Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotesOverview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany creditsAwards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage boardPlot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotesDid You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQOther Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDeskPromotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo galleryExternal Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clipsReviews & Ratings for
Stalin (TV) More at IMDbPro »
| Page 1 of 3: | [1] [2] [3] ![[Next]](http://i.media-imdb.com/f86.gif){kind=small} |
| Index | 25 reviews in total |
21 out of 26 people found the following review useful:
It helps to know some history., 5 November 2004
Author:
jumbaxter from Glasgow, UK
To appreciate this film you might read any one of the best accounts of
Stalin's dictatorship by Roy Medvedev, Dmitri Volkogonov, Edvard
Radzinsky, Simon Sebag Montefiore, or Donald Rayfield. If you know
these books you'll find little reason to argue with how this film
portrays 'The Boss'. Other reviewers on this site have noted how well
Robert Duvall captures Stalin's surly, crude, cunning, sadistic,
paranoid personality. They're right. He's marvellous in the role. One
reviewer has questioned whether Voroshilov would have dared to shout at
Stalin, as he does in this film, at the start of the war. This is a
fair point as Stalin picked his men carefully for their inability to
stand up to him or take initiative. However, Donald Rayfield cites an
example of the normally slavish Voroshilov doing something very like
what is portrayed in the film, shouting at Stalin as war with the Nazis
was looming for murdering most of the Red Army high command and so
crippling the defences of the USSR. He was one of the few men to do
anything of the kind and survive Stalin
The film is shot at the scenes of the crimes - the Kremlin at Stalin's
Kuntsevo dacha - and is sumptuous watching as a result. Watch out for
Satlin's huge, waddling shadow on the ceiling as he climbs a great
staircase, an incubus about to settle on the Soviet People. It might be
a standard trick but it doesn't look contrived.
Rather less convincing are the portrayals of Stalin's wife and some of
his associates. This is the fault of the script or the direction or
both, not the actors. For example, Stalin's second wife Nadya was not
quite the principled heroine seen here who apparently took her own life
because she saw no other escape from the evil that her husband was
bringing to the country. The real Nadya brought some of her own
problems to her marriage and these contributed to her death. Bukharin,
wretched in his final weeks, may have been the best of them but that
was saying little. He was not quite the noble, tragic 'swan' portrayed.
He was prone to hysterics - about his own problems primarily - the
suffering millions could suffer as long as he was approved of. During
his final imprisonment, Bukharin wrote to Stalin offering to do
anything, put his name to anything, if only Stalin would be his
'friend' again. Stalin takes all the heat and deserves plenty but many
of the rest seem like innocents, fooled by him, finding out too late
that they were caught up in his evil and corrupted or destroyed by it.
But Stalin, like Hitler and any other dictator, was only possible
because those around him saw advantage for themselves in supporting
him. If there's a problem with this film it's that it lets some of
Stalin's minions off the hook. It settles for extremes - Stalin and his
chiefs of secret police on the one hand, and the good or loyal but
naive on the other. But the only innocents were the people of the
former Soviet Union, those far from power whose lives were destroyed
according to the requirements of a command economy - so many deaths and
so many slaves were required from every walk of life, like so many tons
of iron, to meet quotas. (They are acknowledged in the film's
dedication). Those around Stalin, however, were all up to their elbows
in blood just as he was, obsessed with their own positions, Bukharin,
Zinoviev, and Kamanev included. This is perhaps something to bear in
mind in watching a generally excellent and historically accurate film.
If you're interested in the psychology of Stalin and his henchmen try
Jack Gold's 'Red Monarch' (1983) with Colin Blakely as Stalin. The
history comes second to the general impression in that film but it's
worth the sacrifice. Duvall as Stalin is marvellous in a deadly serious
way, but Blakely is bloody marvellous in a deadly funny way. Red
Monarch also spares the audience English peppered with 'Da' to remind
you that these people are really speaking Russian, and faked
Eastern-European accents.
11 out of 13 people found the following review useful:
Intriguing and Stunning. Duvall's Greatest., 11 December 2005
Author:
jsataluri from United States
Probably one of the TV movies I had never heard about until I watched
it 3 years ago in history class. This movie details the life of Joseph
Stalin, the notorious Communist leader, brought to life by a stunning
Robert Duvall who brings out his greatest performance ever.
Narrated by Stalin's daughter Svetlana, this begins with Stalin joining
Lenin and the Bolsheviks in their fight against the government,
eventually setting up their own government themselves. Most of his
biography is well known to us, however this movie brings out the
character of Stalin as a psycho villain who did not trust a single
person, not even his associates and took extreme measures to
exterminate them all. His ego and paranoia alienated him from his
friends and his family, even to the point where his wife (Julia Ormond)
commits suicide and young Svetlana hating him. But in the end, he does
not change and this leads to his downfall and death.
Although the film does suffer in pacing, it is the performance of
Robert Duvall that makes it worth watching. In my opinion, Duvall is
simply the best actor out of the Godfather series, better than Brando,
Pacino, De Niro or Caan. His performances are real and endearing as he
simply becomes Stalin by portraying the ruthlessness and paranoia of
the mad Communist dictator; a man who could not be solved by his
friends or family, and who could not be controlled by anyone even
himself. The supporting cast headed by Julia Ormond as Stalin's wife,
Maximillian Schell as Lenin and Roshan Seth as Berin do well, but it is
Duvall's show all the way. This TV movie is what is not shown in
history textbooks. It is engaging and real, but not a masterpiece.
History buffs will enjoy watching this, trying to put the pieces
together about the madman known as Joseph Stalin.
8 out of 10.
10 out of 13 people found the following review useful:
Exclusive focus on his personal life., 3 August 2005
Author:
shanfloyd from India
This is one of the rare biopics that offer less opinions and more
facts. Over three hours long, the movie covers the dictator's life from
his exile in Siberia when he took the name Stalin up to his death in
1953. It does not try to feature the then world politics and even
contemporary Russia as a whole, nor it wastes further screen time on
the social reaction to Stalin's policies too much. It features Stalin
and only Stalin. It focuses exclusively on his personal life
(naturally, since the movie is narrated by his daughter Svetlana) and
his take on the fellow comrades of the party. And the filmmakers remain
more-or-less true to the facts, giving neither imaginative shock
moments nor just plain history.
Robert DuVall looks nice as Stalin,and his performance is also
satisfactory. But I don't know why he used that Vito Corleone accent on
him. Did Stalin use to talk that way? I don't know. Julia Ormond does a
really magnificent job as his second wife Nadya. Her timid yet
free-spirited attitude is nicely portrayed by Ormond. And I also must
mention Joanna Roth as Svetlana and Roshan Seth as Beria for a really
good job. All the actors lift this movie up to a really higher level.
Along with the flawless screenplay, acting is another asset of the
film.
7 out of 9 people found the following review useful:
Historical Accuracy, 10 November 1998
Author:
Josh Friedlander (jpfri@conncoll.edu) from New London, CT, USA
I re-watched this film in order to put faces to the names, as I was studying
for a Soviet History midterm. In terms of the film's accuracy, it is largly
excellent (from what I have read). However, the tendency of the film to
separate the good guys (e.g., Bucharin) from the bad (es.g., Stalin, Beria,
Ezhov) is not great historiography, but makes the film easier to digest.
It is hard to know what effect the death of Stalin's wife had on him.
Clearly the film needed an overarching plot structure to attempt an
explanation of a complex man. Unfortunately, it is impossible to get inside
Stalin's head. Duvall's performance is masterful, I think, because he
manages to capture the LACK of essence of Stalin. If anything, the man was
driven by hatred and little else--a hatred that is difficult to articulate,
but which was at least admirably displayed in the film.
9 out of 14 people found the following review useful:
This movie made me love HBO for years, 5 May 2000
Author:
canthony
I freakin love this movie. I don't even really know why. Probably a combination of factors. First of all, this was the first movie I ever saw Robert Duvall in, and he does an exceptional job as he has done in every role he has ever had. Also, it gave me a decent historical picture of Stalin which led to years of fascination with the man. It was also one of HBO's first in a long string of award winning historical fiction TV movies, and still my personal favorite. If you like Robert Duvall and great dialogue, I highly recommend it.
7 out of 11 people found the following review useful:
historical realism at its best, 13 January 2000
Author:
giuliano-3 from san diego
This film would have been ruined by a big studio production. there is no way to "hollywoodize" Josef Stalin. He was perhaps the worst and most brutal tyrant of the 20th century. Estimates range from 20-40 million deaths he was responsible for. He was in no way a nice man. in him there was not an ounce of decency, only a vast void of feeling that Robert Duvall conveyed very well. the film itself almost seemed hollow or lifeless at times, and generally moved slowly. Passer's meticulous method pays off, however, with powerful performances from Plowright, Schell, and Ormond complimenting Duvall's brilliance. After viewing this film it should be difficult not to place Duvall amongst the present day acting legends (DeNiro, Nicholson, Pacino, Hopkins, etc). Very few have played such a wide variety of roles as Duvall has. My whole point in this being, "Stalin" IS Duvall's picture. Duvall is Stalin. If you enjoy well made, historically accurate films and Robert Duvall both you're in for a treat. Otherwise this film will bore you.
2 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
Accurate, extraordinary acting and excellent direction., 22 February 2008
Author:
pywalkye2 from Venezuela
Ivan Passer made a very good job directing this "Docudrama", and everybody actress and actors give us a masterpiece. Those that do not agree shall remember that each one choose the role they want to play... They have the freedom to reject it also, so I must say "Thank you" to all the crew, you were really great. Great casting indeed. There is only one thing that is regrettable, I would like this "mini" much longer, I shall say 9 or 12 hours, maybe more. That will give much more precision in all sense in many many details in the story. And making a review of the sound, light, locations, make up, wardrobe etc. They were very good. I had a very good time seeing this movie. Duval performance is really extraordinary and unforgettable as Stalin, and Julia Ormond (Nadya), M. Schell(Lenin),J. Carter(Sergo), M.Ewan(Khrushchev),C. Jeavons (Yagoda) were most excellent.10/10
3 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
Awesome portrayal of Stalin, 15 March 2006
Author:
carsblair from United States
I watched Stalin and think that it is a good portrayal of Stalin's life. I would have liked to see more actors such as people playing Hitler instead of showing stock footage. One downfall of the movie was that it skips over Stalin's involvement in WWII and just starts the movie in 1917. I would have liked to see more of Stalin's childhood in the movie and maybe some cold war clips near the end of his life. Overall, I was pleased with the content. Stalin was one of the worst people to ever live, and this movie does well in showing how bad Stalin really was. I also like that the movie is told from the perspective of his daughter, Svetlana. This gives the movie a more personal touch to what his life was really like. The movie also used Robert Conquest as one of the contributors, which is good because he wrote Stalin: Breaker of Nations in 1992, also at the time of this movie.
1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
Best HBO programming ever!, 2 May 2010
Author:
maestro-45 from United States
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
With Stalin HBO outdoes itself and it can be attributed entirely to Robert Duvall -which is not to say that the rest of the cast is not top notch, it is. Historically Stalin is one of the greatest monsters that ever walked the earth. Duvall manages to catch this ghastly aspect of the man but still makes the Soviet tyrant irresistible. No doubt about it those old Soviets who took over Russia after the czar were a ruthless bunch and among that murderous crowd Stalin rose to the top of the heap by out doing every one in the terror stakes. Given what was going on in the world Stalin may have been the right leader for Russia -- rule that mess of nationalities with an iron hand. This is not to excuse his terror, but to recognize that that country was largely ungovernable except by force. Since the fall of communism about 20 years ago, Russians have told pollsters that they have nostalgia for Stalin's good old days. Maybe not for his drop of a hat terror, but because he got things done. Robert Duvall captures this and make the character likable while he goes on his merry murdering way. Especially in his interaction toward the end, the last scene he has with his grown up grand daughter. It is some of the best acting ever put on film and a must see!!
drawing, 11 April 2012
Author:
Vincentiu from Romania
delicate subject. for the survivors or their heirs. for the West people for who all is only far story. the virtue - confession of Svetlana Alilueva as frame. so, result is a drawing of a time, a man, an accident of history. not spectacular, not very precise , out of great accuracy but impressive for translation of realities. Robert Duval is remarkable for the search of nuance. Julia Ormond - good choice to define the line between dark and light. it is a difficult mission to present Djugashvili world. so, the central virtue of movie is courage. and fight against temptations. so, it is not a picture. only drawing in which pencil and hand are just unique instrument to open a heavy door, to remember painful period of a space in which people are just shadows, numbers and dead bodies. in which life is only convention and ration is empty word. a film like a cry. or only map of huge cemetery who cover so many memories yet. because Stalin is only symbol of a way to control the others in each dictatorship, in Russia, China, Belarus, Romania or Myanmar.
| Page 1 of 3: | [1] [2] [3] |
Related Links
| Ratings | Awards | External reviews |
| Official site | Plot keywords | Main details |
| Your user reviews | Your vote history |
Copyright © 1990-2012
IMDb.com, Inc.
Terms and Privacy Policy under which this service is provided to you.
An 
company.