|
|
Rating:  - Shadow and light as stars
Eisenstein's "Ivan the Terrible" is a visual experience not to be missed. The acting's not anything to write home about. Nikolai Cherkasov's portrayal of Ivan is so overdone that his extravagant gestures remind one of the silent film variety. Nor is the script a particularly good one. The two parts of the film are a bit disjointed.
But what IS excellent is the cinematography. It's not wide of the mark to say that the real stars of the film are the shadows and light. In this first part, we get a breathtaking preview of just what Eisenstein is capable of in the scene of the poisoned tsarina's funeral bier. Ivan's profile is situated in front of candlesticks in such a way as to suggest not only incredible loneliness but also destiny. We also see glimmers of the huge shadows cast by tiny humans trick that will dominate the second part. It's all really quite incredible.
Plot-wise, the first part of "Ivan the Terrible" sets the stage for Ivan's on-going power struggle with the boyars, the traditional aristocracy. It begins at his coronation, details the connivances of the boyars, led by Ivan's own aunt (a character that is especially one-dimensional), features Ivan's war against the Kazars, and crescendos with the poisoning of his beloved wife Anastasia. The emphasis throughout is the need for strong centralized leadership if the Russian Empire is to be saved from enemies east and west. Stalin loved it.
Rating: - IVAN THE WONDERFUL I
Despite having been produced over 60 years ago, IVAN THE TERRIBLE remains one of the most bizarre and compelling movies ever made. It is filmed in an ultra-expressionist style, despite the fact that expressionism had long passed its heyday in the 1920's and early 30's. Nonetheless, the style fits this almost gothic film perfectly. Religious and other symbols of power and authority are exaggerated, transformed into grotesques. The powerless peasantry, mired in the darkest ignorance, is presented as a frightening presence of menace, ever lurking in the background, waiting to be harnessed by the next tyrant. Ivan himself is depicted as an elongated, Nosferatu-type character with a moral compass so convoluted as to be nonexistent. The mixing of "song & dance numbers" under the most monstrous circumstances toward the end of Part II only enhances the mesmerizing quality of the film. It is said that Stalin attempted to pressure the director to make this masterpiece more "Stalinist friendly," but that the filmmaker courageously refused. Unfortunately almost all other films made during the Stalinist Era reflect the justifiably maligned, dreary style called "socialist realism."
[...]
Rating: - Light and Shadow
The movies "Ivan the Terrible" numbers 1 and 2 are a facinating example of the use of light and shadow which serves to enhance these stories of royal intrigue. I'm not well versed on Russian history so I don't know how much of the events described in these movies are facts and how much are Stanlinist revision. It was clear that the impact of the movies were designed to rally the besieged Russian people during the disaster that was WWII on the Eastern Front. The fact that the Russians prevailed didn't undo the catastrophic damage that was done to them. One might question how minimal that was compared to the death and societal destruction that Stalin wrought in the years leading up to the War. However, I digress from the movies themselves.
Not to pick on a master of the art of cinema, but there was one shortcoming to the two movies. Except for a battle scene in the first movie, the rest of the film was indoors. Given that the theme was the unification of Russia, it was a shame that we saw so little of it. I understand that the war had something to do with the available locations. However, it seemed odd to watch a tsar of Russia who appeared to be confined to a castle. It makes you wonder how all this unification happened if Ivan depended totally on others to go out and get things done.
What is great about these movies is the camera and lighting that I mentioned earlier (but it outstanding enough to mention again). I was also impressed by the meter of the dialogue. I kept looking for signs that the film had been slowed down somehow because there was always ample time to read the English subtitles. Eisenstein, who excelled in the silent movie era, used his dialogue effectively without overdoing it. There is a darkness to these movie (another plug on the excellent use of lighting) that excellently complements the events that are depicted. The two movies are similar to each other and it's a pity that the third installment never came to be. However, parts 1 and 2 are excellent examples of how the visual can amplify the audio.
Rating: - The genius always finds an exit door despite the struggling iron fist!
The art is always irreverent and doesn't know about previous imposed rules. What Stalin initially considered as striking propaganda device under his absolutist, oppressive, abrasive and despotic Regime, was employed by the irreverent Eisenstein as epic saga, but that increasingly derivates what so many times has been said for many heralds before him (Shakespeare, for instance) about the irreversible and dramatic final destiny of all repressive government, so well stated by Saint Just: "The power corrupts; and the politic power corrupts absolutely."
One of the universal patrimonies of the cinema!
Rating: - Epic in the Grand Manner
More Operatic in style and performance than traditional film, with a simplistic manner of narrative, yet Ivan The Terrible remains a masterpiece of the Cinema, and Ivan an unforgettable character. Astonishing images abound, theatrical sets and lighting, superb costumes, a grand yet gothic sense prevades this picture. The very eye movements of the cast's remarkable faces convey much of the underlying tension and conflict. Perhaps not to everyone's taste, but well worth the effort of finding out.
|
|