1984

1984

Action / Drama / Romance / Sci-Fi / Thriller

85
Rotten Tomatoes Critics - Certified Fresh 80%
Rotten Tomatoes Audience - Upright 71%
IMDb Rating 7.2 10 56645

Synopsis


Uploaded By: OTTO
Downloaded 75,478 times
April 03, 2015 at 12:15 PM

Cast

John Hurt as Winston Smith
Richard Burton as O'Brien
Cyril Cusack as Charrington
Phyllis Logan as The Telescreen Announcer
720p.BLU 1080p.BLU
813.65 MB
1280*720
English
NR
23.976 fps
1hr 53 min
P/S 1 / 74
1.65 GB
1920*1080
English
NR
23.976 fps
1hr 53 min
P/S 0 / 52

Movie Reviews

Reviewed by Thy Davideth 8 / 10

A Fear That Could Be Real

So the SJW identify with the book 1984. Yeah, the totalitarian part. The idea that they have become the thought police trying to suppress free speech like the fascists that they are because they live in a baby play pen of hypersensitivity and child like sensibilities. Give it up. You crybabies only identify with sociopaths and pseudo-intellects. Anyways, I liked 1984 for its bleak look on a totalitarian society run by Big Brother to due away with imagination, love and to live life freely away from subjugation and conformity. You know, kind of like the way the leftist want us to live under subjection and a lack of imagination. But anyways, the only letdowns was that this film is artsy fartsy which results in boring ass pacing and all that. But in the end, this film serves as a somewhat clairvoyant look on what society looks like when ruled under socialism, authoritarianism, totalitarianism, and the malicious abstraction of creative thought through nihilism and stupidity.

Reviewed by qmtv 1 / 10

Very slow and boring for most part. Best to see the 1954 British TV version with Peter Cushing. 84 version is a disgusting joke.

I read the book many years ago. I remember the main plot but forgot the ending. The only other thing I recall is that they raised the price of chocolate from 25 to 30 and Winston had to rewrite the history and state they're reducing the price from 50 to 30.

Richard Burton was great but seriously underused. Excellent voice and delivery. John Hurt did fine, mostly towards the end. He's a fine actor, the problem is in the script and direction. Suzanna Hamilton was decent, not great. A few other minor characters, did not add anything to the film.

Visually it was OK, not great. At times it looks like a cheap TV movie. There was some atmosphere in the film, but not all the way through. A lot of cheap scenes. Everybody praises the cinematography. I can't. It looked OK. Nothing great. A few days ago I rewatched The Shining. That has great cinematography. I would also recommend Messiah of Evil for great camera work. 1984 cinematography was OK at best. The music was OK, annoying at times. The dialogue was mumbled and hard to understand at points.

Now, onto the story. We don't get a good idea what is going on. We know this is in a future time when 3 world powers are at war, and the people are brainwashed. But we don't get a full picture of Hurts character. We see some backstory of his mother and sister, and a scene with a prostitute. We see him at work rewriting history. But these scenes are very boring and it's all cheap TV show format. I'm reading other reviews now. One critic mentioned that when Winston went into the proletarian area he didn't look too cautions or paranoid, like he did in the book. He just came and went like it was normal. Apparently in the book things were more stark, and he would have been more cautious in this area of town.

I've seen this movie years ago on TV and don't remember it much. Watching it yesterday I was thinking, OK, this is fine, but I saw the deficit in it. It is very slow, and boring. I will now need to reread the book.

Worth checking out, if you read the book. If not, I would not recommend it. As it is my rating is 4 stars, maybe a C. The problem is the director. He also wrote the script. I do not recommend directors, write and produce their own films. No checks and balances.

OK, after watching this mess of a film last week, I viewed 3 other versions and rewatched this yesterday. The 1956 US film. The best Peter Cushing 1954 British TV version. And the 1953 US TV version. All of the previous versions were superior to the 1984 mess. Simply put everything was better, from the script and the acting to cinematography, costumes, music, directing, dialogue, story, and comprehension of what the hell is going on. I recommend watching all versions to compare. I don't know why John Hurt is elevated to such heights. He was a decent actor but give me a break. The best version of Winston Smith was Peter Cushing. The Eddie Albert 1953 and Edmond O'Brien 1956 also acted well, much better than Hurt. I thought Richard Burton as O'Brien did well until I checked out the other versions. Best was Andre Morell 1954 against Cushing, he was cool and calculating. Lorne Greene 1953, and Michael Redgrave 1956 were also good. I thought the best Julia was Norma Crane 1953. But Yvonne Mictchell 1954, and Jane Sterling 1956 did well. Suzanna Hamilton 1984 was OK, but the worst, the only thing she did well was when she took her clothes off. That just doesn't make the film. Donald Pleasence as Syme in the 1954 version was excellent. Great stuff. Gregor Fisher as Parsons in 1984 version was a complete joke, what a mess. All the Charringtons did well, but the best was 1954.

Not having read the book in so long, I cannot comment on the differences with the book. But after watching the 4 versions available, I saw what the 84 version missed on. The meeting at O'Briens home, the previous versions had Julia accompany Smith, this one didn't and it was much shorter. There was some intense dialogue in the earlier versions. When Charrigton enters the room towards the end, this version is shorter, the previous versions had more impact. Gratuitous nude scenes. At the end one of the thought police gut punches Julia. I wonder who thought this was a good idea? The torture scene in this one was ridiculous, repetitive nonsense. There was more impact in the older versions.

So, my revised rating is a D or 3 stars. For balance for all the praise given I will give 1 star. This movie is a joke. It looks disgusting. The flashback scenes of Smith as a kid and then visiting a prostitute, all add up to a bunch of crap. Missing information, the audience is left to read the book, or just be awed by the visuals, which is honestly not that impressive. Zero chemistry between Smith and Julia. This director wrote the screenplay. Big Freaking Mistake. Maybe he should have viewed the other versions. Or, how about reading the book. Or, maybe get a professional screenwriter, rather than try to slap some stupid scenes together that make no sense. Forget the D, this is an F.

Reviewed by framptonhollis 10 / 10

chillingly brutal in its depiction of a disturbing dystopia

This brilliant adaptation of George Orwell's immoral classic of the same name nearly matches its source material in terms of quality (which is quite the achievement, considering the fact that "1984" is by far one of the greatest novels I have ever read). The chilling direction and pitch perfect performances help make this disturbing vision all the more of a truthful gut punch. The fact that such a hard hitting and seemingly over the top story remains entirely relevant in today's chaotic political climate is both a disgrace and a testament to Orwell's genius, and the cinematic capturing of Orwell's classic is one of practically unbeatable quality. While little to nothing is added to the plot, the visual accompaniment of the story enhances its impact. The cinematography is fittingly dull, soaked entirely of the joys o color. The performances are simply perfect, making this one of the few novel adaptations I have seen in which I felt that the actors absolutely nailed their performing of the original work's dialogue. At the center of this terrifying satire is the performance of Richard Burton who is both subtle and mind blowingly horrifying in his indescribably villainous role, while John Hurt provides a sometimes timid, sometimes paranoid, and other times absolutely petrified protagonist that attempts to escape from the norms of the totalitarian society he is forced to live in.

While not necessarily a "horror" movie, there is no doubt that "1984" is among the most genuinely SCARY films that I have ever seen. Both the book and film have succeeded in making me shake like drug addicted pepper and salt shakers. The dystopia depicted here accurately displays the horror of an overly controlling and oppressive government system forcing its propaganda upon those below, and outwardly embracing anti-free speech and pro-war beliefs. I must restate how sadly relevant this work remains.

Read more IMDb reviews

2 Comments

Be the first to leave a comment