"Ïvan the Terrible" (1944 and 1958) was made in the second part of the career of Sergeij Eisenstein. It was no longer the Eisenstein of the revolutionary movies ("Battleship Potemkin" (1925) and "Oktober" (1927)) with associative montage and short cuts. It was the Eisentein of historical drama's ("Alexander Nevski" (1938 and "Ivan the Terrible" (1944 & 1958)) with clearly noticable influences of German expressionism and long takes. Mainly due to the beautiful music of Sergei Prokofiev the movie takes on elements of a Wagnerian opera.
In part 2 of the film Ivan, maybe because of the death of his wife, becomes ever more suspicious and cruel. Stalin liked this part of the movie a lot less than the first part. Probably he recognized too much of himself in the character of Ivan and was afraid the moviegoer would make the same connection. Whatever it may be, the film was banished in Russia until 1958, 10 years after the death of Eisenstein and 5 years after the death of Stalin.
Ivan the Terrible, Part II: The Boyars' Plot
1958 [RUSSIAN]
Action / Biography / Drama / History
Plot summary
This is the second part of a projected three-part epic biopic of Russian Czar Ivan Grozny, undertaken by Soviet film-maker Sergei Eisenstein at the behest of Josef Stalin. Production of the epic was stopped before the third part could be filmed, due to producer dissatisfaction with Eisenstein's introducing forbidden experimental filming techniques into the material, more evident in this part than the first part. As it was, this second part was banned from showings until after the deaths of both Eisenstein and Stalin, and a change of attitude by the subsequent heads of the Soviet government. In this part, as Ivan the Terrible attempts to consolidate his power by establishing a personal army, his political rivals, the Russian boyars, plot to assassinate him.
Uploaded by: FREEMAN
September 30, 2019 at 06:36 AM
Director
Top cast
Tech specs
720p.BLU 1080p.BLUMovie Reviews
The part of Ivan the Terrible that Stalin did not like
"Truly, what pleasure is it to be Tsar?"
The second in what should have been a trilogy, Ivan the Terrible Part 2 follows on from Part I not only in story but in style. Eisenstein approached the Ivan the Terrible films from a traditional theatrical angle appropriate to the subject matter. As others have commented, this was his equivalent of a Shakespeare adaptation.
If anything, Part 2 is even more baroque and stylised than its predecessor. The opening scene the defection of Kurbsky - is Eisenstein at his most operatic, with exaggerated acting that flows along with Prokofiev's score. But it's totally cinematic too, with spot on editing between facial close-ups, giving us an impression of the allegiances and hidden thoughts at play here. Eisenstein never really stopped thinking like a director of silents, and although the Ivan films are quite wordy they can be read and understood purely as visuals.
The first scene is also the lightest and happiest, which seems unusual after all it's a scene in which Ivan's best friend is betraying him and going over to join his enemy but in the context of the whole picture perhaps it's not that strange. While Ivan the Terrible Part 1 was a great study of the power of a charismatic individual, part 2 focuses more on the loneliness and insecurity of a powerful figure. The majority of part 2 is incredibly dark and eerie, full of disturbing imagery. Ivan is ageing, he's widowed and he trusts no-one. Eisenstein still makes him vaguely sympathetic, but more as a tragic figure than a conquering hero. So it makes sense for Kurbsky's betrayal to be so bright and jaunty this is the world Ivan has lost. Of course, it's fairly likely that Eisenstein was himself feeling stifled by the Soviet regime, and perhaps the subtext here is that he secretly longed to do a Kurbsky himself!
Part 2 includes a short colour sequence in the film's climax. This serves to show off a hypnotic dance routine, a magnificent set piece which forms a backdrop to Ivan's final act of retribution against his enemies. The picture quality is terrible here (No Technicolor in the USSR!), even worse than early two-strip Technicolor. It's very fuzzy, and only the blues and reds show up boldly. Eisenstein takes this on board however, and uses red and blue to create a "hot" and "cold" look respectively, using the two colours as he used light and dark in monochrome.
Although they are very similar, I prefer part 2 somewhat to part 1. Whereas part 1 was more a collection of episodes, part 2 is a more complete, singular story. As a little side point, Ivan the Terrible part 2 should perhaps be classed as a musical. There are several musical numbers, two are in the context of the film, but the other is a genuine case of a character bursting into song, like a medieval Russian Julie Andrews. And why not? The musical is a cousin of the opera, and the border between opera and cinema is incredibly close in this picture.
Sadly, this picture was banned by the soviet state and part 3 (which was already in production) was axed. Purportedly this was because the highlighting of Ivan's iron rule and his use of spies and secret police was thought to be an attack on Stalin's government, although I think the real reason might have been more personal. Stalin looked upon Ivan as a role model, and may have taken offence at the portrayal of the Tsar as a paranoid, decrepit old man (Like Disney, Eisenstein often drew upon animal characteristics; some have compared the middle-aged Ivan to Disney's Big Bad Wolf, although I've always thought of him as looking more like a vulture). Whatever the case, we are on the one hand very lucky that Eisenstein's swansong has survived intact, yet on the other hand unlucky that the concluding part of the trilogy never saw the light of day, as it would surely have been another classic.
Sympathetic portrayal of a cracked despot (part 2)
Part 2 followed on from Part 1 without a gap the 2 put together would make one colossal movie. The only trouble being that the last 90 minutes or so would still be missing (Part 3). This has a 16 minute colour sequence near the end plus the last 2 minutes that added a new dimension to the story, and although the spotlighting was a bit ropey it all worked well with the usual fantastic camera angles and ugly brooding people.
Ivan vacillates between doing it his way and relying on Mother Church for help. Either way the plotting aristocratic boyars have to be sorted out for once and for all, this he sets out to accomplish with the help of the Men Apart his NKVD. In reality Ivan was going mad at this period, the similarities to Stalin still resound. Eisenstein pulled his punches but must have known Part 2 would end up in trouble, which it did it wasn't released from the metaphorical gulag until 1958, and Part 3 was aborted. Intensely absorbing and startlingly melodramatic by turns it still hasn't got the same energy as Part 1, but that only makes it a lesser classic. Again, it resembles a sedate silent film with sound (with a bit of red this time), the simple tale powerfully told by a master propagandist using sledgehammer symbolism at every turn. Intelligent film-making is hardly the phrase to use a previous post compared Eisenstein correctly to Kurosawa very different styles but with the same results.
Wonderful sequel, much better to be watched on the heels of Part 1. At least the people who didn't like that won't watch this and comment adversely on it, right?