Before Star Trek, William Shatner Appeared In A Cinematic Adaptation Of A Beloved Book
by Witney Seibold · /FilmAdd SlashFilm on Google:
Google Discover
We may receive a commission on purchases made from links.
There was a time in William Shatner's career, when he was still an up-and-coming young buck, that he had a propensity for the classics. At the very least, he starred in a few impressive cinematic adaptations of important Western Canon titles. One of Shatner's very first and best non-"Star Trek" projects, for instance, was Tyrone Guthrie's 1957 filmed production of Sophocles' "Oedipus Rex" (in which Shatner plays a member of the masked chorus). The script for that film was taken from William Butler Yeats' adaptation, so it possesses a modern sense of English poetry. It's a pretty great movie.
Not as celebrated, but equally ambitious, was Richard Brooks' 1958 adaptation of Fyodor Dostoevsky's "The Brothers Karamazov," in which Shatner played Alexey, the youngest of the three titular siblings. Shatner starred opposite Yul Brynner, who played Dmitri, and Richard Basehart, who played Ivan. As those of you familiar with Russian literature are no doubt aware, "The Brothers Karamazov" is one of the most studied books of the 19th Century. Indeed, it handily encapsulates Dostoevsky's many vital life philosophies as they run concurrently and/or come into conflict. Dmitri is a hard-drinking sensualist, Ivan is a cynical, intellectual atheist, and the wide-eyed young Alexey is a religious novice. You should definitely read it. I recommend the Richard Pevear/Larissa Volokhonsky translation from 1990.
Some trivia books may refer to Brooks' "The Brothers Karamazov" as Shatner's film debut, but that's not entirely accurate. It would be more correct to say that it marked Shatner's first notable leading cinematic role. He was only about 26 or 27 during production and projected the requisite innocence. He has always been a very assured performer, even if he often gets grief for his sometimes-halting line delivery (although Shatner has a reason for speaking that way).
William Shatner played Alexey in the 1958 film adaptation of The Brothers Karamazov
Before the literary purists write in angry emails, I'm aware there's a fourth Karamazov brother in the form of Pavel, the son of patriarch Fyodor and a sex worker. He's the bitter one because he is hated. In Richard Brooks' movie, Pavel is played by Albert Salmi.
Meanwhile, Fyodor is portrayed by Lee J. Cobb, who received a Best Supporting Actor Oscar nod for his efforts. Beyond that, Dmitri's fiancée, Katya, is played by Claire Bloom, and Maria Schell portrays the family matriarch, Agrafena. This was a big-time "A"-production, and it could certainly be seen as William Shatner's "big break."
Fyodor Dostoevsky's original book talks a lot about notions of faith versus atheism, of course, but also mechanistic psychology versus free will and how those things can only be revealed through connection and dialogue. This is pretty hefty stuff for a big studio film, and there's not a lot in "The Brothers Karamazov" in terms of traditional cinematic action. This may be why Brooks felt the need to change the story's main character. And that, in turn, may be why the movie overall received mixed reviews.
Per the opening credits, Brooks adapted the famous 1912 translation of "The Brothers Karamazov" by Constance Garnett. Brooks, however, added a few things to streamline the story. There's an element in the film, for instance, wherein Dmitri falls into debt with his father, but that's not in Dostoevsky's novel. Likewise, in a rewrite that might have upset Shatner, Alexey is the book's professed hero and protagonist, whereas Brooks' film makes him a bit of a supporting player. Dmitri is the real star of the movie, to match the smoldering mid-1950s star power of Yul Brynner.
What did critics think of The Brothers Karamazov?
As recounted by the AFI Catalog, Richard Brooks shifted the focus from Alexey to Dmitri for the film version of "The Brothers Karamazov" because he felt Dmitri was the more active character. He also nixed many of the original book's flashbacks as they just slowed the story down. Fyodor Dostoevsky's novel, it should be noted, is pretty hefty, and Brooks' movie is an equally bulky 145 minutes.
Critics were, as mentioned, mixed on "The Brothers Karamazov." Reviewing the film for The New York Times in 1957, Bosley Crowther was impressed by its scope but a little upset that the book's complex themes of faith had been reduced to a mere drama about debt. As he put it:
"It is mostly the matter of money — who owes what to whom and how a fellow is going to pay debts when he has run out of sources of funds — that keeps popping up throughout the drama and making folks mad and miserable."
John McCarten, writing for The New Yorker, was more critical and came away unimpressed with the movie's performances. He felt that one might better spend the film's runtime pursuing other interests and that, yes, the movie fails to reach the same philosophical highs as the book, writing:
"I think that Mr. Brooks, in addition to being saddled with actors who just can't stand up to the obligations they've assumed, never quite grapples with the ideas that Dostoevski [sic] was trying to propound."
William Shatner, meanwhile, continued to work in film and TV for the next decade before landing "Star Trek: The Original Series" and becoming a pop culture legend (one who infamously feuded with his "Star Trek" co-stars). Every actor takes the best job they can get at the time.