October is a masterfully done film, covering the history of the October Revolution. While it is still technically a silent film, its sound track attempts to sync up with the events on the screen, adding gunshots and yells where appropriate. In that sense, the film is not too different from modern day action movies, provided the audience can ignore the black/white. It is definitely much more advanced than the Dying Swan and Man With A Movie Camera. The actual film itself is a fascinating piece of history, as the title suggests. It was funded by the Soviet government in honor of the 10th anniversary of the 1917 October Revolution. That said, one can gripe about historical accuracy. The ruling class is often portrayed as completely corrupt and sluggish, while the revolutionaries as noble and just. Statues reassemble themselves and soldiers fighting for the "evil" side join the revolutionaries with pride and are welcomed with open arms. Despite this, it does show the revolution as it was portrayed to the Soviet public at the time. The scene of Lenin leading the revolutionaries has in fact become how most people imagine the moment to have happened. An interesting note is that the film did not enjoy commercial success during its time but has gone on to become a symbol of both Eisenstein's ability and the bringing of a historical epic to cinema. Since then however, it has been accepted as one of the best films of the time period. Looking at it now, I can't see why it ever wasn't viewed as a masterpiece.

I really did not enjoy this movie very much. I feel like it was purely a propaganda film that was solely geared towards the Russians at the time. Many of the scenes were very long and drug out for what seemed like an endless amount of time. Most of the time, it was difficult to figure out exactly what was going on and who was on either side. I understand that the scenes were supposed to be a little longer, but I found myself losing interest very quickly. The storming of the palace was one of the most interesting scenes though. The camera angles were different compared to other films during that time (from the ones that I have seen) and it seemed like it was really happening. Much of the film played out almost like a documentary which made the film seem more realistic. If it had been overly dramatic and with color, it may not have had the same effect on people.

This film is made in complete over look of the real events of 1928. First of all he has added in more brave, fighting parts to make his idea of the revolution good, making it very unreliable-there were no brave fighting women, they all really went hysterical and had to be protected round the back. This film has been made out of opinion not reliability and history making it unfair if viewers want a good taste of the history. Although there are parts of the story that are true but only because the look and sound perfect for his opinion. This film was made to look good like all films, not to suit reality, therefore again making unreliable and un-true. So to conclude this film uses opinion to make it look good and to make it look how he thought the revolution looked like.

The Film Oktaybr is celebrating the 10th anniversary of the Russian Revolution,If thats what you can call it. The fact is that the film is historically incorrect as it mentions how organised the Revolutionists were when actually they were very disorganised,Shambolic. The film also shows that hundreds of revolutionist ran towards the Winter Palace firing guns. I don't think so. There were actually a small handful of Bolshevik sailors moving towards the palace but certainly not hundreds. Oktaybr also shows that a lone brave sailor jumped on top of the front gates and threw a grenade over. This is completely incorrect and there is no record of this happening in any historical documents. Another thing is that the director of the film,Sergei M. Eisenstein,was shown the front gates of the Winter Palace where the storming took place but decided that it was not big enough for him to film and therefore chose to shoot the storming elsewhere. Therefore I feel that Oktyabr is historically incorrect and should not be classed as a good version of the Russian revolution because of how fictional it is.