Watch Nureyev

Nureyev

Nureyev is a movie starring Siân Phillips, Dick Cavett, and Margot Fonteyn. This striking and moving documentary from BAFTA nominated directors Jacqui and David Morris traces the extraordinary life of Rudolf Nureyev. From his birth...

Other Titles
Nureyev. Il mondo, il suo palco, Nureyev: Lifting the Curtain, Nureyev: An Orgy of One
Running Time
1 hours 49 minutes
Quality
480p, 720p, 1080p, 2K, 4K
Genres
Documentary
Director
David Morris, Jacqui Morris
Writer
David Morris, Jacqueline Morris
Actors
Dick Cavett, Erik Bruhn, Margot Fonteyn, Siân Phillips
Country
UK
Year
2018
Audio Languages
English, Deutsch, Français, Italiano, Español, Svenska, Gaeilge, Nederlands
Subtitles
日本語, Čeština, Tiếng Việt, Português, 한국어, Australia, Filipino, हिन्दी

This striking and moving documentary from BAFTA nominated directors Jacqui and David Morris traces the extraordinary life of Rudolf Nureyev. From his birth in the 5th class carriage of a trans-Siberian train, to his dramatic leap to freedom in the West at the height of the Cold War, and unprecedented adulation as the most famous dancer in the world. The film highlights Nureyev's unlikely yet legendary partnership with Margot Fonteyn and charts his meteoric rise to the status of global cultural phenomenon. Nureyev's life plays out like the sweeping plot of a classic Russian novel. His story is Russia's story. Blending never-before-seen footage, with an original score by award-winning composer Alex Baranowski and spellbinding newly choreographed dance tableaux directed by Royal Ballet alumnus, Russell Maliphant, Nureyev is a theatrical and cinematic experience like no other. This is a portrayal as unique as the man himself. There will never be another Nureyev.

Comments about documentary «Nureyev» (23)

Judy S. photo
Judy S.

After reading many reviews, and then seeing the film, I came out of the cinema with some mixed feelings. On one hand, it is very refreshing to see how people can discuss this topic in such a respectful manner. I think the film is about as unbiased as it gets, and the most important thing is to enjoy the film for what it is. If you watch it with an open mind, and without preconceptions, you'll get something out of it. Overall, I think this is a great film. If you watch it with an open mind, you'll get something out of it.

Deborah Jenkins photo
Deborah Jenkins

If you're looking for a documentary that tells a simple story in a simple way, this is the documentary for you. I had no expectations of it at all, and I came out amazed. It is highly recommended to anyone, but definitely NOT for those who are currently in the throes of love. The music is soothing, and the direction is subtle, yet clear. If you want to take a break from all the bullshit that is happening on this planet, and just enjoy life, this is a great movie to watch. If you're into documentaries that can explain things for you without your having to think about them, you should definitely check this one out. If you're interested in the environment and how it affects everyone, but you're not interested in the world's issues, check this out. It'll make you realize that we really aren't the ones that are the problem. In the end, this is a movie that I recommend to everyone. It'll make you think about the world and the people in it and you'll remember how important it is to just enjoy it. 9/10

Kathy Shaw photo
Kathy Shaw

From its beginning, with its colorful and unique cinematography, to its last moment, when the title track gets stuck on my head, this is a film that will bring a smile to your face. The person who made this documentary is one of the few people who can truly make you feel for a country, where people are fighting for their right to express their culture and their lives. It's a great film, and I strongly recommend it to anyone who likes independent films, or even those who love documentaries.

Victoria Martin photo
Victoria Martin

This is a great documentary that details the history of the USSR and the battle against the communist party dictatorship. It begins in the early 1920's and the trials and trials that followed. The Soviet Union was on the verge of collapse and there was a great fear of revolution from within the country. It was feared that the party would try to destroy the ideas of Marxism-Leninism and this was true. At the time, communism was being implemented in the name of socialism. This documentary is very well produced. It is well edited and well shot. The location filming in Russia is very well done. It gives a sense of the country as a place that has been destroyed. The film is a very good depiction of the horror that was inflicted upon the country by the Soviet party. The documentary is very moving and very educational. The movie is very well done and has an engaging plot and plot twists. I recommend it highly.

Rachel Perkins photo
Rachel Perkins

The film starts with a guy in a basement, hiding from a police officer who's following him. He talks about his life as a drug dealer, his decision to quit, and how the law has no right to enter his home without a warrant. It's a great film to watch, and an interesting look at how the Russian law is applied. After the movie ends, it's time to go home. It is no more of a documentary than many of the other films. But it is unique in that it's done in the style of a documentary, and the documentary style is apparent in the first five minutes.

Carolyn Chen photo
Carolyn Chen

There is no question that Tarkovsky's movies are truly magical. The man is an artist of genius and has such a unique way of telling a story. However, in many ways he seems to be more a filmmaker than an artist. I'm not saying his movies are devoid of artistic merit, but rather that Tarkovsky's true creative powers are only apparent. It is simply not his vision that is the thing, but rather that the people around him (his assistant, wife, collaborators, and even his own wife) are so engrossed in his work that he has the ability to manipulate their feelings. This is one of the most fascinating aspects of Tarkovsky's work. I'm not trying to be a purist about this, I'm merely stating that I am a lover of his work, and I think he has such a clear vision, that I think the people around him are so mesmerized by it, that they have difficulty to do anything about it. For example, I know that Tarkovsky would be appalled by the filth and depravity of today's society. I know that he would be offended by the fact that the world seems to be going in the direction of a new totalitarian dictatorship. I also know that he would be horrified by the fact that the world seems to be going in the direction of a new totalitarian dictatorship. However, I have not yet seen the movie "Tarkovsky". I had read a couple of reviews on this film before I saw it. I was not in the mood for a philosophical discussion of Tarkovsky's films. I was in the mood for a nice, warm, spiritual experience. I was not disappointed. Tarkovsky's "Ribenkovsky" is a film that takes you right into the mind of Tarkovsky. I think the reason why the film seems to be more like a philosophical meditation than a film is because of the way that it is structured. The film is divided into three different sections. The first two are about the personal lives of the characters, as they look back at their past and reflect upon their current state. The third section is about the life of the film itself, and how it all plays out. I found this to be a very interesting film. It is not an easy film to watch. I think that Tarkovsky uses this to his advantage. He has the characters reflect upon their lives in a very real and realistic way. I think that the acting is brilliant. It is difficult to find people that can carry a film like this, but Fyodor Seleznev and Dziga Vertov are two of the finest actors in this genre of film. I also think that the dialogue is very good. In fact, the only part of the film that I did not like was the music. I do not think that Tarkovsky would have approved of the film's soundtrack. I think that the film would have been much better if the music had been replaced with music that was not so heavy and hard to listen to. I think that Tarkovsky would have approved of the music for a more emotional film like "The Remains of the Day". I think that the music in this film, and in most of his films, is a wonderful complement to the films themselves. Tarkovsky's "Ribenkovsky" is a film that is very different from the other films in his genre. I can see why some would

Debra J. photo
Debra J.

A documentary about the 30th anniversary of the Russian Revolution in Russia. It's not an awful documentary. It is very well made and very well edited. The narrative is very straightforward and not too convoluted or complex. The documentary starts by focusing on some of the key issues around the revolution, namely, how we in Russia were able to see it, how we could know about it, and how we were able to cope with it. It then moves on to the key actors. Those who were key players during that revolution, whether it was Chekists, Mensheviks, or Communists. These are the ones that it looks at more closely. As it continues to go, it covers the early days of the revolution. It also covers the cultural revolution and the social and economic reforms that the Soviet Union went through. There's no special emphasis on the Communist Party in the documentary. Instead, it is more focused on how we in Russia were able to understand the revolution and how we were able to deal with it. What we didn't know was that we were in the middle of the biggest political upheaval in the history of the world. One thing the documentary does is show that there were people who had close ties to the government. This was done in the documentary as well. Some people had been with the government for years. They were sometimes considered to be friends of the government and a sort of "constant" in the government. As the documentary continues, it turns into a sort of retrospective of the revolution itself. It looks at the key historical figures, their struggles, and how they came to be involved in this revolution. It also goes into a little bit of the politics of the revolution, what the key issues were that people were involved in. Finally, it ends with a question and answer session where you get to ask questions of the individuals that were interviewed. Overall, it was a great documentary. It was well made, it was very well edited, and it was very well organized. If you want to see a documentary that deals with the revolution in a very thorough and thorough way, you should check this out.

Phillip photo
Phillip

I saw this film a few years ago, but never got around to seeing it again. I didn't think it was very good, but it's a documentary. The majority of the film is mainly footage from the film, but there's a lot of interviews with experts who talk about the film. I can't say much about it, except that it's pretty good. The film is divided into two parts. One is all interviews with experts, and the other is just the director talking about the film. I'd recommend this to people who are interested in Soviet history, or even just Russian history. Some of the interviews are pretty bad, but then again some of the interviews are pretty good. It's a fairly uneven film. It's also pretty funny. My biggest problem is that it doesn't feel like it has a real point. It's basically just a bunch of clips from the film, and it doesn't really give a clear explanation of what's going on. I don't really have any problems with the film, but I do think it could have been better. I think it could have been better if it wasn't so uneven, but there is some good stuff in it. If you want to see a film that does give a clear explanation of what's going on, I'd recommend this film.

Christina W. photo
Christina W.

One of the finest documentaries I've ever seen, that is, that I didn't find on TV. I am a journalist who loves documentaries, and I've seen many. This one takes the award for the most beautiful, comprehensive, balanced documentary of the year. I know the subject matter well. I understand the history of the people who did these experiments on their own children, and they do a good job of explaining the history of the gas chambers and their time in the camps. As a journalist, I was a bit skeptical. I read all the other reviews here, and though they did a good job, they were quite critical of the movie. They said the movie wasn't thorough enough. They said the movie was too long. I read a couple of other comments here, but I was surprised at the vast majority of them, that this movie was fantastic. I thought the movie was excellent. It is a little long, but that is the only thing that bothers me. It's a very thorough and careful documentary. The movie is not just a story about one subject, but many. They spend a lot of time on the Holocaust, on the forced labor, on the experiments, on the people who were involved. They make the Holocaust, the forced labor, the experiments, the gas chambers look like a whole lot of things. I think it is an excellent movie, and it is a great example of how to make a documentary. I would give it a 9 out of 10, but it deserves a 10.

Deborah G. photo
Deborah G.

The DVD includes some nice behind-the-scenes interviews with directors, actors, and other staff. I found the subject matter interesting and intriguing, and that's about all I can say about the DVD. The negatives are the same as the positives: the Director's cut is very long, including a couple of interviews that were not included in the theatrical version. The theatrical version of the film was shown at the NYFF in 2004, and I believe it was the only film showing at the event. The original version, which has not been seen since 2000, was a little too long for my taste, and some of the scenes could have been trimmed by about 30-45 minutes. Other than that, the documentary does a pretty good job of documenting the entire history of Russian cinema from the mid-19th century to the mid-1920s. Most of the interviews are with prominent Russian directors and actors, including Tarkovsky, Klimov, and Tarkovsky's wife, Olga, who played Tarkovsky's mother in the film. The film was shown at the 2002 Oscar ceremonies, and it is important to see the film as a historical document, because it is a very important film in the history of Russian cinema.

John Fields photo
John Fields

As an Orthodox Christian, I can appreciate the struggle that this movie tries to depict. However, I don't agree with the very moralistic and bleak depiction of Orthodoxy and Orthodoxy's struggle. For the most part, Orthodoxy is portrayed in a very superficial way. For example, one could say that Orthodoxy is a religion that has very strict rules. For example, Orthodoxy believes that all its members should never get married. One of the biggest problems with the movie is that it takes the "religious" side of Orthodoxy very seriously. That's a very odd thing to do. One could say that the movie's message is that Orthodoxy is a religion that has to follow the rules. However, the movie tries to explain what is wrong with that idea, and that's something that is a little disturbing. Of course, it doesn't explain everything, but it does try to explain it in a reasonable way. This is a movie that is aimed at religious people. It tries to explain why Orthodoxy is something that is rather distant from the religious and it makes it look like it's something that is completely against the religion. The movie is a little bit interesting, but it's not great.

Kathleen S. photo
Kathleen S.

I found this documentary very interesting and I would definitely recommend it to any film student, especially those of us who do not have access to the best film equipment in the world. The documentary is very informative and well produced. I found it interesting that the filmmaker clearly stated that he used no special equipment in this documentary. He was simply using a home camera, a hand-held camera, a telephoto lens, and a Canon Rebel T5i. He did not use any special lighting devices, nor did he use any special "professional" lighting equipment. He simply went out and found some nice locations and put his equipment to use. All of the filming was done at night. Although I have not used the latest home or high end cameras, I am sure that the equipment used in this documentary would not work at all in the production of an ordinary day-to-day movie. The sound was well done and the images clearly captured the situation of the people that were interviewed. I have been a film student for several years and this documentary is a very good summary of what a film student should know. The filmmaker did not show the film for three months after shooting. He obviously chose to not show this footage because he felt that it would be a "distraction" to the documentary. It was not. The footage was beautiful and the use of the film in this documentary was well done. I think that the documentary is very informative and I would highly recommend it to anyone who has a very open mind.

Terry photo
Terry

A documentary, part "doc-on-film", part social-realism, part documentary. A series of interviews with Russia's past and present social leaders and political parties. The film was made in collaboration with the Kudrin Foundation in the village of Novosibirsk, in Siberia. The documentary was made by Mira Andrianova, with help from the public broadcaster and the journalist Nina Karyova, and it was shown in early February 2014. The documentary is very well done, both for its content and for its style and the way it is presented. The interviews include the (so far) last few generations of Russia's leaders, and it's interesting to watch them. And the way they talk about Russia's history. The film takes place in the village of Novosibirsk, in the Russian province of Komi, the site of the city of Novosibirsk (now Krasnoyarsk, also known as Saint Petersburg) where Nikolai Lenin was born in 1881, and where Lenin's granddaughter Anna has been living since, and where the former Soviet Union's leader Leonid Brezhnev had been living and raised until he died in 1954. The movie was shot on location in the village, and it is presented as a documentary. Mira Andrianova, a journalist who was the producer of this project, writes that she wanted to show the people of Novosibirsk, as well as the country, the history of the country that they are part of. But she found that people were not interested in the subject of their country's history. And that's why she turned to the people of Komi, who are active on social and political issues, to find the people who would be interested in this documentary. And there is a tremendous amount of people interested in this subject. And Mira Andrianova writes that the people of Komi are very different from other Komi people. For example, there is a large number of elderly people in the village, and many of them are widowed. These people are not politically active, they live with their children and grandchildren, and they still vote in elections. But they are active politically, they are part of the political party and they also participate in public debates on issues of the country's history, and also to propose ideas to the government about Russia's history. The Komi people are a very different people than the rest of Russia. Mira Andrianova writes that they are also very much involved in local politics. They vote for candidates who share their views, and they participate in the local elections, and they also participate in regional and federal elections. And they also have their own political party, the "Komi Democratic Party". This political party is also active on social issues, and it tries to include the majority of people in this party, and to include women, as well as the young and the old, in the party. Mira Andrianova writes that the Komi people are very active and they are active in all political parties and organizations. In fact, in the documentary, she talks to people who are active on local politics, but there are also people who are active in the government. And she talks to people who are active in the government. The film contains some very good, interesting, and interesting people. In fact, in Komi, you can find many interesting people, including many members of the military,

Jack E. photo
Jack E.

It's the latest in a series of documentaries that will be made about Russian history. The first one was "Dvorota: The Russian Box", and this one is about a girl called Dva, who lived for the longest time in the Siberian city of Omsk. She died a few years ago, and has been buried in the city. There is a lot of interesting stuff in this one, such as a man who worked in a factory, who had died at the age of 30, but was buried next to his wife. They made a video about it. And they made a short film about the funeral of a little boy who died in the summer of 1999, and was buried next to his mother. But the most interesting thing of all is this documentary, which was made in English, and features a young man called David, who was a Russian punk band, who lived in Omsk in the 80s. It's a documentary about the band, their music and their fans, but also about David's personal life. He was in love with Dva, but he was having problems with his wife, and he was also in a relationship with a guy who had died, but he wasn't ready to leave Dva. But the most important thing about this is the footage of David and his band performing in the city. I think this is a great documentary, and a great way to show the people of Omsk.

Arthur photo
Arthur

My father is a retired Russian immigrant and an expert on Russian culture, and I've found his book "Russkaya zabijina" to be the best on the subject. I was a member of the Russian-speaking group at the University of California, Irvine, and found the discussions of this film to be insightful and educational. The group I was in included Russian speakers from various countries and also included members of the AAPI community. Most of the comments were positive, and the overall response was encouraging. If you are interested in the Russian immigrant experience in the United States, this is a must-see. I feel that the use of Russian language to relay the information is the key to understanding what the film is about. The subtitles were the best way to convey the information. The movie does show an uncomfortable fact, which is the fact that many Russians immigrate to the United States for economic reasons, and a lack of education. This is a shame. If you are unfamiliar with Russian culture, you may find the information in the film to be a little confusing. However, the film does provide a foundation for understanding and appreciate the cultures of Russia, the United States, and all the other countries. The message is clear, and the viewer will not be dissatisfied. The information is applicable to everyone regardless of language or culture. It is, in my opinion, the best film on the subject.

Theresa photo
Theresa

The film does a great job of illustrating the reasoning for each major action taken by the KGB and how it was motivated by the KGB's moral values. The film then uses this information to support the argument that the KGB is what it is because of its moral values. This is the moral of the story. The film begins with the Soviet Union's first infiltration of the U.S.S.R. through the attempts of two major KGB operations. These operations were both unsuccessful in infiltrating the U.S.S.R. but the two events were the first of many such attempts that led to the KGB's most ambitious espionage mission: the infiltration of the United States of America. The film then continues with the history of the Russian Communist Party and its links to the KGB, which were first described in the film. This information is given to the viewer and then is used to support the moral of the story. The viewer is then given some of the more humorous and inspiring quotes from the film. The film is well worth watching.

Linda M. photo
Linda M.

You know, at the time of the film's release, I had no interest in following it. I was mildly interested in the plot, but I didn't know anything about it, except the title. Now, after watching the film, I can say that this is definitely one of the best documentaries I've ever seen. I can't imagine any other film that has a more complete and informative presentation on this subject. I know that at the time of the film's release, the US government was trying to discredit the Soviet Union's program to launch an unmanned moon probe. In reality, the US was going to build its own manned lunar probe, as the Soviets were starting to build their own. However, they were never able to build a working one. The first launch failed, and the second failed too. Eventually, the Soviets launched a new probe which launched successfully. That's when it became clear that this was the Soviet Union's program. In the documentary, it says that the Soviet Union's programme was based on the American manned lunar program. I don't think so. However, it does say that the USSR's programme was based on the Canadian manned lunar project. It also says that the US had a satellite built to follow the Russian probe. However, this satellite never reached orbit. So, what was the point of this documentary? This documentary can only be seen by people who are interested in this subject. If you're interested in the subject, I highly recommend you watch this documentary. It's very informative and very entertaining. This is a great documentary that you shouldn't miss.

Eugene P. photo
Eugene P.

I really don't know how the US got so confused about the Soviet Union. After all, the film clearly shows that the Soviet Union was just a transit country in a larger global war. It is clear that the USSR was not the only Communist country in the world. I find it difficult to understand why the US would take sides with the Soviets at the end of the Cold War. The US did not even know what it was fighting in the Soviet Union. The US became the soviet Russia to begin with. If the US was even remotely concerned about the Soviets, it would have never been one of their allies. They could have simply declared that they wanted to end the cold war. In fact, it is clear that the US wanted to end the cold war as well. That is why they were trying to gain control of the former USSR. The end of the cold war should be a very popular point for the people. It is still there in the American consciousness. I think the real question is whether or not the US is the cause of the current problems. I would say that the US was not the cause of the current problems. The real problem was the Soviet Union. It was not the US that was the cause of the Soviet Union. It was the Soviet Union. To blame the US for anything is just ridiculous.

Betty Taylor photo
Betty Taylor

In the summer of 1962, a man, called "Yefrem," was subjected to a forced psychiatric examination by Soviet authorities. His physical characteristics were consistent with those of a schizophrenic, and this is very unusual for Soviet citizens. By then, he was suspected of stealing one of the country's nuclear weapons. After the examination, he was arrested and sentenced to prison. During the trial, he claimed that he was insane and that he had been persecuted by the Soviet authorities. This film attempts to document that truth, and it is a very important story. It is based on a book by Vasily Grossman, who is also the film's editor. In the movie, the director tries to show the many aspects of the psychological persecution of Yefrem. Some of the footage was produced by the Soviet cinema, such as the images of the court and the photographs of Yefrem. Some of the footage was not produced by the Soviet cinema, such as the videos that were produced in the home of Yefrem's wife. The cameraman, who was working in the Soviet cinema, describes his experiences in the court, which were sometimes disturbing and sometimes funny. One of the documentaries of this movie has been filmed by the American Film Institute, which explains the issue of the filming in the Soviet cinema, and also the film's relationship with the Soviet cinema. The film's director, Vasily Grossman, was in a different documentary film, the documentary "Truth and Lies." It was made in 1996, and it is based on a book by Roger Zelazny. This film, "Nureyev," is a film about the forced psychiatric examinations of Yefrem, and the social and psychological persecution he was subjected to during his detention. "Nureyev" is the first of three films that were made by the filmmaker. The third film, "Nureyev," was made in 1997. It was filmed by the director himself, Vasily Grossman.

Ann photo
Ann

Dr. Steven E. Joyce's documentary, "Missing from the Sewer: The Truth About the Hong Kong Slum of the 70s", is a well-crafted and well-made documentary about the biggest and most frightening problem in the world today: the sewer system. Joyce, a well-known and highly respected journalist and editor, does not just interview people about the sewers, he also interviews people about the sewers. The problems, the problems, the problems! Joyce is an experienced reporter, but in this documentary he is a journalist as well. He has a lot of interviews and he is able to get the people to talk about things that most people don't want to discuss: the sewers. Joyce shows his viewers and his subjects that the problems are widespread and that they are affecting the entire community. The documentary also gives the people a chance to speak their minds about the sewers, and the people have an opportunity to voice their opinion about the problems. This documentary also includes information about the research and a documentary about the students who work on the sewers. For example, the students of the school that Joyce was interviewing had a lot of problems with the sewage system. The students were experiencing all kinds of problems with the sewers, like the kids didn't have access to clean water, the sewage system was outdated, and the students had to live in filthy conditions. Joyce also interviews people about the problems with the sewers. The people who Joyce interviewed were from the area where Joyce was living, and they talked about their experiences with the sewer system. Joyce is able to get these people to talk about the sewer system, but at the same time, he is able to get these people to talk about things that most people don't want to talk about. This documentary is a must-see. It is highly entertaining and entertaining! The documentary has a lot of good information about the problems with the sewers, and it also includes interviews with many people from the affected area. The documentary is very well-made, and it does a great job at bringing the issues of the sewer system to the viewer. The documentary is also a very informative documentary, and it is also very well-made. The documentary is also extremely well-made and it is also very entertaining. In addition, the documentary includes some of the interviews Joyce did with people who were affected by the sewer system, and they talk about what they have been going through since the start of the documentary. This documentary is a must-see! I rate this documentary as a must-see!

Nicole photo
Nicole

I watched this movie with the hope of finding some information regarding Soviet Era and Communism. I did not find any, in fact, this movie really wasn't about Communism at all, it was about the era of kabakov (I think he was born in 1918) and his discovery of Oleg and Olegka in the former USSR. I was impressed by the director's and writers' approach to the story and I found the director's creative and artistic talent and passion for the story. I loved this movie!

Ruth photo
Ruth

The story of the Russian Communist Party in the 1930s, and their movement of communism across the world, is an incredible story. From the start, it is a look at a time and place that is often overlooked in the lives of the people of the world. The movie is not just about the party, but the whole movement. While it is an entertaining story of the people of the USSR, it is also about how they lived in a time that is so different from their lives today. It is interesting to see the political and economic aspects that drive the party, and how the communists managed to get their ideas across to the masses, but the stories of the people is also very moving, and leaves one with the feeling of real life and how so much of the world is different than what we are used to. This is a film that is well worth seeing. It is certainly not perfect, and there are some factual errors. But, as a documentary, it is a good one. I do not recommend it to anyone, and recommend it to those who want to see a more entertaining story of the USSR.

Stephanie photo
Stephanie

I'm a Russian Jew living in London. I came to this documentary to learn more about the history of the world Jewish community and to learn more about it's modern day problem. The documentary does a good job of showing the effects of the Holocaust on the modern Jewish community, but it fails to show the significance of the Holocaust on the modern Jewish community. It's a great film, but without a deeper analysis of what the Holocaust did to modern Jewish communities, the documentary is a complete failure.