James Hitchcock Alexander Pushkin's verse novel "Eugene Onegin" is well-known in English-speaking countries, partly due to the influence of Tchaikovsky's opera, so I need not set out the plot in any detail. It centres upon the relationship between Yevgeny Onegin, a 19th century Russian landowner, and a teenaged girl named Tatyana Larinа, the daughter of a neighbour. Tatyana falls passionately in love with Onegin and writes him a letter setting out her feelings, but he replies that he cannot return them. Six years later Onegin meets Tatyana again and discovers that she is now married to a prince. A subplot deals with a duel fought between Onegin and Vladimir Lensky, the fiancé of Tatyana's sister Olga.Some have seen the story as a case of "the spurner spurned" and have regarded Onegin's eventual rejection by Tatyana as a just punishment for his cruel treatment of her. I think, however, that Pushkin intended his story to be more than a simple morality tale. In the first place (and I know many people will disagree with me here) I think that Onegin was right to reject Tatyana; he clearly knew himself well enough to realise that with his cynical, nihilistic nature he would be far from an ideal match for the idealistically romantic Tatyana and that any union of their clashing personalities would only lead to unhappiness for them both.Moreover, when Onegin meets Tatyana again, he only falls in love with her because she is no longer available. He falls in love with the dazzlingly elegant society beauty she has become since her marriage; if she were still unmarried, a twenty-something version of the pretty but dowdy teenager he once knew, a minor provincial aristocrat's daughter with no real fortune, he would not give her a second glance. Onegin, however, does not understand Tatyana's nature as well as he understands his own. He predicted that she would soon forget him, but she is even more of a romantic idealist than he thought and his prediction has not come true. Tatyana is still desperately in love with the man who once rejected her, but she can see no option but to reject him in his turn. To embark upon an affair would be to risk public disgrace, and although she does not love her husband she still feels a certain loyalty to him.I felt that Liv Tyler was wrong for the part of Tatyana, coming across as rather too sensuous and knowing for this innocent, idealistic young woman. The saturnine, world-weary Ralph Fiennes, however, seemed just right as Onegin, the bored, cynical "superfluous man", a type so beloved of Pushkin and other Russian poets. Toby Stephens is also good as Lensky, a character who could be difficult one to play because of the way in which social conventions have changed since the novel was written. Pushkin (later to die in a duel himself) may have intended us to see Lensky's fierce determination to defend his honour and the honour of his beloved Olga as something admirable, but to the modern reader or viewer his readiness to fight his former friend to the death over a trivial insult seems like, at best, a toxic, misguided idealism and, at worst, rank bloodlust disguised as gentlemanly behaviour.This was the first film to be directed by Martha Fiennes. Several other members of her family were involved; apart from her brother Ralph in the leading role, her sister Sophie also appeared, and another brother, Magnus, wrote the music. Adapting a verse novel for the screen is always going to be a difficult project. Pushkin's complex verse-form is so much a part of this particular work that his translators have generally tried to imitate it in English, often with impressive results. Cinema audiences, however, are unlikely to accept a film in verse- certainly not rhyming verse- so film-makers have to make do with a prose version, and prose translations of poetry can often fall rather flat.What I think Martha Fiennes does to try and overcome this difficulty is to try and find a visual equivalent to Pushkin's poetry. She does this by giving the film a very distinctive look, with an austere palette dominated by blacks, whites and greys, although there are occasional flashes of brighter colours, such as the sumptuous dark red dress which Tatyana wears in the later scenes. Two scenes in particular are dominated by a sombre tone, the fateful duel and the sequence at the end after Onegin has separated from Tatyana for the final time.This is a risky strategy, but I think that here it comes off. Although the characters speak in prose, "Onegin" has an elegiac and poetic sensibility appropriate to the great work on which it is based. 8/10 A goof. When Tatyana writes her letter she addresses it to "Monsieur Onegin". Now it is quite possible that she might have written to him in French- many Russian aristocrats were fluent in the language- but had she done so she would not have used this English spelling. The normal French transliteration would be "Onéguine" or "Oniéguine".

darrhling A truly spectacular film with so many visual, psychological and melancholy delights that it is hard to know whom or what to praise more. Ralph Fiennes executes a stunning performance as the aloof, sarcastic disillusioned aristocrat managing a performance which combines a great deal of emotion and extreme surface passivity; Liv Tyler is at her most beautiful in one of her best performances to date as the poignant Tatiana who, as the film unfolds, evolves from passionate idealism into resignation and honour; and Martha Fiennes proves herself as part and parcel of the elite group of great directors... The filming is of high quality; a lot of very English wit and charm. A film which will appeal to those who enjoy BBC dramatisations, classics such as Cate Blanchett's performance in Elizabeth, Shakespeare in Love, etc.Enjoy!

yurivetrov If we imagine that somewhere there is a non-existent country. Thatcertainly can agree that the film is beautiful. But no more. Any educated Russian people laughing at this film. Of course it's music, especially the moment where Vladimir plays the piano Russian song))) This is not a Russian, it's a Soviet song of 1950 from a Soviet film. Also there is a waltz "On the Hills of Manchuria". It was written in 20 century. But this is not important. Very important that none of the actors did not pass the character of those heroes of which Pushkin wrote This is not just a desire to make a negative rating! I respect the Russian and American classics. I think that the Russian director's would never take Gone with the Wind

Jugu Abraham Many viewers are quick to note the fine effort of the Fiennes family to bring a Russian literary masterpiece on screen in the English language. The Fiennes family need to be complimented for their dedicated work to bring such an important literary work closer to thousands who would never have heard the name of Yevgeny Onegin.However, I would like to underline the work of Martha Fiennes--the director. This is a marvelous debut for a director. The pivotal point of the film is the letter of Tatyana to Yevgeny. If the viewer were to replace the images of the blue/black ink with red blood, the images could have been of a lover hurting oneself while writing the letter. Pushkin intended this savage intensity--Ms. Fiennes succeeds in capturing this on screen without the blood. After the letter is written, the writer cleans her fingers on the white dress. The director's detailed shots on the writing of the letter, the opening of the letter, and the refusal of the return of the letter are visually as important as any performance in the film.Second, Martha Fiennes is to be complimented on the sartorial details of Tatyana. The gradual change in clothes--color-wise and wealth-wise--is structurally well done in tandem with the plot of Pushkin.I particularly loved the sequences of Onegin staring at neck of his lost love during the concert--Ms Feinnes captures the mood eloquently with shots which could easily have been spoiled had the camera been placed in front of the two actors.The opening shot of the sleigh drawn by horses is very Russian. Unfortunately, for Ms Feinnes, Russian director Igor Talankin's film "Tchaikovsky" had used similar imagery--only Talankin did it much better with striking effect.The duel sequence is perhaps an important part of the film, if one recalls the writer Pushkin himself went through such an ordeal in real life--I do not recall if "Yevgeny Onegin" was written before or after the incident...But Ms Feinnes' duel sequence is comparable to those of Kubrick in "Barry Lyndon" or Ridley Scott's brilliant early work "The Duellists." It is equally interesting to note that Pushkin's work alludes to the importance of married persons remaining faithful to each other--in real life Pushkin demanded the same of his wife, but suspected his spouse was cheating on him and this forced the duel that wounded him in real life.But what is the modern windmill doing in "Tsarist Russia"? The windmills in Tsarist Russia I believe had more spokes (or hands), if we were to go by the paintings of that era..Ms. Fiennes' on the other hand has taken care of details that a male director would have perhaps overlooked--the postures of Tatyana in the boat hidden by the reeds. Ms. Fiennes has shown talent in many ways that recall the brilliance of Julie Taymor. I only wish Fiennes were a Russian director using Russian actors--the work would then have been so real. For an effort from a non-Russian, I applaud her work as a director and the contribution of her family to the finished product. So is the contribution of cinematographer Remi Adeferasin. The performance of Liv Tyler should be assessed against the opportunity the role offered--she was good but not outstanding--she has done better under the direction of Robert Altman.