Ivan The Terrible parts I & II

[Johann]

I own the crucial Criterion set Eisenstein: The Sound Years, which has the above mentioned film restored to it's full glory.
Peter Greenaway accurately said 'this is grand, operatic cinema". Sumptuous sets & costumes, beautiful tones, and acting of pantomime surreality take you to a very intriguing Russia indeed.

I don't like to describe what happens in films too much when I post about them. I just like to generally say my thoughts, and for this film, just see the damn thing. If you are oblivious to Eisenstein (and God help you if you are) then find this film and make sure you have lots of time to get into it. (It's long)
It may bore you, fascinate you, irritate you or inspire you. What it will not do is leave you indifferent.

"Ivan" reaches for a place in cinema history few directors would even dream. I schedule time for it every month, and you should too.
Thank you , from Ma Johann.

[oscar jubis]

I knew that I had to own this film but the price was prohibitive. I found a way by buying the russian import dvd that puts the Criterion transfers of both parts into one disc sans extra features. It cost me $18.50.
I was fascinated with Ivan The Terrible. The film features Eisenstein's characteristic frequent cuts, static camera, and precise framing. Particularly perceptive of Johann to include Greenaway's quote as the movie is closer to opera than any other art form. There's a contingent of filmgoers, wedded to realism, for whom the acting and stylization of IVT are insufferable. The rest of us can luxuriate in this odd confection and appreciate its vast influence on generations of filmmakers.

[wpqx]

I always prefered Eisenstein the silent years myself (Still waiting for that Criterion set). As for Ivan the Terrible, I didn't think that the second stood up as well, and what was with that whole color sequence, it just didn't seem to be necessary? I did admire the maturity of Eisenstein the director, who had evolved far beyond the limited world of montage. He moves the camera, and shoots with an enormous amount of style and of course great deep focus photography. Again for those ignorant of his work check these out

1. Strike (1925)
2. Battleship Potemkin (1925)
3. October/Ten Days that Shook the World (1928)
4. The General Line/Old and New (1929) - unfortunately this is his hardest film to find, and ironically I think it is his best. I admire Potemkin quite a bit, but it seems too cliche to site it as his best. The film has been overanalyzed and it is slightly overrated, at least not worth Sight and Sound status, six times no less.

[oscar jubis]

Big fan of Potemkin and the Sound Films. The General Line is as important to me as any film I haven't watched. What is it about it that makes you like it so?

[Johann]

October has eclipsed Ivan for me as the best Eisenstein.

Ivan The Terrible is a regal work of art, and those shots of slow turns by Nikolai Cherkassov are pure cinema. Kubrick used those slow turns as inspiration for Eyes Wide Shut- remember those masked figures up in the balcony at the mansion? Directly from Eisenstein. The acting is a little wooden, but who cares? Nobody makes films like that anymore.

Potemkin is incredible, but like Gance's Napoleon it's fairly crude. Gance, Griffith and Eisenstein can be forgiven- they were pioneering the medium. The fact that these silents still hold up after all these years is a miracle.

There is a lost silent film from 1915 about the Titanic. I heard it had footage of the lifeboats being picked up by the Carpathia, had footage of the survivors' arrival in New York & had scenes from the inquiry. Now THAT is a lost film. Not to mention all the films of Theda Bara- The Vamp- she only has one film on DVD (Kino): A Fool There Was.