Reviews (3)

Not for everyone
Right off the bat, it needs to be said that this is the older DVD version, not the new remastered Criterion Collection version. There are no extras in this DVD version by Image. The subtitles are black and white, and are difficult to read against the black-and-white film sequences. The excellent score by Prokofiev is tinny. The soundtrack was recorded in PCM, essentially a WAV file, which will not play on many older DVD players. The transition between the black and white sequences and the color sequences is not as smooth as it could be. The difference between the Image version and the Criterion version is one of quality and content, and price. The Criterion version comes as part of a boxed set, which is pricey if you already own Alexander Nevsky and/or Ivan Part I. If you don't already own Alexander Nevsky and/or Ivan I, the Criterion version is the way to go. If you do own it, then you have to decide whether to purchase the Image version and spend less money, or to replicate part of your film library with the 3 disk set from Criterion.

As to the virtues of this Eisenstein compared to other Eisenstein films or all other films, the pacing will be too slow and the posed acting will be too melodramatic for most American audiences raised on modern action flicks. Film lovers will get more out of it, however, because most of them will have the background to appreciate the preservation of the silent film acting style with all its posing, stance, pregnant pauses and charactured good guy/bad guy visual "leitmotifs." The historical background of the film will be missed by your average modern western audience, who would probably fail to sort the propagandizing of Soviet filmmaking from the dramatic touches and historical details. Overall, this is worthy film to watch because of its historical value, insight into the Soviet "social realism" school, hand-in-glove Prokofiev score and brilliant cinematography. The set-up for the final murder and the murder scene itself are great cinema, achieving the pacing and suspense that seem lacking in the first half of the film. Even though you know what is going to happen, the resolution is still satisfying and surprising. If anything, see this film for that. My three stars are really to rate this DVD version because of its tinny and grainy quality and hard-to-read subtitles. Better to spend you money to get the Criterion boxed set instead, even if you do end up replicating one or more Eisenstein's which you may already own.

The (Russian) Empire Strikes Back
Yes, the acting does seem a bit forced and overly melodramatic. Yes, the raised eyebrows and evil grins may provoke laughter instead of fear in an audience. Each character is easily identified as belonging to a certain type which is made clear through exaggerated gestures and the like.

What captivated this viewer was Eisenstein's use of shadows and surprise transition from black and white film to color during the banquest (ultimately returning to black and white). The sudden shift can seem odd but upon reflection the change does fit the scene.

Prokofiev's score also contributed to the overall viewing experience. A modernist polonaise while presenting the Polish king on screen was altogether appropriate.

The film can seem slow moving at times to an audience raised on fast moving action adventures. While watching scenes with the Oprichiki (secret police) I could not help but wonder if George Lucas was inspired by such imagery. Similar comments can be made about Eisenstein's "Alexander Nevsky" and its possible influence on Star Wars.

One minor complaint about this edition-- the subtitles were in white and given black and white film this makes for a difficult reading situation at times.

Worth at least renting
If you are interested in the history, check this movie out. The subs aren't exactly great, but it lets you know what's going on. ... Read more

Reviews (8)

Superb Eisentein film
During World War II, with Russia in the grip of Stalin and with Hitler at its door, the greatest Russian director of his day, and perhaps ever, joined the greatest Russian actor of his day, to depict the dark and brooding story of the rise and fall of a ruthless Russian Tsar who tyrannized Russia during the 1500s. While the story hardly amounts to movie uplift, the joy and fascination here lies in the details. Straightaway, in episode one, there is perhaps the most amazing movie opening ever filmed, in the coronation of Ivan the Terrible. Those familiar with Theodor Dreyer's "Passion of Joan of Arc" in 1928 will appreciate what fascination can lie in watching the camera cut skillfully from one grotesque image to another in endlessly imaginative ways, almost as if the gargoyles themselves were about to speak. The fascinating imagery proceeds non-stop from there, in the hands of master craftsman and director Sergei Eisenstein, like a medieval masterpiece come to life, though the later segment (part two) did not quite rise to the exceptional quality of part one. A taste of the high production standards is gleaned from a musical score composed by the great classicist Sergei Prokofiev. A very, very Russian production -- dark and grim, but full of amazing levels of interest, just the kind of production spoofed by Woody Allen years later in "Love and Death." Not necessarily to everybody's taste, but a great treat for connoisseurs.

Eisenstein's best sound movie
This is a DVD that you can watch over and over again. I rented it a long time ago and really liked it, so I bought the DVD. The cinematography, the acting and Prokifiev's score are all amazing.

The Michelangelo of Cinema
For Westerners Ivan the Terrible is in the same mental pocket as such unlovely characters as Rasputin, Vlad the Impaler, and even Joseph Stalin. Although he definitely had a brutal and bloodthirsty side and looked rather creepy, he was also one of RussiaÕ's greatest statesmen (probably because he was so brutal and bloodthirsty and looked so creepy!).

Although depicting the achievements of a Tsar, this film got the go-ahead from the Communist authorities because Comrade Stalin identified with the central character and wanted to encourage patriotism. Eisenstein's ambivalent treatment of the nature of power in Part 2, however, offended Stalin who withdrew persmission to complete what was originally intended to be a trilogy

The two films that we have were made in the aftermath of the defeat of the German invasion as the Russian armies rolled West rather as they had rolled East in Ivan's day when Kazan and Astrakhan had fallen to the rising power of the Russian state.

When I first saw this film, it was a little like the first time I heard "Riders on the Storm" by the Doors: it just completely STOOD OUT from everything else on TV and in the cinema. I was immediately impressed by its intensity and uniqueness.

Every shot and scene are powerfully stylised, every statement emphasised and dramatised. Watching this, you realize how bland, wishy-washy, and sloppy most movies are by comparision. Artistic energy and craftsmanship are never absent for a moment. Nothing is left to chance, nothing is wasted; everything is touched by the central guiding genius. It is dense and muscular, and tense. The scenes have the same gravity and power as the scuptures and paintings of the great Michelangelo.

Some people might be amazed that such artistic heights were reached under a Communist system that repressed free expression, but here in the West we also have our own form of repression, perhaps even more insidious than the whims and dictates of Comrade Stalin. I refer to the pressure of making a buck! This was one pressure that Michelangelo didn't have when the Pope commissioned him to paint the Cistine Chapel, or Eisenstein when Stalin allowed him to make the first two great parts of this triology.

Eisenstein's Best
I've seen most of Eisenstein's films and Ivan the Terrible (1,2) is his best. The film is entirely based on history but focuses on the nature of power and the figure of Ivan. Ivan is portrayed in differnt ways. At first he is heroic and made to look like the victim of more evil people than himself. In the second part he struggles to understand himsself and is plagued by self doubt. He's very much like Hamlet in fact. The acting by the extremely tall Cherkasov is just slightly over the top but it suits the Shakesperean quality of the story.. Eisenstein experimented with sevarl techniques to accent the sensation of power and evil that sorrounded Ivan and the murdfer scene in the Cathedral is the culmination. The film was to have featured a third part but Stalin cut the project short, due to the critical character of power that the film had taken on in the 2nd part. It's not for everyone, but for students ot those interested ion the psychological effects of power and dicataors everywhere it's excellent.

a classic of avant-garde !
In this film you can find the utmost blend of a historical narrative and formal experiences. The ambivalent figure of Ivan lead us to contemplate the very nature of power. ... Read more

Description

The monumental final work of cinematic giant Sergei Eisenstein, Ivan the Terrible chronicles the life of Czar Ivan the IV, who unified Russia in the 16th century.In part one of this larger-than-life, meticulously detailed two-part epic, Ivan ruthlessly extends his empire by wresting power from a corrupt aristocracy and conquering neighboring enemies.Eisenstein's arresting imagery adds near-operatic grandeur to Ivan's lavish coronation, his destruction of the Tartar city of Kazan, his self-imposed abdication in response to court treachery and his return to the throne at the request of the common people --all set to a magnificent score by Prokofiev.Stalin himself loved this triumphant treatment of his personal favorite Czar.He was considerably less pleased with part two, which daringly implied criticism of Ivan's later abuses of power and struggles with his own conscience. ... Read more

Reviews (8)

Superb Eisentein film
During World War II, with Russia in the grip of Stalin and with Hitler at its door, the greatest Russian director of his day, and perhaps ever, joined the greatest Russian actor of his day, to depict the dark and brooding story of the rise and fall of a ruthless Russian Tsar who tyrannized Russia during the 1500s. While the story hardly amounts to movie uplift, the joy and fascination here lies in the details. Straightaway, in episode one, there is perhaps the most amazing movie opening ever filmed, in the coronation of Ivan the Terrible. Those familiar with Theodor Dreyer's "Passion of Joan of Arc" in 1928 will appreciate what fascination can lie in watching the camera cut skillfully from one grotesque image to another in endlessly imaginative ways, almost as if the gargoyles themselves were about to speak. The fascinating imagery proceeds non-stop from there, in the hands of master craftsman and director Sergei Eisenstein, like a medieval masterpiece come to life, though the later segment (part two) did not quite rise to the exceptional quality of part one. A taste of the high production standards is gleaned from a musical score composed by the great classicist Sergei Prokofiev. A very, very Russian production -- dark and grim, but full of amazing levels of interest, just the kind of production spoofed by Woody Allen years later in "Love and Death." Not necessarily to everybody's taste, but a great treat for connoisseurs.

Eisenstein's best sound movie
This is a DVD that you can watch over and over again. I rented it a long time ago and really liked it, so I bought the DVD. The cinematography, the acting and Prokifiev's score are all amazing.

The Michelangelo of Cinema
For Westerners Ivan the Terrible is in the same mental pocket as such unlovely characters as Rasputin, Vlad the Impaler, and even Joseph Stalin. Although he definitely had a brutal and bloodthirsty side and looked rather creepy, he was also one of RussiaÕ's greatest statesmen (probably because he was so brutal and bloodthirsty and looked so creepy!).

Although depicting the achievements of a Tsar, this film got the go-ahead from the Communist authorities because Comrade Stalin identified with the central character and wanted to encourage patriotism. Eisenstein's ambivalent treatment of the nature of power in Part 2, however, offended Stalin who withdrew persmission to complete what was originally intended to be a trilogy

The two films that we have were made in the aftermath of the defeat of the German invasion as the Russian armies rolled West rather as they had rolled East in Ivan's day when Kazan and Astrakhan had fallen to the rising power of the Russian state.

When I first saw this film, it was a little like the first time I heard "Riders on the Storm" by the Doors: it just completely STOOD OUT from everything else on TV and in the cinema. I was immediately impressed by its intensity and uniqueness.

Every shot and scene are powerfully stylised, every statement emphasised and dramatised. Watching this, you realize how bland, wishy-washy, and sloppy most movies are by comparision. Artistic energy and craftsmanship are never absent for a moment. Nothing is left to chance, nothing is wasted; everything is touched by the central guiding genius. It is dense and muscular, and tense. The scenes have the same gravity and power as the scuptures and paintings of the great Michelangelo.

Some people might be amazed that such artistic heights were reached under a Communist system that repressed free expression, but here in the West we also have our own form of repression, perhaps even more insidious than the whims and dictates of Comrade Stalin. I refer to the pressure of making a buck! This was one pressure that Michelangelo didn't have when the Pope commissioned him to paint the Cistine Chapel, or Eisenstein when Stalin allowed him to make the first two great parts of this triology.

Eisenstein's Best
I've seen most of Eisenstein's films and Ivan the Terrible (1,2) is his best. The film is entirely based on history but focuses on the nature of power and the figure of Ivan. Ivan is portrayed in differnt ways. At first he is heroic and made to look like the victim of more evil people than himself. In the second part he struggles to understand himsself and is plagued by self doubt. He's very much like Hamlet in fact. The acting by the extremely tall Cherkasov is just slightly over the top but it suits the Shakesperean quality of the story.. Eisenstein experimented with sevarl techniques to accent the sensation of power and evil that sorrounded Ivan and the murdfer scene in the Cathedral is the culmination. The film was to have featured a third part but Stalin cut the project short, due to the critical character of power that the film had taken on in the 2nd part. It's not for everyone, but for students ot those interested ion the psychological effects of power and dicataors everywhere it's excellent.

a classic of avant-garde !
In this film you can find the utmost blend of a historical narrative and formal experiences. The ambivalent figure of Ivan lead us to contemplate the very nature of power. ... Read more

Description

Part 1
In part one of cinematic giant Sergei Eisenstein's larger-than-life epic, Czar Ivan IV battles corrupt aristocracy, conquers neighboring enemies and abdicates in response to court treachery only to return to the throne in triumph.A classic Prokofiev score matches Eisenstein's operatic imagery.

Part 2
After winning the favor of Stalin with part one of this larger-than-life epic about the life of Czar Ivan the IV, cinematic giant Sergei Eisenstein drew the dictator's wrath with this dramatic conclusion, which dares to portray Ivan as an indecisive leader who resorts to summary executions to save his throne.
... Read more

Reviews (1)

Eisenstein the extraordinary
Joseph Stalin was a smart old monster, and when he saw the second part of Sergei Eisenstein's "Ivan the Terrible" he must have thought: "Hm, paranoia ... secret police ... pogroms ... you don't suppose ...?" He had the film confiscated, and it was not shown publicly until 1958, five years after the great dictator's death and ten years after the great director's. Part I of the epic had pleased the man of steel, but in that film Ivan is presented as an idealist who wants to make Russia a world power and must fight corrupt Boyars to achieve his noble aims. A planned Part III was never accomplished, and one can only wonder how the Kremlin would have dealt with it: after the age of 40 Ivan IV became increasingly erratic, killing his own son in a fit of pique. As long as Eisenstein's spectacle depicted the Tsar agonizing over Mother Russia everything was fine; but once the mock trials and mass executions began, the 16th Century began looking suspiciously contemporary. (In one scene, Ivan is shown sending an envoy to Elizabeth I of England, who must have thought of Ivan the way FDR thought of Stalin.) The movie's plot is a somewhat fictionalized account of Ivan's struggle with an ambitious aunt and his forming of the oprichnina, a protective cadre of husky young men. Behind all this, according to Eisenstein's biographers, was a difficult relationship with his mother and his sexual frustration. I think "Ivan the Terrible" is one of the most fascinating films ever made, but I have to be honest: it takes a little getting use to. The sets and costumes are extremely ornate, sometimes quite bizarre; and Prokofiev's glamorous score seems slightly disassociated from the action. But strangest of all is the acting, which must have baffled Eisenstein's admirers, remembering the almost documentary style of 1925's "The Battleship Potemkin". Eisenstein had been directing a production of "Die Walküre" at the Bolshoi, and the acting in "Ivan" is blatantly operatic: silent-screen swooning and bug-eyed staring. All this can bewilder you or bewitch you. With me, it's the latter, which is why I'm glad that Home Vision's new video is such an improvement over the old cassette I had. The visuals are crisp and clear, showing Edward Tissé's classic, carefully-composed black-and-white frames at their elegant best. Much has been written regarding the quality of the color in the frenetic, joyless banquet sequence. Granted, this is not exactly a Fox musical; but I find the effects striking, especially when poor Vladimir literally turns green. And you can READ the subtitles because they have been electronically enhanced. The translation also seems to have been improved, making situations and relationships easier to understand. A single typo ("fiend" for "friend") can be forgiven. Altogether, this is a superior presentation of an artistic work that is demanding but ultimately rewarding. ... Read more

Reviews (9)

A fascinating look at an era and style
Surprisingly watchable, for a silent film, and very well preserved. The Constructivist sets and costumes are amazing, a revolutionary art style before the later supression of expression and innovation in the Soviet Union (this film was later banned by Stalinist critics). Even the images of life on Earth, in the early days of that nation, are quite interesting.

Hokum - made in Russia!
Aelita is a spectacular failure. Made to compete with the great productions from Germany and USA, it was the Leviathan of Russian silent movies; hyper-expensive and long in the making.

It became the victim of a critical backlash (too much capitalist wishy-washying) and was quietly withdrawn from circulation soon after its bombastic premiere opening, featuring larger-than-life models of Aelita's characters outside the cinemas and advance hype of the highest order.

Soon even the rumour of it faded into obscurity, yet some remembered. The Soviet State Film archives didn't destroy the negative (apparently, they have preserved everything, however subversive!) Aelita was still mentioned fleetingly during the years (John Grierson tried to aquire a copy) but not until Glasnost was it released to new audiences. And now it's on DVD.

This is a film you will want to see just once. Oh, you can probably return to it and watch individual scenes, but I myself wouldn't ever want to see the entire film again. It's badly directed and the story is complete hokum. The special effects are perfunctory. Just take a peek at that lens or telescope the Martians use to watch life on earth. Whoever conceived that one? When Aelita looks into the telescope, it's from a distance of 50cm from the ocular, which means she can't see anything at all. The space-ship looks like a pot bellied boiler from the Titanic.
I've seen much better effects in other films from the 20ies.

The planet Mars, however, is imaginatively rendered and the costumes and make-up are a sight to behold! Check out those hair-dos!

The scenes from earth are interesting. Not for the melodramatic story, but the social aspect of it. Post-revolutionary Soviet had great housing and food supply problems and this features strongly in Aelita. If only they had got rid of that terrible counter-revolutionary villain and his obnoxious wife, Aelita would have been so much better.

Buy it only if you want to support the release of old silents on DVD, or is an avid collector of all things rare and silent.

Commies on Mars!
An early piece of science fiction cinema, Aelita is an interesting gem of a movie. It is from the silent era and will probably not gain a lot of followers from those raised on the big budget productions common from Hollywood today. It was made in Russia in 1924 and is little more than Marxist propaganda, however, as a piece of science fiction and cinema history, it is of interest.

The movie starts with radios around the world receiving a mysterious transmission. It is decided that the signal is from Mars (for no apparent reason), and a Russian scientist (Loss) decides that he will build a spaceship to travel there. (Title card: ?[Loss] works all night to construct a spaceship to take him there?!) Meanwhile, Aelita, the queen of Mars, uses a viewing device to watch the people of Earth. She sees Loss and falls madly in love with him (so much for long courtship). At the same time, we are shown the struggles of the Soviet people in the early days of Communism and a group of conspirators who prey upon the simple hardworking Soviet citizens. One of these conspirators tries to seduce Loss? wife over to the ways of the old (capitalist) society. Loss becomes enraged when he believes that his wife has cheated on him and kills her. He must now use his rocketship to escape from the law. He takes off in his craft with a Soviet soldier, Gussev, as his traveling companion (a police detective in pursuit of Loss also stows away). When they arrive on Mars, they find that the rulers there (including Aelita) are tyrants that enslave and torture the common people. Led by Gussev, the people stage a revolt to put down the tyrants and establish a socialist society on Mars. Loss kills Aelita then awakens to find that it was all a dream and that he had never traveled to Mars and that he had never shot his wife. He discovers that she did not really cheat on him and the two are reunited.

The movie is essentially a Marxist parable. It shows people who have lost faith in the ideals of the revolution but eventually are swayed back to the side of socialism. In this sense, it a less of a cinematic feature and more of a propaganda tool. It is an interesting piece of movie history though. It is an early attempt at science fiction and an interesting window into the nascent Soviet Republic. The special effects are so-so, but hey, this was made in 1924. The cubist imagery used to depict the Martian society is fascinating. And the spacecraft used to travel to Mars is actually based on sound scientific principles. It is a liquid fuel propelled rocket, though it is bloated and unwieldy in appearance. Tracking in at almost two hours (111 minutes), the movie is daunting at times even for the most dedicated of viewers. But still I would say it is worth the effort for sci fi and movie historians.

Unfortunately, the DVD version contains no additional features. It would have been interesting to see some information on early Russian cinema.

Marxist ethics on Mars
Aelita, Queen of Mars is certainly a gem of a movie. Made in 1924, it is a look at how Communist philosophy plays out in speculative fiction during the silent era. Purportedly, it was made on a fantastic budget, and the sets on Mars show it. The costuming for the Martian aristocrats concerns styles that were non-existent at the time, and seem to have arrived out of the 50's American Sci-Fi films. The Martian sets were indeed, outlandish and worth getting the DVD just to see.
The story is slightly weak, attempting to cover too much ground and too many genres for the amount of time presented. However, it does not detract from the important historic value of the picture and the simple enjoyment of watching the tale unfold.
The film displays the humorous exploits of the Bourgeoise Zie, and the stark poverty the Proletariat suffered in 1924 Russia.
In a way, this film could be an equal criticism of both. It takes an inordinately long time for the main character to reach Mars, although Mars is shown throughout the film, following Aelita, queen of Mars as she goes about.
The DVD has no special features worthy of note. The average scene selection and nothing else, but the restoration work is excellent, keeping true to even the few parts of the film that were intended to be poor quality. It is truly a film worthy of being presented on DVD.

AELITA - QUEEN OF MARS!
No, this is not some sort of 1950's space babe film! AELITA is a science-fiction SILENT film from the early days of SOVIET cinema! REALLY! The FUTURISTIC SETS here rival those of "Metropolis" (which was made three years later)! The story is quite simple! An engineer in Moscow builds a SPACESHIP to travel to MARS so he can meet the GIRL of his dreams! Of course, once he gets there, instead of romance, he becomes involved in a REBELLION by the PROLETARIATE! Are you really surprised? This is a SOVIET film from 1924! Almost TWO HOURS long! Directed by Yakov Protazenov! A FASCINATING film! This DVD also features an ORCHESTRAL score! So none of that organ music nonsense for this film! ... Read more

Description

The monumental final work of cinematic giant Sergei Eisenstein, Ivan the Terrible chronicles the life of Czar Ivan the IV, who unified Russia in the 16th century. ... Read more

Reviews (3)

Not for everyone
Right off the bat, it needs to be said that this is the older DVD version, not the new remastered Criterion Collection version. There are no extras in this DVD version by Image. The subtitles are black and white, and are difficult to read against the black-and-white film sequences. The excellent score by Prokofiev is tinny. The soundtrack was recorded in PCM, essentially a WAV file, which will not play on many older DVD players. The transition between the black and white sequences and the color sequences is not as smooth as it could be. The difference between the Image version and the Criterion version is one of quality and content, and price. The Criterion version comes as part of a boxed set, which is pricey if you already own Alexander Nevsky and/or Ivan Part I. If you don't already own Alexander Nevsky and/or Ivan I, the Criterion version is the way to go. If you do own it, then you have to decide whether to purchase the Image version and spend less money, or to replicate part of your film library with the 3 disk set from Criterion.

As to the virtues of this Eisenstein compared to other Eisenstein films or all other films, the pacing will be too slow and the posed acting will be too melodramatic for most American audiences raised on modern action flicks. Film lovers will get more out of it, however, because most of them will have the background to appreciate the preservation of the silent film acting style with all its posing, stance, pregnant pauses and charactured good guy/bad guy visual "leitmotifs." The historical background of the film will be missed by your average modern western audience, who would probably fail to sort the propagandizing of Soviet filmmaking from the dramatic touches and historical details. Overall, this is worthy film to watch because of its historical value, insight into the Soviet "social realism" school, hand-in-glove Prokofiev score and brilliant cinematography. The set-up for the final murder and the murder scene itself are great cinema, achieving the pacing and suspense that seem lacking in the first half of the film. Even though you know what is going to happen, the resolution is still satisfying and surprising. If anything, see this film for that. My three stars are really to rate this DVD version because of its tinny and grainy quality and hard-to-read subtitles. Better to spend you money to get the Criterion boxed set instead, even if you do end up replicating one or more Eisenstein's which you may already own.

The (Russian) Empire Strikes Back
Yes, the acting does seem a bit forced and overly melodramatic. Yes, the raised eyebrows and evil grins may provoke laughter instead of fear in an audience. Each character is easily identified as belonging to a certain type which is made clear through exaggerated gestures and the like.

What captivated this viewer was Eisenstein's use of shadows and surprise transition from black and white film to color during the banquest (ultimately returning to black and white). The sudden shift can seem odd but upon reflection the change does fit the scene.

Prokofiev's score also contributed to the overall viewing experience. A modernist polonaise while presenting the Polish king on screen was altogether appropriate.

The film can seem slow moving at times to an audience raised on fast moving action adventures. While watching scenes with the Oprichiki (secret police) I could not help but wonder if George Lucas was inspired by such imagery. Similar comments can be made about Eisenstein's "Alexander Nevsky" and its possible influence on Star Wars.

One minor complaint about this edition-- the subtitles were in white and given black and white film this makes for a difficult reading situation at times.

Worth at least renting
If you are interested in the history, check this movie out. The subs aren't exactly great, but it lets you know what's going on. ... Read more