IMDb > Ironiya sudby. Prodolzhenie (2007) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Ironiya sudby. Prodolzhenie
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guide
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Ironiya sudby. Prodolzhenie More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 2:[1] [2] [Next]
Index 13 reviews in total 

47 out of 62 people found the following review useful:

Another sad product of post-Soviet cinema...

Author: scythian45 from Canada
30 December 2007

If there is one lesson that could be drawn from this movie, it is this: do not touch old Soviet classics! Does anyone really think it is possible to produce a sequel to a movie thirty years after it came out on the screens? Since the old "Irony of Fate" was made, it has become one of the most venerated Soviet cultural icons. And icons are better be left alone. I'm not sure if any director would be able to make a successful "Irony of Fate-2", but what we are offered by Bekmambetov is at best a third-rate production. Bekmambetov may be a decent thriller-movie director (see his Daywatch and Nightwatch) but he is extremely weak as a maker of romantic comedies, which is what "Irony-2" was purported to be. The plot details are not developed at all (thus, we do not learn anything about Kostya's or Nadya's occupations or previous lives); the advertising of Toyota Camry is too obvious not to be noticed; and the acting, with the possible exception of Bezrukov (Irakliy) is one-dimensional and unconvincing. The old actors (Myagkov, Brylska) look tired, lost and emotionless, as if trying to understand what it is really they are doing in this movie. Special effects (such as the one with the Aurora) may be fitting in a fantasy thriller but they look out of place in a romantic comedy. In short, this is another proof that there is little worth seeing in post-Soviet cinema.

Was the above review useful to you?

38 out of 51 people found the following review useful:

No plot. No dialogue. No taste. No movie.

Author: Serguei Patchkovskii from Ottawa, Canada
13 January 2008

This production (I cannot bring myself to call it a movie, because it isn't) pretends to be a sequel to the beloved New Year romantic comedy the Irony of Fate (Ирония Судьбы). In fact, it is nothing more than a shameless attempt to cash in on the huge and well-deserved popularity of the original, which remains one of the favorites of the Russian-language audiences even after more than 30 years. This "sequel" brings together most of the original actors who appeared in the Eldar Ryazanov's masterpiece. As you might well imagine, the original actors are by now in their seventies - which is by no means a bar to being a good actor (just take a pick at any of Jack Lemmon's late movies!), provided that you do not try to play the same role you had 30 years ago. Unfortunately, the movie director Timur Bekmambetov (Тимур Бекмамбетов) completely lacks the ability to capitalize on the strengths of his actors; he is also clueless in the basic principles of scene composition, and is incapable of pulling off the most basic of physical jokes. In addition to that, the script lacks a coherent plot or basic believability. The production quality is also terrible - I've seen some home movies with more professional scene lighting, for example. Altogether, this is an extremely bad movie - avoid it at all costs, even if you have to pay to be let off watching it.

Was the above review useful to you?

35 out of 46 people found the following review useful:

Better watch film from 1975

Author: Chris_UA from Ukraine
6 January 2008

I did not expect much of this film, because it is really difficult to make a good sequel. And indeed it turned out to be a poor copy of one of my favourite films "Ironiya sudby", which still remains one of the most popular New Year films on the territory of ex-USSR. The original plot was exploited, and no novelty was added. I bet not a single phrase or dialogue will become so recognizable, as some phrases from the first movie. Instead of witty pretty characters from the old film we meet old tired people. The younger generation of actors, which appeared in the sequel, lacks the charm due to which the success of the first movie could be attributed. I even did not enjoy Konstantin Khabensky, who remains one of my favourites in the modern Russian movies. Suddenly I did not recognize the lively young guy from "Uboynaya sila" whom I admired so much. My rating – 2/10. I don't recommend this movie to any fan of "Ironiya sudby". It is rather worth to watch the film from 1975 one more time, since even the knowledge of its end won't spoil the usual amusement.

Was the above review useful to you?

13 out of 18 people found the following review useful:

what's a hell?!.

Author: brumbold from Russian Federation
10 February 2008

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This is the worst movie I have seen. Yes, I hate "Road Trip", but THIS "sequel" make me angry at all! Who let Ernst and Bekmambetov spoil great Soviet Movie? They make it only for money. What it means? Oh, I'll say: it means, Russian cinema is dead completely.

Nasty special effects freaked me at all. Why? Why you is so silly, Timur? Your "Night watch" was very funny comedy - but you don't wanted to do it. You done it not specially. But what was in your head when you got idea to make this sh*t? There isn't any philosophic idea in your movie. Miagkov, Brylska, Yakovlev and Talyzina played awful! And this is when they are GOOD actors! Why there is drunken border guy? It is for "harmony" of "good" film? Or it is excellent humor, do you think? And I was killed when I seen Anna Semenovich thee. SHE ISN'T ACTRESS! You're not director! You can't create good films, but you like to create bad FX.

People! Don't watch this. Better watch another movie of Ryazanov or Gaidai.

It's bad.

Was the above review useful to you?

16 out of 30 people found the following review useful:

Not a sequel but an independent movie

Author: dorothy996 from Russian Federation
3 January 2008

This movie should be considered not as a sequel but as an independent movie. This way it's more or less OK. I haven't expected much from the movie that's why I wasn't disappointed. I can say for sure it's not going to be a new classics though. While watching the movie I forgot sometimes that I was watching a romantic comedy… so many special effects made this movie look like Nightwatch. Advertising of Toyota and Beeline was so obvious and so annoying. Actors weren't very convincing. The only reason I'll probably watch the Irony of Fate-2 for the second time for is Liza Boyarskaya. She's gorgeous!!! I absolutely like her but not her acting in that movie though.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Can you recapture fate?

Author: hte-trasme from United States
21 January 2015

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

The sequel to The Irony of Fate was clearly made with the knowledge that it had very big shoes to fill, as the declared continuation (with a returning original cast) of what by the time the sequel was made was a well-established and beloved cultural icon. It's full of reverent references to its antecedent, but these reminders don't serve it well, because overall it doesn't compare favorably.

The story of The Irony of Fate was elegant in its simple confusion. The sequel has to bend over backwards to recreate an echo of that situation, while at the same time including one one but two generations of versions of the central characters. It just about comes together, but it doesn't have the appealing spontaneity and tidiness of the original. Whereas Zhenya was likable because he was hapless and placed in his baffling situation, the scenario here necessitates that his son go into things scheming, and participating in a scheme. The man he cuckolds has a decent point when he complains about his trickery -- and that makes him a much less appealing hero to watch.

The original film was in two parts and much of the action remained in one apartment. It was a neat trick, but it never became boring for that, and felt like a kind of thrilling, entertaining marathon. The new movie is hampered by the standard running time which makes this impossible. There are some nicely-realized directorial touches in the camera-work and the special effects, but the context just makes them stand out, and seem out of place.

There are some legitimately funny situations, and a few moments that hearken back to The Irony of Fate very nicely and touchingly, but overall it doesn't capture the intangible appeal of the film it's constructed around. And that makes it, in context, easy to see why many disappointed, even though objectively it's a decent enough sweet New Year's piece. It just doesn't add anything original or superior to the piece that is its reason for being.

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

Just what you need when New Year is close

Author: romancheg96 from Russia
7 October 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

We know, that the original "Irony of Fate" is legendary in Russia. This sequel (or independent movie, decide for yourselves) is known firstly because of the original. But anyway, it's great. It looks beautiful, it's rather easy to watch and it tells the story that will never ever get old: that true love lives forever. There are good old characters we all know, and the new ones; places are the same but time had changed - almost everything changed but love between Jenya & Nadya is still alive. Isn't it true love story you need? If it's 20th December and if you want to create the New Year mood for yourself - you just have to watch the movie because it creates amazing atmosphere. All these New Year trees and fireworks, the Kremlin charms beating - it all is so great. After watching it, I can't wait for the New Year and Christmas holidays

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

A charming mix of people known before with new ones and of situations seen before with new ones

Author: Witold Brostow from Denton, Texas
31 July 2011

Before watching the film we have read the reviews: this is a continuation of the Irony of Fate 1, but a bad one; no, this is a good continuation; still different, this film should not be considered as a continuation. There is an 'objection' that a hero drives a certain car; was he supposed to change cars every 20 minutes to give "equal rights" to different car manufacturers ? There is another 'objection' that the heroes behave as they did in Part 1; should nice people now become nasty and vice versa ? There is a still different 'objection' to lights in the city and fireworks on New Year's Eve. Rarely one sees such a diversity of views, many mutually contradictory and some outlandish.

Now that we have seen Part 2, I can comment on it: on people, devices, locations and situations.

There are actors known before from Part 1: Barbara Brylska as Nadya; Andrei Myagkov as Zhenya; Yuriy Yakovlev as Ippolit; Aleksandr Shirvindt as Pasha (mostly Pavlik in Part 1); Aleksandr Belyavskiy as Sasha; as well as Valentina Talyzina as Valya. It was so good to see them again ! Now we also have Elizaveta Boyarskaya as Nadya Number 2, the daughter of the original Nadya; Konstantin Khabenskiy as Kostya Lukashin son of Zhenya; Sergey Bezrukov as Irakliy (note a carefully chosen name, similar to Ippolit). There are naturally more new faces, including Igor Savochkin as Kolya the Border Guard; he makes his unique contributions – largely because most of the time he is as confused as a hungry baby in a topless bar. While Nadya Number 1 now wears large glasses, her smile is the same as before. While Zhenya now has less hair, his smile is also the same as before.

As for devices, frequent use of cell phones makes this means of communication look nearly ridiculous. An original comic approach, while in more and more locations around the world there are limitations on the use of cell phones, including driving.

Obviously Apartment # 12 in House # 25 on the Third Constructors Street plays its role again, as does the elevator there. We also see again the train station from which trains go to Moscow as well as two airports. This helps the impression of continuity – as does music repeated from the first film (except for the song at the end which is new).

The situations are sometimes similar as before, but with interesting twists. It is not easy now to send Zhenya to St. Petersburg; this becomes a clever two parts operation executed by Sasha and Pasha. Zhenya starts to figure things out when Pasha phones to reserve "another" plane ticket. There are also new situations – well connected to Part 1. Nadya Number 2 is asked by Grandfather Frost to play his Snow Girl. She gets instant advice not to agree. However, in a wonderful twist of action, Nadya says: when I was five years old, I had to do things I hated; when I was 10 years old, it was the same; enough is enough; I agree. When one knows that Ippolit is her father and one knows his character from Part 1, the fact that he has been a despotic father is anything but surprising. Thus, events in Part 2 are admirably rooted in Part 1.

One sympathizes so much with Kostya - who can hardly get a moment alone with younger Nadya. One admires his ingenuity in creating opportunities to talk to Nadya. When Grandfather Frost walks into Nadya's apartment, one wishes that inside the costume covering largely the face should be Kostya. One hears later an explanation of the original Snow Girl: he agreed to take over and complete the Grandfather Frost route but on the condition that he will have his own Snow Girl. Incidentally, I recently learned something about Grandfather Frost: Santa Claus was strictly forbidden for a number of years in the Soviet Union – until Stalin found the tradition too strong and allowed him but renamed Grandfather Frost and wearing blue instead of red. The vote of five children on who should marry the Princess is new and fresh - in spite of centuries of fairy tales.

We have seen recently a US movie called "Fast Five", with virtually nothing left to imagination and much noise most of the time. Here both Part 1 and Part 2 have two levels; the amusing or moving surface level, but also a deeper level where the viewer has much food for thought. This is one more common feature of both films. Timur Bekmambetov as the director, Emil Braginskiy as the story writer – together with Eldar Ryazanov himself – have much to be proud of. One needs to say this: the richness of Part 1 has much helped the creators of Part 2 to make such a good film.

Let me provide at least an example of two levels in this film. Kostya asks: "are we in Moscow or in St. Petersburg ?". Younger Nadya provides a charming – but also a profound – response: Does it matter ?".

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 14 people found the following review useful:

We loved the original and this sequel is even better!

Author: ArtySin from United Kingdom
2 January 2010

My wife and I used to watch the original every new year but gave up a couple of years ago. Watching of film evry new year became a tradition in Russia many years ago as it put people in the party mood because of it's New Year's storyline and romance factor.

We found the sequel recently and have just finished watching it (again) and have to say this is absolutely brilliant. We lent it to some friends a few weeks ago and they enjoyed it so much that they went and bought their own copy which even their friends have borrowed. It's great fun, great laughs and great irony. We consider it deservedly gets a 10/10 in our family's books.

Was the above review useful to you?

7 out of 21 people found the following review useful:


Author: stasisz from Russian Federation
22 February 2008

I would not say that the movie is awful, it is alright, but I would not call it a "sequel", which implies continuation of some story line. This is a modern remake, a very popular method among some producers and directors, who want to capitalize on the old idea and get some cash without spending too much time on a script.

The "sequel" copies the scenes from the first movie one after another. They even left the car crash scene! Come on, you could be more creative than that..

New actors play well, old ones are OK, but they do not really contribute to the movie, mostly serving as a background for attracting older generation to the screen.

I think that a lot of people who posted comments on this website got annoyed by the above facts and gave movie extremely low votes.

However, there are good things about the film too.

First of all - this is my personal opinion with which you can disagree - there are no long and boring songs in the sequel.

Secondly, it is good to see even a slight attempt to try and make a good movie. Of course, today's filmmakers are far from Gaydai and Riazanov, but still it is better than the stupidity of "The Best Movie".

Finally, I should say that most of young people - I am talking about 20-25 year old - liked the movie. Hence there is a hope that future generations will appreciate classics and won't degrade to monkey level.

That is why it is 5 from me

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 1 of 2:[1] [2] [Next]

Add another review

Related Links

Plot synopsis Ratings Awards
External reviews Official site Plot keywords
Main details Your user reviews Your vote history