Nikolai Cherkasov, Serafima Birman

Sergei Eisenstein's saga of Czar Ivan IV continues with the struggle for power and the use of secret police, a controversial segment that caused the film to be banned by Stalin in 1946 (the film was n...( read more  read more... )ot released until 1958). The predominantly black-and-white film features a banquet dance sequence in color. Obviously the two parts must be viewed as a whole to be fully appreciated. Many film historians consider this period in Eisenstein's career less interesting than his silent period because of a sentimental return to archaic forms (characteristic of Soviet society in the '30s and '40s). Perhaps it was just part of his maturity. --Bill Desowitz

Flixster Users

91% liked it

2,492 ratings

Critics

100% liked it

11 critics

Unrated, 84 min.

Directed by: Sergei M. Eisenstein, M. Filimonova

Release Date: November 24, 1959

Invite friends to see

DVD Release Date: October 28, 1998

Stats: 101 reviews

Your Rating



clear rating
Facebook

Flixster Reviews (101)


  • September 12, 2009
    Eisenstein's most beautifully and perfectly synchronized "talkie" symphony. The pacing and the acting is excellent. The cinematography cannot be described with just words. Nikolai Cherkasov is still as terrifying and terrific as we expected.

    A masterpiece of classic era. Makes...( read more) me feel even more proud of Eisenstein's genius.

    96/100
  • August 14, 2009
    The worst part about this movie is that it was supposed to be followed by a third part that was never made.
    Sigh.
    Fantastic film that plays out like a Shakespeare play.
  • July 4, 2009
    Mucho mejor que la primera parte. Esta es más equilibrada y menos efectista, pero igual de espectacular. La secuencia del banquete sobresale, y antecede estilísticamente al trabajo de Powell y Pressburger desde BLACK NARCISSUS y, sobre todo, THE RED SHOES. / Much better than the ...( read more)first part. This one is more balanced, less of a show-off but just as spectacular. The banquet sequence is outstanding and precedes stylistically the work of Powell and Pressburger since BLACK NARCISSUS and, especially, THE RED SHOES.
  • March 21, 2009
    If you haven't seen it you must
  • December 16, 2008
    this wasnt as good as the first 'ivan the terrible', but cherkasov is still impressive as the tyrannical czar. i would have liked the use of color at the end of this movie, but the contrast was so bad i could hardly see the actors! but on the other hand, in the color part, the su...( read more)btitles were easier to read!
  • July 27, 2008
    And this is where the meat of the movie is.

    This is an absolutely goregous film and I'm extremely happy to have finished these films. Mind you, I only watched them a week apart, but I wasn't as fired up as you would have thought about concluding a Russian epic. Regardless, t...( read more)his movie is a visual treat that really deserves attention.

    I talked about this in the review of the first film, but this is the movie that really deserves this kind of critique. I know that Ivan the Terrible, to some extent, is a biopic. But there are so many themes compared to Hamlet it is ridiculous. The only difference is that the protagonist (despite the title, "Horrible") is actually the Tsar as opposed to Prince Hamlet trying to kill King Claudius. Ivan is surrounded by scoundrels and usurpers and he has to be as shrewed as Hamlet to rid his court of these traitors. I mean, there is some really heavy stuff going on in this movie and that should be noted. This is a complex film. I don't know if this is the normal connotation, but I know that a lot of people think of early cinema as being light and full of fluff because they are still trying to get past the novelty of the medium. Eisenstein seems never have to have dealt with that issue. I know that the movie says 1959, but this movie was made decades before it was released. This movie is a breakthrough in filmmaking

    This one is far more political than the first part. It takes a few minutes to realize what is going on and without an in-depth knowledge of ancient Russia, I can imagine that you'd be a little lost. But the story quickly makes sense and then you realize that, despite the political overtones, that this is a character drama full of intrigue and murder. I mentioned this in the review of part one, but you really have to commend the visual choices when it come to makeup and costumes. The villains look villanous but not completely as dark as Ivan does throughout the movie. There's an interesting juxtaposition showing Ivan as a child. He is as strong-willed as he is in the future, but the look that Eisenstein chose for that little boy is so full of innocence. He has only been betrayed once and that betrayal has affected him only to relive the same moment over and over again.

    While I applaud the visual choices that Eisenstein made in the first movie, this is the one that is really powerful aesthetically. Towards the end of the movie, Eiesnstein switches between monochromatic and full color. Now, I've seen The Wizard of Oz. Screw that. Oz never flip-flopped back and forth. Going from color to black and white is a bold movie and quite effective. Honestly, this film really shows the impact of choosing a palate for your film. At one point, it almost seems like two separate films contained in one. I almost didn't recognize characters in either light. It was fantastic.

    The end of this movie is to die for. Literally, there's so much angst and cruelty in these characters. Yes, you see it coming in the last five to ten minutes, but that's what makes it perfect. You want this plan to go forward. You want to see these villains get their just desserts and they do. What's bizarre is that their downfall comes from a man obsessed. His obsession is proven valid and his darker desires are never removed, but rather satisfied. I mean, the ending is practically cathartic. I felt my own vengeful nature satisfied and that creeped the hell out of me.

    This really is a fantastic film that earns its "classic" title. It is innovative, and that's all well and good, but the movie itself is objectively fantastic. This is the one Russian film that everyone needs to see.
  • March 30, 2008
    Maybe I need to see the first one.
  • January 16, 2008
    second part of the epic film...unfortunately
    Stalin had a deep culture ......
  • July 19, 2007
    All CLASSICS are GOOD
  • July 6, 2007
    J'adore. Tres bon film. Long donc il faut etre dans une ambiance de renouveau. L'acteur est genial de plus qu'il est super difficille sur le plateau, ce qui cree une dynanique tout autre au film.

Comments


This board looks lonely. Be the first to talk about "Ivan the Terrible - Pt. 2" !

Critic ratings and reviews powered by RottenTomatoes.com

Fresh (60% or more critics rated the movie positively)

Rotten (59% or fewer critics rated the movie positively)

More Like This


Click a thumb to vote on that suggestion, or add your own suggestions.

  • Aleksandr Nevskiy (Alexander Nevsky)
    Aleksandr Nevskiy (Alexander Nevsky) (100%)
  • Andrei Rublev
    Andrei Rublev (100%)
  • Secha pri Kerzhentse
    Secha pri Kerzhentse (100%)
  • Ivan the Terrible - Pt. 1
    Ivan the Terrible - Pt. 1 (100%)

Facts


No facts approved yet. Be the first

Ivan the Terrible... : Watch Free on TV


Movie Quizzes


No quizzes for Ivan the Terrible - Pt. 2. Want to create one?

Video Clips


No video clips yet. Want to upload one?

Recent News


No recent headlines. Got one?

Most Popular Skin


No skins yet. Interested in creating one?