Lovesusti The Worst Film Ever

AnhartLinkin This story has more twists and turns than a second-rate soap opera.

Humaira Grant It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.

Roxie The thing I enjoyed most about the film is the fact that it doesn't shy away from being a super-sized-cliche;

bkoganbing If I shut my eyes for a bit and just listen to Christopher Plummer and Helen Mirren for a bit I might think I've got The Lion In Winter on. The two certainly sound a lot like that other estranged couple Henry II and Eleanor of Aquitaine. Both couples apparently can't live with each other or without each other.It's the famous Russian author's last days and everybody knows it including Plummer. He and Mirren brought a lot of kids into the world most of whom lived to adulthood. He's got a traditional will with the first son prime, but provisions for all. That's what Mirren wants, their descendants to benefit for as long as possible like any other author. But those around Tolstoy who have subscribed to his ideas about universal non-violent revolution want his work into the public domain so that those who can read can profit thereby and his ideas spread to all. A grand scheme that will leave the Tolstoy family bereft of profit.That's what James McAvoy is there for. Installed in the household by Paul Giammati chief disciple of the Count he starts having ideas of his own and starts seeing the Countess's point of view.Watching this I wonder if a young Tolstoy ever met an old Charles Dickens? Those two had diametrically opposed views as to what an author should receive. Dickens kept a careful eye on his copyrights lest anyone take a shilling from him. Irving Berlin who lived to 101 was actually dismayed as more and more of his early song hits entered public domain and he could no longer make a nickel on work like Alexander's Ragtime Band, When I Lost You and a few others.Plummer and Mirren are as matched a set of adversaries as Peter O'Toole and Katharine Hepburn were and they got Oscar nominations to prove it. The film is mostly the two of them, but are they worth it.

zachcjohn Much of the criticism I have been reading about 'The Last Station' is specious, and I felt compelled to write this article because I believe that most of the negative reaction might be eliminated if the film were more adequately illuminated.You don't have to love (or even know anything about) Tolstoy to enjoy this film. You do, however, have to have a taste for love, because this movie is a wonderfully full (if occasionally saccharine) tour de force of love- in fact, the director informs the audience so, right away, in the opening quote. So the viewer ought to approach this work with the mindset that the story is about the love that occurs to various degrees with each of the different characters.It would be a grave mistake to believe that, since this is a film about Tolstoy, the film itself echoes some of the characteristics of Tolstoy's work. In fact, it echoes practically none of Tolstoy's work. I do not, however, find fault in this, and any movie-goer who is expecting to experience War and Peace ought to just go read War and Peace because War and Peace's literary excellence is just that: literary. To find fault in The Last Station because it does not address the problem of the Russian Aristocracy's exorbitant habits, and their relationship to the struggling peasant class, is like condemning the movie for not discovering who was responsible for the murder on the Orient Express, or insufficiently detailing the party life of Holly Golightly- that is to say, the two are entirely unrelated.Although the content of the story concerns the aging Leo Tolstoy and his wife, Sofya, the protagonist of the movie is Valentin Bulgakov (played by James McAvoy), and so, the principle conflict is, in fact, about his personal devotion to the Tolsotyian doctrines, and how his personal goals and values change as a result of his employment under Tolstoy. So, any stigma attached to Tolstoy comes directly from Bulgakov's personal devotion to Tolstoy the Diety, and this dynamic is the only thing which plays on any viewers' preconceived notions of Tolstoy.The story is not really about Tolstoy, per se, but is instead about Bulgakov's navigating between the celibacy and strictness of the Tolstoy Dogma, (as embodied through Chertkov, portrayed by Paul Giammati) and the passionate and sometimes inexplicable nature of human interactions (as embodied through Sofya, portrayed by Helen Mirren in an incredible, forget-where-you-are performance). So, take heart, the viewer is not taken on a journey with Tolsoty where-in we aim to discover how to solve the enormous question of the class conflict in Russia. Instead, the question is: how has Bulgakov's first hand experience of Tolstoy, Sofya, Chertkov, and Telyatinki in general, affected his beliefs, and will those beliefs confirm his position as a disciplined Tolstoyian, or will they facilitate his rejection of the doctrine? So, you see, criticism about Sofya's "weird behavior", or about the lack of Tolstoyian erudition really comes down to a misunderstanding. The Tolstoyian scholastic plays a frivolous and superficial role, and does so intentionally. The film is not actually about Tolstoy, or his works, and we need only process the interactions that occur, and the characters for that matter, through Bulgakov's experience and frame of mind.When the viewer understands this, I think they will understand why the film is so delightful.

edwagreen Pre-Communist 1917 revolution is the backdrop for this drama which features a totally over-the-top performance by Helen Mirren as the Countess Tolstoy, and Christopher Plummer as the great writer Leo Tolstoy. Both Mirren and Plummer were nominated for Oscars in the best actress and supporting actor divisions, respectively and deservedly lost to Sandra Bullock and Christoph Waltz, respectively.The movie is a slow moving one with a sidebar story of Tolstoy's social secretary finding love in the commune that the writer has set up.The film is extremely slow moving and brooding with Paul Giamatti, the friend of Plummer, stealing every scene that he is in. Conniving and supposedly loyal to his friend, he sets forth a changing of the will to supposedly help Tolstoy's cause of peace which sets him against Mirren.As shown in the film, the peasants didn't look like they had it that bad which is a major flaw of the film. In fact, Mirren seems to be suffering even more. Is she that money hungry, desperate for love or just what?

meeza "The Last Station" is not based on the Radio Station 107.9 on your FM dial. Come back, please do not change the station, come back to my review, just my silly pun humor. "The Last Station" is really Director Michael Hoffman's cinematic piece on the last days of famed Russian author Leo Tolstoy. Leo was that long-bearded dude who wrote the infamous literary works "War and Peace" and "Anna Karenina"; you know the ones that you used to pretend to read in World Literature class. Sorry Leo, I did not read your books, but your cliff notes were the bomb. Tolstoy, never a Gillette client, believed in a life devoid of material things during his latter years, even though he lived in a gargantuan mansion. Nevertheless, he wrested with that balance and that is one of "The Last Station" focal points. Tolstoy was married to Countess Sofya Tolstoy for 48 years, and she is a central figure in the movie's narrative, especially when it comes to her battle to keep Leo's writings "in the house" and not be disclosed in the wrong hands of shady profit-seekers disguised as Tolstoyians. But in reality, "The Last Station" primarily revolves around the experience of young Valentin Bulgakov, Tolstoy's personal secretary who has the challenging task of carrying out his work. Bulgakov is initially sent to the Tolstoy residence to carry out his secretarial duties by Tolstoy's #1 groupie (in other words, chief Leo follower) Vladimir Chertkov, who will do whatever it takes to advance the Tolstoyian cause. Vladimir butts heads with Countess Sofya who wants Leo all to himself in his last days of peace. Valentin himself becomes quite a Valentino by romancing the free-spirit Masha, who differs from Valentin's philosophies but he just cannot seem to resist her Masha's unit of a body. Director Michael Hoffman does an adequate job in helming & scribing "The Last Station", but one definitely has to be an avid connoisseur of period-piece flicks to relish this movie. The acting standouts are Helen Mirren as Countess Sofya and Christopher Plummer as Tolstoy, both were nominated for Academy Awards for their performances. James McAvoy as Valentin, and Paul Giamatti as Vladimir were adequate but nothing to write home about. "The Last Station" does offer some delights if you are a Leo Tolstoy aficionado, but if you are not (which are most of us) I advice you to change the station, you will be bored. *** Average