. She, on the other hand, is manipulative and not easy to get along with.
I can't comprehend how two people who have spent 48 years together could be separated at the end of life, nor how Cherhov (sp?) insisted on keeping the wife away. Who would do that?! The one redeeming quality is that Valentin seems to recognize that love is more important than being a 'Toystoyian,' although he might be confusing sex for love.
Nothing in this movie made me glad to have seen it, other than admiring Helen Mirren's ageless grace and beauty.
A man, Tolstoy, who teaches love and respect of others, is unable to practice such characteristics with his own wife. She, on the other hand, is manipulative and not easy to get along with.
I can't comprehend how two people who have spent 48 years together could be separated at the end of life, nor how Cherhov (sp?) insisted on keeping the wife away. Who would do that?! The one redeeming quality is that Valentin seems to recognize that love is more important than being a 'Toystoyian,' although he might be confusing sex for love.
Nothing in this movie made me glad to have seen it, other than admiring Helen Mirren's ageless grace and beauty.
Timely and thought provoking entertainment
- andrewcappelletti
- Dec 17, 2009
- Permalink
A good Dramatic piece
Rating-7/10
The Last Station is a biopic of good proportions and delivers them thoroughly and dramatically to produce a film about Leo Tolstoy that isn't his point of view at all, if anything is criticises parts of his mentality. It isn't scared to show the fragility's of every person included in this film and just what it takes to push them over the limit. I particularly liked this movie also for it's moments of silent drama pieced with it's angry drama together which build up for a good drama, and that is exactly what I found it, a safely good drama.
The story is slow yes but it has to be to that to show the drama unravel and who is treacherous and who is faithful for a good film that shows good drama. I enjoyed the more humorous side with James McAvoy portraying a character who although it is in no way a comedy but a drama that isn't afraid to not always be serious and produce a more light side that runs along side the darker tones too. Finally on the story it is a story that starts by being more happy than expected but by the end darker tones come in and not to ruin it but it is dark until the very last few scenes(well kind of).
Christopher Plummer and Helen Mirren(both nominated for Oscars) do superb and although Ii actually didn't feel this was Mirren's best, she still did a great job as the slightly damaged wife. Plummer I felt was great support for McAvoy as the main man Tolstoy, he excerpted his smart mind with a tad of crazy to bring in a portrayal that can dazzle. Supporting cast are all good, literally nearly all of them and the film gains on that point with a solid cast as I said. I finally will say that the acting deserves more praise as the characters are diverse and unpredictable, and so there skills are pushed to the limit, all of them.
This is based on Jay Parini's book of the same name and the screenplay adaption by Michael Hoffman is a well unknown if it is a good on the book but in any cast the script is good and is of course adapted very well by the actors on screen. Hoffman is also director and proves to be a great one of that making this film nearly very good, but not quite. Finally on technical terms the locations are beautiful in Tolstoy's grounds and make for a drama yes, but it is beautiful to look at if you happened to not like the story.
The film is not without criticism but not a lot so here is the only thing I found wrong with this, the film is incredibly slow and set in the most similar places scene for scene, now personally I found the drama in most scenes but I felt maybe some were wasted and boring, but also why my rating is not higher than what I gave it. I think some will not find these annoying and some will hate the entire film but in the end it is your opinion.
I think those who enjoy straight drama will love this and if you enjoy films set in these kind of early 20th century settings then it is perfection for you, although maybe a more romantic film set in this time would be a better choice for you. Those who like big and loud films stay away, this is slow and also slow releasing drama that is for those who like it that way, but still worth a watch nonetheless.
Overall I give it a 7/10 and it is Safely a Good film, it just escapes from being simply Pretty Good and I feel I could have rated it a bit higher, but also rated it lower. People will be mixed on how to rate it and although I do believe if you watch this you will like it, in the final end it comes right down to preference and what kind of film you enjoy watching. Finally also even if you don't like films like this, if you are an aspiring actor this film has prime example of how to be a good actor and really is worth taking notes on.
The Last Station is a biopic of good proportions and delivers them thoroughly and dramatically to produce a film about Leo Tolstoy that isn't his point of view at all, if anything is criticises parts of his mentality. It isn't scared to show the fragility's of every person included in this film and just what it takes to push them over the limit. I particularly liked this movie also for it's moments of silent drama pieced with it's angry drama together which build up for a good drama, and that is exactly what I found it, a safely good drama.
The story is slow yes but it has to be to that to show the drama unravel and who is treacherous and who is faithful for a good film that shows good drama. I enjoyed the more humorous side with James McAvoy portraying a character who although it is in no way a comedy but a drama that isn't afraid to not always be serious and produce a more light side that runs along side the darker tones too. Finally on the story it is a story that starts by being more happy than expected but by the end darker tones come in and not to ruin it but it is dark until the very last few scenes(well kind of).
Christopher Plummer and Helen Mirren(both nominated for Oscars) do superb and although Ii actually didn't feel this was Mirren's best, she still did a great job as the slightly damaged wife. Plummer I felt was great support for McAvoy as the main man Tolstoy, he excerpted his smart mind with a tad of crazy to bring in a portrayal that can dazzle. Supporting cast are all good, literally nearly all of them and the film gains on that point with a solid cast as I said. I finally will say that the acting deserves more praise as the characters are diverse and unpredictable, and so there skills are pushed to the limit, all of them.
This is based on Jay Parini's book of the same name and the screenplay adaption by Michael Hoffman is a well unknown if it is a good on the book but in any cast the script is good and is of course adapted very well by the actors on screen. Hoffman is also director and proves to be a great one of that making this film nearly very good, but not quite. Finally on technical terms the locations are beautiful in Tolstoy's grounds and make for a drama yes, but it is beautiful to look at if you happened to not like the story.
The film is not without criticism but not a lot so here is the only thing I found wrong with this, the film is incredibly slow and set in the most similar places scene for scene, now personally I found the drama in most scenes but I felt maybe some were wasted and boring, but also why my rating is not higher than what I gave it. I think some will not find these annoying and some will hate the entire film but in the end it is your opinion.
I think those who enjoy straight drama will love this and if you enjoy films set in these kind of early 20th century settings then it is perfection for you, although maybe a more romantic film set in this time would be a better choice for you. Those who like big and loud films stay away, this is slow and also slow releasing drama that is for those who like it that way, but still worth a watch nonetheless.
Overall I give it a 7/10 and it is Safely a Good film, it just escapes from being simply Pretty Good and I feel I could have rated it a bit higher, but also rated it lower. People will be mixed on how to rate it and although I do believe if you watch this you will like it, in the final end it comes right down to preference and what kind of film you enjoy watching. Finally also even if you don't like films like this, if you are an aspiring actor this film has prime example of how to be a good actor and really is worth taking notes on.
- willcundallreview
- Mar 26, 2014
- Permalink
disappointing, cheap melodrama
I was out of the country when this film came out and so have looked forward a long while to watching it on DVD. What a disappointment. It was nothing but cheap melodrama. I don't know if that's how Jay Parini wrote it or if it was more how Michael Hoffman directed it, but in any case, it too often devolved into sentimentality. I understand that the tensions between Tolstoy, his wife, and the Tolstoyans that the film focused on are a historical fact. They may have been factually, in some instances, also as histrionic as the film represents. I'm quite willing to believe too that the histrionics were as much or more on the side of Chertkov and the Tolstoyans as on Countess Tolstoy's. Still, the portrayal of Chertkov as villain was so melodramatic that it's not an exaggeration to say that we see him twirling his mustache. Tolstoy was many things, but one of them was was the master of the realistic detail. Sorry, none here.