the seduction is the basic virtue. the crazy mixture between history and science , the use of Ivan Vasilievich out of historical/popular speech, the gags and the credible story, the memories of viewer about slices from Arabela and Visitors are good details for create a charming story. the great thing - the measure and the subtle science to explore the realities from Soviet Union.because it has the good sense to be more than a comedy but reflection of the errors and absurd of the regime. a film who could be interesting for understand the past in different sides. a film who must see. not only for humor. but for its roots. because, more than the first sigh's impressions, it is a real smart movie.
43 Reviews
between Arabela and Visitors
Vincentiu31 August 2012
play with history. ironic image of Soviet society. old recipes for entertainment with big success. in fact, a fresco of a life style. a kind of testimony. preoccupation for science, seduction of past, the small family problems as way to present political errors, the gangs, the time travel, a czar and an innocent inventor.a slice of Communism. strange for public beyond the Iron Curtain, amusing in a profound sense for the public of ex - satellites states of U.S.S.R.,source of touching memories and piece of great art of cinema. but essence of this film is just definition of freedom. and the exploration of accidents as seeds of transformation. sure, recreation of old Russia, humanization of Ivan the Terrible, the smart thief and the not very clever house manager are crumbs of seductive kind of resistance against a regime. but, after years, more important is the delicious humor. nothing else.
Slapstick for the working class
PogoNeo22 August 2016
It is just that and almost nothing more: a slapstick for uneducated people; who when watching a movie do not want to or do not like to bother their minds with things like plot, plausibility of events or laws of physics. If in reality nobody acts the way those various characters act and objects do not work the way that is shown on the screen, then it is no problem for those kind of viewers. And it should be no problem for others as well, because it is suppose to be an adventure fantasy comedy (with elements of musical), that even has a kind of a proper disclaimer at the beginning. But the problem is, that this picture is simply not funny. With an exception of one laugh and 2 or 3 smiles, this comedy is just boring, predictable and annoying
The only thing of value in it are the shots of high quality, in their entirety: lighting, sets, special effects; all those technical and visual aspects of the film. They not only stood the test of time in comparison to many other movies of that era. Moreover, for a film made in the Eastern Bloc, its quality is simply amazing when compared to other movie productions of economically struggling communist countries. (Although some part of this comes probably out from restoration process for the digital release)
And having pointed that out, it is no wonder that this movie is what it is- a sweet pill for the masses brutalized by a communist system. And it is not like this is "a stupid piece of cinematic feces", just because "it was made in the 70's in the USSR". Hollywood was making back then and still is making the same kind of unfunny comedic garbage for simpletons, just like the Russians did with this movie, but only without Benny-Hill-like running around (which Ivan Vasilevich is abundant of). Probably there are even more much worst "comedies" made in USA per decade now, than there were made thorough the entire Soviet period of Russian cinematography
The only thing of value in it are the shots of high quality, in their entirety: lighting, sets, special effects; all those technical and visual aspects of the film. They not only stood the test of time in comparison to many other movies of that era. Moreover, for a film made in the Eastern Bloc, its quality is simply amazing when compared to other movie productions of economically struggling communist countries. (Although some part of this comes probably out from restoration process for the digital release)
And having pointed that out, it is no wonder that this movie is what it is- a sweet pill for the masses brutalized by a communist system. And it is not like this is "a stupid piece of cinematic feces", just because "it was made in the 70's in the USSR". Hollywood was making back then and still is making the same kind of unfunny comedic garbage for simpletons, just like the Russians did with this movie, but only without Benny-Hill-like running around (which Ivan Vasilevich is abundant of). Probably there are even more much worst "comedies" made in USA per decade now, than there were made thorough the entire Soviet period of Russian cinematography
Ivan Vasi'lievich Changes Profession (1973) d. Gaidai
dkwootton31 October 2015
Warning: Spoilers
After a genre film-style zoom from a man screaming in a black abyss, the title card tells us that the movie is "a non-science-fiction, not quite realistic and not strictly historical film." Ivan Vasi'lievich Changes Profession (1962) starts off as an absurdist comedy as the mad scientist Shurak watches his television and accidentally sucks up his cat into his vacuum cleaner (Shurak using two staple domestic products of the Brezhnev years). The film becomes a science-fiction adventure as Shurak's newly operational time machine unwittingly sends Ivan the Terrible into 1970s Moscow, forcing the old Russian czar to adjust to the struggles of modern life. And finally, Ivan Vasi'lievich transforms into a musical as Shurak's apartment superintendent Ivan Vasi'lievich and Miloslavksy perform a dance in the sixteenth century echoing Eisenstein's Ivan the Terrible, Part II (1958), but this film would have never survived the harsh censorship of Late Stalinism. The Soviet citizen during the Brezhnev years saw an increase in the standard of living prompting a greater middle class and permanently instilling a lifestyle of consumerism. While the popularity of television was enormous, movie attendance in the Soviet Union was also massive. GOSKINO, under the leadership of Filipp Ermash, gave entertainment value and the sensibilities of the audience highest priority during film production. Genre films, such as the melodrama, crime, sci-fi, romance or adventure film, were fundamental to the years of stagnation. The silly, surreal, sci-fi-adventure-comedy precedes Back to the Future (1985) and Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure (1989) by over a decade criticizing the modern day world as the suspicion Ivan the Terrible is told, "you'd be poisoned with can food then vodka."
This movie looks like it's an elementary school project
lruella16 July 2015
Warning: Spoilers
I don't know where to start saying what's wrong with this movie.
Be it the childish acting, the ridiculous special effects, the miserable editing or the incompetent directing.
While the starting idea of the plot is quite interesting, the final result is a total embarrassment.
The only explanation for positive reviews is nostalgia for USSR.
The idea of black and white and color to differentiate reality from dream could not have been executed more poorly. I thought the TV was broken or the divx file was damaged.
Even something as simple as a pie thrown in the face is depicted with such a bad flow... you see that the pie is thrown and then the shot shows it has landed already on someone's face, without showing the actual impact. This is the kind of editing that could have been acceptable when cinema was invented in 1880s but even for the '70s is already ridiculous.
Be it the childish acting, the ridiculous special effects, the miserable editing or the incompetent directing.
While the starting idea of the plot is quite interesting, the final result is a total embarrassment.
The only explanation for positive reviews is nostalgia for USSR.
The idea of black and white and color to differentiate reality from dream could not have been executed more poorly. I thought the TV was broken or the divx file was damaged.
Even something as simple as a pie thrown in the face is depicted with such a bad flow... you see that the pie is thrown and then the shot shows it has landed already on someone's face, without showing the actual impact. This is the kind of editing that could have been acceptable when cinema was invented in 1880s but even for the '70s is already ridiculous.
Good slapstick type humor and some jokes that I didn't get because I speak very little Russian
gagewyn20 February 2000
I saw this in Russian without subtitles, so I missed most of the dialogue. Luckily about half the humor is purely visual, so I was still entertained. One doesn't need to speak Russian to understand that Ivan the Terrible is confused by the elevator.
In terms of the visual humor it is well done. Most of the humor comes in the form of extended chase sequences with high film speed. The thief is especially funny, although with the mustache he came across looking like an armature porn star at first. I think this was intentional. Also, the footage of the black cat climbing up things and looking flustered is well done and cute.
I recommend this film to those looking for well done slapstick type humor. From laughter by those present who spoke fluent Russian I think that there are probably some fairly good verbal jokes too.
In terms of the visual humor it is well done. Most of the humor comes in the form of extended chase sequences with high film speed. The thief is especially funny, although with the mustache he came across looking like an armature porn star at first. I think this was intentional. Also, the footage of the black cat climbing up things and looking flustered is well done and cute.
I recommend this film to those looking for well done slapstick type humor. From laughter by those present who spoke fluent Russian I think that there are probably some fairly good verbal jokes too.
Horrible!
krem123423 January 2022
I would like to propose to IMDb to unmercifully deny Bulgarians to comment foreign (to them) movies, especially when everything they have ever heard of a country which the movie is made in /times it describes was/is a cliché. You cannot comment something you don't understand and especially when you cannot possibly understand it in lifetime. Likewise you cannot comment Pythagorus theorem when you're not mathematician or Eifel Tower if you are not architect, you cannot criticize gem of comedy for being silly when you don't understand it in first place. You can, however, tell the others that its been silly TO YOU, just because YOU are used to toilet-drawn "humor", with silliness and stupidness you see in every modern Bulgarian comedy which has gone its way from stardom in 50's to 80s to total drop down quality nowadays. _Shoe maker, do not watch above the shoes!_ And leave masterpieces like this one alone. If you're Bulgarian, this is probably not your movie for the evening. Go grab the Bulgarian Pie 10 instead.
A wonderful movie!
AlinaNaumova-6528619 January 2022
Warning: Spoilers
The film tells about an engineer-inventor who designed a time machine that connected his apartment with the sixteenth century, or rather, with the reign of Ivan the Terrible. The tsar's namesake Ivan Vasilyevich Bunsha and apartment thief Georges Miloslavsky randomly get there. Ivan Vasilyevich's striking resemblance to the Russian tsar played into their hands. They did not come up with anything better than to give the public figure Ivan Vasilyevich for Ivan the Terrible. In the process of this transformation, a lot of funny and unexpected events occur that will definitely please the viewer and give a lot of laughter. At the same time, the real tsar gets into modern reality, is surprised by the achievements of science and technology, threatens the heroes and behaves like a real cruel tsar Ivan the Terrible. The breakdown of the time machine forces the heroes to linger for a while in an unusual environment for them, which is a difficult test for each of them. Ivan Vasilyevich Bunsha discovers confidence and courage in himself, and Ivan the Terrible - gentleness and compassion.
Comedy in every turn of the plot, amazing acting and musical accompaniment, details and much more - all this creates a unique atmosphere of the film, which has become a favorite for no generation.
Comedy in every turn of the plot, amazing acting and musical accompaniment, details and much more - all this creates a unique atmosphere of the film, which has become a favorite for no generation.
Good movie
olesakrivonosova19 January 2022
A good, old, kind movie that you know by heart, but that you want to watch again and again, especially on New Year's holidays! In the first days of January, there is a special ritual in our house - the whole family gather at the TV screen and watch their favorite classics, which I am sure time will pass, our children and grandchildren will also watch!
You will be cured, and you will be cured... and I will be cured
jamesjustice-9231 December 2022
If you were born on the Post-Soviet territory it's hard to find a person who hasn't watched this masterpiece at least a dozen times. I probably watched this movie more than a hundred times over the course of my life and I know it all, every scene and every piece of dialogue by heart. Every year on December 31st I watch Ivan Vasilievich and every time I laugh so hard - I guess nostalgia probably plays a huge part in my eternal adoration for this movie but it is a pretty well made motion picture in general too.
The humor, the setting, the immortal soundtrack and songs written by Aleksander Zatsepin which I can replay in my head just as easily as any of the fantastic works of maestro John Williams or Alan Silvestri, all of the actors and especially Yuriy Yakovlev, who played a dual role of the tsar Ivan the Terrible and the building clerk Bunsha, and Leonid Kuravlev and his Miloslavsky, and naturally the masterful direction of Leonid Gaidai - it all made a movie a hit back in 1973 and it still is, 50 years later, loved by many people and quoted by just as many.
But if you take this movie and try and see it as a story it really tells you nothing about the characters, their back stories and what they have learned over the course of the movie because most of it is a lengthy dream sequence shot in color and we don't get to spend a lot of time in the real, black and white world of the main character. All we can take out from the movie - from a moral perspective - is that the power of imagination knows no limits and that we should cherish what we have right now over what we could possibly have someday.
Overall Ivan Vasilievich is a perfect example of a pure comedy. The only goal here is to successfully entertain you, make you laugh and forget about your worries for an hour and a half and this movie does just that. I would prefer to watch this comedy for 101st time than to watch any of the modern ones hands down. 12/10.
The humor, the setting, the immortal soundtrack and songs written by Aleksander Zatsepin which I can replay in my head just as easily as any of the fantastic works of maestro John Williams or Alan Silvestri, all of the actors and especially Yuriy Yakovlev, who played a dual role of the tsar Ivan the Terrible and the building clerk Bunsha, and Leonid Kuravlev and his Miloslavsky, and naturally the masterful direction of Leonid Gaidai - it all made a movie a hit back in 1973 and it still is, 50 years later, loved by many people and quoted by just as many.
But if you take this movie and try and see it as a story it really tells you nothing about the characters, their back stories and what they have learned over the course of the movie because most of it is a lengthy dream sequence shot in color and we don't get to spend a lot of time in the real, black and white world of the main character. All we can take out from the movie - from a moral perspective - is that the power of imagination knows no limits and that we should cherish what we have right now over what we could possibly have someday.
Overall Ivan Vasilievich is a perfect example of a pure comedy. The only goal here is to successfully entertain you, make you laugh and forget about your worries for an hour and a half and this movie does just that. I would prefer to watch this comedy for 101st time than to watch any of the modern ones hands down. 12/10.
i would advise it to those who study Russian :)
valiia31 October 2003
This film is the classics for those who speak Russian. Many of the charachter's sayings passed into a proverb and are widely used in informal talk. But to enjoy the language one should have a notion about old-Slavic language. As for the comment about the thief looking as a porn star and the probability that the producer intended this - it is absolutely impossible.
Soviet cimetography never used pornographic details, besides Soviet viewer din't see any porno films until maybe late 80s and there were nothing to hint to in 1973 (!). In this respect, the soviet viewer was absolutely innocent and naive.
Soviet cimetography never used pornographic details, besides Soviet viewer din't see any porno films until maybe late 80s and there were nothing to hint to in 1973 (!). In this respect, the soviet viewer was absolutely innocent and naive.
Ipan the Terrible!
melinda20011 November 2006
It's really hard to imagine how this movie got a score of 8.5. Since nobody has given it a bad review yet I guess it is up to me.
I know that I was warned that it was something of a Russian Benny Hill, and that much turned out to be true. Very slapstick and silly, sure, but in such a tedious and painful way. The story and acting are terrible. It even attempts to be a musical! Perhaps some Russians will enjoy it for some cultural references that I'm not getting, but otherwise I would expect it to appeal only to six year-olds. Unless you have some very strong reason for seeing this movie I suggest that you avoid it.
I know that I was warned that it was something of a Russian Benny Hill, and that much turned out to be true. Very slapstick and silly, sure, but in such a tedious and painful way. The story and acting are terrible. It even attempts to be a musical! Perhaps some Russians will enjoy it for some cultural references that I'm not getting, but otherwise I would expect it to appeal only to six year-olds. Unless you have some very strong reason for seeing this movie I suggest that you avoid it.
The Great Movie
torontotokyo19 January 2022
Warning: Spoilers
The film "Ivan Vasilyevich changes his profession" is based on a play by Mikhail Bulgakov, a mystical writer. The action takes place in modern times in relation to the time of the creation of the film - the seventies of the twentieth century.
The director of the film is Leonid Gaidai, which means that you can already predict before viewing that the film will have an amazing, dynamic plot diluted with sparkling, delightful good humor.
In "modernity" - in the seventies of the twentieth century, engineer Timofeev invents a time machine in his own apartment. The time machine is a brilliant fantastic invention, appears in some other fantastic novels (in particular, G. Wells). It allows you to pierce time and space and find yourself in a different historical era. It is unknown whether it will ever be possible to create a time machine in reality? Is it safe for humanity, the world, will it not lead to a change in history? But at the same time, it would allow us to give accurate answers to many vague questions of world history, to see the life and way of life of people of another time, epoch. It's a valuable thing.
Alexander Demyanenko in the role of Shurik managed to convey the deep morality, morality, decency, kindness of this hero, which is probably the most important quality in this image. As well as the absent-mindedness characteristic of many scientists due to immersion in their own thoughts, calculations, thanks to which a time machine was created. At the same time, we can consider in this film the evolution of the image of Shurik himself, if we go from the fact that the role was played by Alexander Demyanenko. Shurik, being a good student at Operation Y, studied and now has become an excellent specialist in his field.
His other half is played by Natalia Selezneva. She is a beautiful person, a creative person, "who is all about cinema, art." She is a wonderful actress, a bright personality. But perhaps she lacks the inner core of morality that engineer Timofeev has. She is fickle and windy. Similar to her is the film director Yakin (Mikhail Pugovkin).
The thief Georges Miloslavsky (Leonid Kuravlev) decides to clean out the neighboring apartment of dentist Anton Semenovich Shpak. But thanks to amazing events, he finds himself in the apartment of engineer Timofeev. Where Ivan Bunsha (Yuri Yakovlev) begins to find out how Miloslavsky ended up in Shpak's apartment.
Engineer Timofeev manages to connect modernity with ancient Moscow through the wall - the era of Ivan the Terrible (Yu. Yakovlev). As a result, Ivan the Terrible finds himself in modern times, and Ivan Bunsha and Georges Miloslavsky get stuck in the 16th century. But if there is a king, he is a king everywhere. He remains king in any place. And in modern times it will be the most important thing, having managed to put Yakin on his knees, and the "boyars" will like it, and to scold Shpak, for the fact that he filed a complaint as a petition to the tsar, in the police to remain himself - an honest, strong and stern man, to eat sausage. Then Ivan Bunche and Georges Miloslavsky have to improvise, because what will happen in the opposite case? And I have to change my profession. Decent, but gentle Bunsha is now in the place of Ivan the Terrible himself, and Miloslavsky is his assistant. However - which of them will be more flexible, capable of improvisation?
Among the actors of Ancient Russia, it is necessary to single out Savely Kramorov in the role of a man from the Embassy order. He has simplicity, naivety, kindness.
All the scenes in Moscow of the 16th century - from the chase in the corridors, on the roof, adventures in the bell tower - everything looks dynamic, exciting, interesting, in one breath, which is characteristic of the style of Leonid Gaidai.
And then the scenes of the departure of the troops to defend the Motherland, when the army sings a song, a folk song, in which there seems to be some inner essence of Russia in its lyricism, spirituality, readiness to defend the Motherland, which remains beyond time and space, remaining the deep essence of Russia.
Reception of a foreign ambassador (S. Filippov). This is also a whole event in the film, where the inner qualities of the characters are revealed.
And also a feast. Again, a whole separate event. The richness of food, where there are different dishes, but a special comic with red, black and overseas caviar, eggplant. Apparently the latter turned out to be the most delicious. A feast that relaxes. Then "dancing". And a lyrical, heartfelt song sung by V. Zolotukhin.
In "modernity" it is necessary to pay attention to the manager - the wife of Bunshi (N. Krachkovskaya). She is a domineering woman, able to flexibly fight back in verbal duels, disputes: "Oh, you cheeky, I'm 5 years younger than you!". But if she only knew who she was telling this to!
And Anton Shpak (Vladimir Etush). At first glance, he is a good person, as well as an unfortunate victim in the film, but the sly smile that appears on his face at one moment speaks of something else. Not so simple.
Yuri Yakovlev managed to perfectly convey two contrasting opposite images in this film: Ivan the Terrible himself and Ivan Bunshi. It would be interesting to see Yu in this role . Nikulina or E. Evstigneeva. But Yu. Yakovlev is great!
Leonid Kuravlev is also great in this role of the great improviser, the Miloslavsky combinator, who will try to get out of any situation. This is the case when his talent has benefited.
In general, "Ivan Vasilyevich changes his profession", a comedy that reveals the line between modernity, which has also become history and the era of Ivan the Terrible, where the identity, patriarchy of Russia, the historical basis, all the best that was in that difficult time.
And this comedy, having passed the main test - time, is loved by the people. If she's on the air a few hours before the New Year!
The director of the film is Leonid Gaidai, which means that you can already predict before viewing that the film will have an amazing, dynamic plot diluted with sparkling, delightful good humor.
In "modernity" - in the seventies of the twentieth century, engineer Timofeev invents a time machine in his own apartment. The time machine is a brilliant fantastic invention, appears in some other fantastic novels (in particular, G. Wells). It allows you to pierce time and space and find yourself in a different historical era. It is unknown whether it will ever be possible to create a time machine in reality? Is it safe for humanity, the world, will it not lead to a change in history? But at the same time, it would allow us to give accurate answers to many vague questions of world history, to see the life and way of life of people of another time, epoch. It's a valuable thing.
Alexander Demyanenko in the role of Shurik managed to convey the deep morality, morality, decency, kindness of this hero, which is probably the most important quality in this image. As well as the absent-mindedness characteristic of many scientists due to immersion in their own thoughts, calculations, thanks to which a time machine was created. At the same time, we can consider in this film the evolution of the image of Shurik himself, if we go from the fact that the role was played by Alexander Demyanenko. Shurik, being a good student at Operation Y, studied and now has become an excellent specialist in his field.
His other half is played by Natalia Selezneva. She is a beautiful person, a creative person, "who is all about cinema, art." She is a wonderful actress, a bright personality. But perhaps she lacks the inner core of morality that engineer Timofeev has. She is fickle and windy. Similar to her is the film director Yakin (Mikhail Pugovkin).
The thief Georges Miloslavsky (Leonid Kuravlev) decides to clean out the neighboring apartment of dentist Anton Semenovich Shpak. But thanks to amazing events, he finds himself in the apartment of engineer Timofeev. Where Ivan Bunsha (Yuri Yakovlev) begins to find out how Miloslavsky ended up in Shpak's apartment.
Engineer Timofeev manages to connect modernity with ancient Moscow through the wall - the era of Ivan the Terrible (Yu. Yakovlev). As a result, Ivan the Terrible finds himself in modern times, and Ivan Bunsha and Georges Miloslavsky get stuck in the 16th century. But if there is a king, he is a king everywhere. He remains king in any place. And in modern times it will be the most important thing, having managed to put Yakin on his knees, and the "boyars" will like it, and to scold Shpak, for the fact that he filed a complaint as a petition to the tsar, in the police to remain himself - an honest, strong and stern man, to eat sausage. Then Ivan Bunche and Georges Miloslavsky have to improvise, because what will happen in the opposite case? And I have to change my profession. Decent, but gentle Bunsha is now in the place of Ivan the Terrible himself, and Miloslavsky is his assistant. However - which of them will be more flexible, capable of improvisation?
Among the actors of Ancient Russia, it is necessary to single out Savely Kramorov in the role of a man from the Embassy order. He has simplicity, naivety, kindness.
All the scenes in Moscow of the 16th century - from the chase in the corridors, on the roof, adventures in the bell tower - everything looks dynamic, exciting, interesting, in one breath, which is characteristic of the style of Leonid Gaidai.
And then the scenes of the departure of the troops to defend the Motherland, when the army sings a song, a folk song, in which there seems to be some inner essence of Russia in its lyricism, spirituality, readiness to defend the Motherland, which remains beyond time and space, remaining the deep essence of Russia.
Reception of a foreign ambassador (S. Filippov). This is also a whole event in the film, where the inner qualities of the characters are revealed.
And also a feast. Again, a whole separate event. The richness of food, where there are different dishes, but a special comic with red, black and overseas caviar, eggplant. Apparently the latter turned out to be the most delicious. A feast that relaxes. Then "dancing". And a lyrical, heartfelt song sung by V. Zolotukhin.
In "modernity" it is necessary to pay attention to the manager - the wife of Bunshi (N. Krachkovskaya). She is a domineering woman, able to flexibly fight back in verbal duels, disputes: "Oh, you cheeky, I'm 5 years younger than you!". But if she only knew who she was telling this to!
And Anton Shpak (Vladimir Etush). At first glance, he is a good person, as well as an unfortunate victim in the film, but the sly smile that appears on his face at one moment speaks of something else. Not so simple.
Yuri Yakovlev managed to perfectly convey two contrasting opposite images in this film: Ivan the Terrible himself and Ivan Bunshi. It would be interesting to see Yu in this role . Nikulina or E. Evstigneeva. But Yu. Yakovlev is great!
Leonid Kuravlev is also great in this role of the great improviser, the Miloslavsky combinator, who will try to get out of any situation. This is the case when his talent has benefited.
In general, "Ivan Vasilyevich changes his profession", a comedy that reveals the line between modernity, which has also become history and the era of Ivan the Terrible, where the identity, patriarchy of Russia, the historical basis, all the best that was in that difficult time.
And this comedy, having passed the main test - time, is loved by the people. If she's on the air a few hours before the New Year!
Not available to everyone
lazylobster201114 February 2022
It doesn't surprise me that not everyone likes this movie. I suspect that not everyone understands both the humor of Bulgakov's play and the eccentricity of Gaidai's production of jokes. Can we call this film a sitcom and Bulgakov's play something vaudeville? Maybe. So let's watch the film as an adaptation of vaudeville. And jokes like the one when Miloslavsky snatches out a pack of Marlboro during the performance of a song ... only people born in the USSR, those who are already over 50, will understand them. Nice film by Gaidai. Chase, music, all of it.
The greatest fantasy film about Ivan the Terrible
alekspredator8714 July 2022
There is hardly a person in our country who has not seen this film. Probably, these are only small children, and then they probably turn on the TV with their parents every new year and watch this movie, knowing every phrase, every dialogue. Isn't this what gives the film cult status? Probably, yes.
The main advantage of this film is the grandiose light humor, which is perfectly conveyed through the actors' play. Almost every phrase has acquired a cult status, these statements have gone to the people. And decades later, people will continue to use them. That humor has nothing to do with the current one, which has been presented to us from the screens in recent years. There is no vulgarity, jokes below the belt, any malice. In this film, the humor is brilliant and appropriate.
The film is beautiful because it was worked on by professionals of the comedy genre. Director Gaidai is known for many of his films, he has his own manner, his films are guessed. He created a wonderful atmosphere in this film, charged it with his energy.
The actors are simply gorgeous. Each. Up to those who played the Archers and made various grimaces. But the most colorful, of course, is the magnificent Yuri Yakovlev. He happened to play two roles: Ivan Vasilyevich, an ordinary citizen of the Soviet Union, and John IV, the tsar, a powerful and mature man in years. Yakovlev managed these images superbly. Why? For me, the answer is simple. When I saw this movie as a child, I was sure that these two characters are played by different actors. What is not the proof of a brilliant game?
Demyanenko, as always, is good. His hero tries to help, enters the situation, acts decisively.
Selezneva is also beautiful. She got the image of a traitorous woman who rushes and can't make a choice.
Kuravlev personifies crime. Here he is, a thief and a fraudster who profits from thefts. It is interesting to watch how he comes out of deadly situations together with Ivan Vasilyevich from the present.
All this cast creates an amazing tandem, which is nice to look at.
Years go by, a lot of films are being made, a lot of comedies, but this fiction remains unsurpassed. The time must have been different. I say this with sadness, because such masterpieces cannot be repeated. Maybe you don't need to. After all, for us there are only Ivan Vasilyevich, Shurik, Georges Miloslavsky and other heroes of the grandiose film.
10 out of 10.
The main advantage of this film is the grandiose light humor, which is perfectly conveyed through the actors' play. Almost every phrase has acquired a cult status, these statements have gone to the people. And decades later, people will continue to use them. That humor has nothing to do with the current one, which has been presented to us from the screens in recent years. There is no vulgarity, jokes below the belt, any malice. In this film, the humor is brilliant and appropriate.
The film is beautiful because it was worked on by professionals of the comedy genre. Director Gaidai is known for many of his films, he has his own manner, his films are guessed. He created a wonderful atmosphere in this film, charged it with his energy.
The actors are simply gorgeous. Each. Up to those who played the Archers and made various grimaces. But the most colorful, of course, is the magnificent Yuri Yakovlev. He happened to play two roles: Ivan Vasilyevich, an ordinary citizen of the Soviet Union, and John IV, the tsar, a powerful and mature man in years. Yakovlev managed these images superbly. Why? For me, the answer is simple. When I saw this movie as a child, I was sure that these two characters are played by different actors. What is not the proof of a brilliant game?
Demyanenko, as always, is good. His hero tries to help, enters the situation, acts decisively.
Selezneva is also beautiful. She got the image of a traitorous woman who rushes and can't make a choice.
Kuravlev personifies crime. Here he is, a thief and a fraudster who profits from thefts. It is interesting to watch how he comes out of deadly situations together with Ivan Vasilyevich from the present.
All this cast creates an amazing tandem, which is nice to look at.
Years go by, a lot of films are being made, a lot of comedies, but this fiction remains unsurpassed. The time must have been different. I say this with sadness, because such masterpieces cannot be repeated. Maybe you don't need to. After all, for us there are only Ivan Vasilyevich, Shurik, Georges Miloslavsky and other heroes of the grandiose film.
10 out of 10.
Soviet classic
sebvonwenden29 December 2021
Just watched it with my Russian parents, the comedy, characters and idea of it all is so funny. Some of the jokes are more contextual so Western viewers may struggle a bit but overall. The plot, characters (especially Miloslavsky) and the humour is really funny.
Very Russian comedy of errors with time travel
johannesaquila21 October 2021
This film is about the following people:
The plot starts with Shurik working on a silly-looking contraption that poses as a time machine, and Zina wantonly deciding to scrap her marriage with Shurik for a bit of superficial excitement, initiating a side plot. When the time machine turns out to actually work, the two look-alike Ivan Vassilyevichs get swapped and George Miloslavsky happens to accompany the one from our time to the 16th century.
Ivan the Terrible speaks an old form of Russian that modern Russian speakers know as Church Slavonic, the liturgic language of the Orthodox Church. Obviously Ivan uses it to express very different thoughts than what people are used to hearing in this language. The jokes related to this are lost on me because I don't understand Russian. I found that this wasn't a problem because there is so much else to love.
It seems some people don't like this film at all. It's important not to misunderstand it as science fiction. And you should have no unrealistic expectations as to the technical execution. Soviet films had small budgets. When a segment was in black and white, it wasn't just for artistic reasons but also to save money.
Before watching this film, watch Operatsiya 'Y' i drugie priklyucheniya Shurika (1965), the first Shurik film, so you are familiar with Shurik and Lida/Zina. The film consists of three half-hour episodes. The middle one is what you need as background; it was responsible for the emergence of Shurik and Lida monuments in several ex-Soviet cities. (The other two do not involve Lida, but are great in other ways.)
(Optional.) You may even want to read just a little bit about Ivan the Terrible and Boris Godunov first. Have a quick look at Ilya Repin's painting "Ivan the Terrible killing his son". Maybe watch Ivan Groznyy (1944) so you get it when a scene copies one from that classical movie.
The film is based on a theater play by Michail Bulgakov that was censored under Stalin and had become available only 8 years earlier. Contrary to the first Shurik film, which has slight moralistic overtones, this one seems completely apolitical to me. (A good thing for a Soviet film, because it means the absence of otherwise mandatory propaganda that was included more or less reluctantly.) When Shurik urgently needs transistors, the film even finds a pretext forcing him to buy them on the black market. Viewers knew that a much more likely reason was scarcity, but that couldn't be depicted. I guess making an apolitical movie was a privilege the director had earned through the spectacular success of the first two Shurik films. (The second, Kavkazskaya plennitsa, ili Novye priklyucheniya Shurika (1967), with a different female lead, was rescued from censorship by Leonid Brezhnev, who was a fan of the first one.)
- Shurik and Lida, the student couple from Operatsiya 'Y' i drugie priklyucheniya Shurika (1965). In the earlier film, this is basically the Soviet version of Romeo and Juliet, with an incredible overload of all-round genuine cuteness replacing the passion and suffering of the Shakespearean couple. In the present film, Lida is called Zina and is an actress, somewhat inconsistent with the technical field she studied earlier. But this couple is played by the same actors as the earlier one, and they must be the same persons because we want them to be the same persons.
- Ivan Vassilyevich and Ivan Vassilyevich. The former is the official busybody in the apartment complex in which Shurik and Lida, sorry, Zina, live. The latter is better known as Ivan the Terrible (16th century). Played by the same actor, of course.
- George Miloslavsky. Not to be confused with Vanka Miloslavsky, who was hanged for robbery by Ivan the Terrible before our story begins.
The plot starts with Shurik working on a silly-looking contraption that poses as a time machine, and Zina wantonly deciding to scrap her marriage with Shurik for a bit of superficial excitement, initiating a side plot. When the time machine turns out to actually work, the two look-alike Ivan Vassilyevichs get swapped and George Miloslavsky happens to accompany the one from our time to the 16th century.
Ivan the Terrible speaks an old form of Russian that modern Russian speakers know as Church Slavonic, the liturgic language of the Orthodox Church. Obviously Ivan uses it to express very different thoughts than what people are used to hearing in this language. The jokes related to this are lost on me because I don't understand Russian. I found that this wasn't a problem because there is so much else to love.
It seems some people don't like this film at all. It's important not to misunderstand it as science fiction. And you should have no unrealistic expectations as to the technical execution. Soviet films had small budgets. When a segment was in black and white, it wasn't just for artistic reasons but also to save money.
Before watching this film, watch Operatsiya 'Y' i drugie priklyucheniya Shurika (1965), the first Shurik film, so you are familiar with Shurik and Lida/Zina. The film consists of three half-hour episodes. The middle one is what you need as background; it was responsible for the emergence of Shurik and Lida monuments in several ex-Soviet cities. (The other two do not involve Lida, but are great in other ways.)
(Optional.) You may even want to read just a little bit about Ivan the Terrible and Boris Godunov first. Have a quick look at Ilya Repin's painting "Ivan the Terrible killing his son". Maybe watch Ivan Groznyy (1944) so you get it when a scene copies one from that classical movie.
The film is based on a theater play by Michail Bulgakov that was censored under Stalin and had become available only 8 years earlier. Contrary to the first Shurik film, which has slight moralistic overtones, this one seems completely apolitical to me. (A good thing for a Soviet film, because it means the absence of otherwise mandatory propaganda that was included more or less reluctantly.) When Shurik urgently needs transistors, the film even finds a pretext forcing him to buy them on the black market. Viewers knew that a much more likely reason was scarcity, but that couldn't be depicted. I guess making an apolitical movie was a privilege the director had earned through the spectacular success of the first two Shurik films. (The second, Kavkazskaya plennitsa, ili Novye priklyucheniya Shurika (1967), with a different female lead, was rescued from censorship by Leonid Brezhnev, who was a fan of the first one.)
A very funny film; plenty of comic action around Moscow and district.
yvonne-59 March 1999
Shurik (a character in several other comedy films) is experimenting at home with an invention which goes wrong and puts him, a passing burglar, and the apartment supervisor back into the time of Ivan the Terrible. There are a lot of chases and action, so you can still enjoy the film even if some of the Russian dialogue passes you by. Good views of several historic buildings, and an insight into 1973 Moscow as well as a bit of a history lesson. Not all Russian films are doom and gloom.
Pretty Bad
zimka20 February 2008
This is one of the movies Russians were practically forced to watch in the early days of television, as there were only a couple of state channels and not much choice. The tradition of watching this and other comedies gradually substituted quality with mass hysteria and, more importantly, habit.
Even today many people enjoy watching it, subconsciously not understanding that it is nostalgia for the past they feel, not joy of watching a quality comedy.
Really, though, the script is horrible and the fact that this pulp of a movie is based on Bulgakov's story just adds insult to the injury. Bulgakov - pulp?! Even idea seems ridiculous, yet, here it is. The comedy itself comes from a lot of slapstick, in very low intelligence ways, like making fun of lisps or speed-up movements, ala Benny Hill. The cinematography is sickening yellowish, for some reason really loved by Gaidai (director). Yet, the worst is acting, or likely directing, which forced such acting. Characters can freely speak to the camera and behave like complete idiots. How could actors play well in such movie is beyond me and apparently beyond them as well, so they do not even try. They just make faces and deliver their lines.
Which is the only saving grace of this whole farce. The film has become a well of one-liners over the years.
All in all, if you enjoy other comedies created by Gaidai, this can even be considered one of his best, so watch it with no worries, as it has all of his safe trademarks. But if you don't or simply don't know what kind of films Gaidai did, I can summarize them to you in two words - Soviet Kitsch.
Even today many people enjoy watching it, subconsciously not understanding that it is nostalgia for the past they feel, not joy of watching a quality comedy.
Really, though, the script is horrible and the fact that this pulp of a movie is based on Bulgakov's story just adds insult to the injury. Bulgakov - pulp?! Even idea seems ridiculous, yet, here it is. The comedy itself comes from a lot of slapstick, in very low intelligence ways, like making fun of lisps or speed-up movements, ala Benny Hill. The cinematography is sickening yellowish, for some reason really loved by Gaidai (director). Yet, the worst is acting, or likely directing, which forced such acting. Characters can freely speak to the camera and behave like complete idiots. How could actors play well in such movie is beyond me and apparently beyond them as well, so they do not even try. They just make faces and deliver their lines.
Which is the only saving grace of this whole farce. The film has become a well of one-liners over the years.
All in all, if you enjoy other comedies created by Gaidai, this can even be considered one of his best, so watch it with no worries, as it has all of his safe trademarks. But if you don't or simply don't know what kind of films Gaidai did, I can summarize them to you in two words - Soviet Kitsch.
Excellent
chubarova9 January 2021
All russians know this film by quotes, it's a part of Soviet films' "gold collection". Firstly, the plot that based on Mikhail Bulgakov's book is very interesting with a lot of jokes. The cast is great, they are the best actors and actresses of USSR.
So, it's great comedy film.
Just really not that funny.
Boba_Fett11382 May 2009
This movie might had been something and original at its time but this movie just isn't exactly my idea of a great or hilarious comedy. It's not like I hated it, I actually still quite enjoyed it but that doesn't prevent this movie from being an overrated one.
Most of the movie its comedy comes from the character looking and talking into the camera and comical sequences that are being played fast-forward, "Benny Hill"-style. It just doesn't work out as being THAT funny. The movie of course has a couple of nice moments but overall the comedy is really lacking, which is a disappointing aspect of the movie.
The story however is quite original, at least for its time it was. It involves time traveling and mistaken identities, when Ivan The Terrible find himself in 'modern' Russia, while another man from the modern Russia and Czar Ivan look-alike takes over his place in return, in the 16th century. This concept of course provides the movie with plenty of comical situations but still I feel that this movie didn't exploited all of its potential. The movie and its comedy mostly remain very simplistic and therefore also somewhat predictable.
Aside from its horrible bleak '70's Moscow look, this movie is a quite good looking one, with professional looking sets and costumes. No doubt that this was quite a cheap movie to make but for most of the time this doesn't show on screen.
Directing-wise the movie is quite flawed, as some of the sequences don't flow in well with each other and the movie features some little mistakes, such as a boom-mike hanging in frame. Leonid Gaidai was a director who felled comfortable within the comedy genre and worked with a lot of famous Soviet comedians during his career. This movie is perhaps his best known- and most popular one.
The actors also didn't convinced much within this movie but luckily saying your lines convincingly isn't the most needed required for a comical movie.
Nothing too horrible but also far from the best that the genre has to offer.
6/10
http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/
Most of the movie its comedy comes from the character looking and talking into the camera and comical sequences that are being played fast-forward, "Benny Hill"-style. It just doesn't work out as being THAT funny. The movie of course has a couple of nice moments but overall the comedy is really lacking, which is a disappointing aspect of the movie.
The story however is quite original, at least for its time it was. It involves time traveling and mistaken identities, when Ivan The Terrible find himself in 'modern' Russia, while another man from the modern Russia and Czar Ivan look-alike takes over his place in return, in the 16th century. This concept of course provides the movie with plenty of comical situations but still I feel that this movie didn't exploited all of its potential. The movie and its comedy mostly remain very simplistic and therefore also somewhat predictable.
Aside from its horrible bleak '70's Moscow look, this movie is a quite good looking one, with professional looking sets and costumes. No doubt that this was quite a cheap movie to make but for most of the time this doesn't show on screen.
Directing-wise the movie is quite flawed, as some of the sequences don't flow in well with each other and the movie features some little mistakes, such as a boom-mike hanging in frame. Leonid Gaidai was a director who felled comfortable within the comedy genre and worked with a lot of famous Soviet comedians during his career. This movie is perhaps his best known- and most popular one.
The actors also didn't convinced much within this movie but luckily saying your lines convincingly isn't the most needed required for a comical movie.
Nothing too horrible but also far from the best that the genre has to offer.
6/10
http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/
Comedic Melodrama
cvasquez9331 October 2015
Warning: Spoilers
Ivan Vasi'lievich Changes Profession, is a science comic fiction film directed by Leonid Gaidai in 1973. The film takes place in 1973 Moscow, where an engineer, Aleksandr Timofeev, is working on a time machine in his apartment. He successfully complete his invention and accidentally traps Ivan Vasilevich Bunsha, his apartment superintendent, and George Miloslavsky, a bugular and trickster, back in time to Ivan the Terrible's Palace. Ivan the terrible also becomes trapped in the future where he is mistaken for Ivan Bunsha and both parties try to disguise themselves as the other Ivan. By the end of the film both Ivans end back to their "reality" and Aleksandr awakes to realize that everything he just went through was just a dream. Ivan Vasi'lievich brings entertainment value to the forefront. The film was full of melodramactic and comedic events. One event that stood out and was rather comedic is the scene where Ivan the Terrible sees a painting in Aleksandr's apartment. The painting depicts Ivan the Terrible killing his son but he fails to recognize himself. One scene which showcases the melodramactic aspects of the film is the scene where Zina Aleksandr's wife meets Ivan the terrible and Yakin, the film directo, starts to question which "actor" is portraying Ivan, only to have Ivan get real upset and start to attack Yakin in a comedic way. The use of color in the film was used to separate the "dream" portion from reality. Reality was shown in black in white in the beginning of the film and the when Aleksandr had an accident he was unconscious and dreamt all of the events in color only to wake up in reality which the film ends in black and white. The use of color was very effect and provided a good separation of reality in the film.
build your own time machine !
myriamlenys25 October 2018
Warning: Spoilers
If you think you've got problems, try this one : 1) your frivolous wife has left you for another man 2) your prototype for a time machine is mocked and disregarded 3) you live in a large apartment building where many dislike you for causing noise, stench, electricity cuts and so on 4) the nosey superintendant of the apartment building has taken a particular dislike to you 5) by mistake, you have just sent the said superintendant back deep into the past, in the company of a cheeky burglar and 6) you are now saddled with tsar Ivan the Terrible himself, who is but doubtfully suited to life in 1970's Moscow.
Welcome to "Ivan Vasilevich menyaet professiyu" (I hope I'm spelling this right...), a barn-storming and whacky comedy which succeeds in mixing and matching subjects such as the science fiction genre, pop music, Russian history, Russian cinema and Ivan the Terrible. These last three topics are combined in a deliriously funny take, pretty much à la Mel Brooks or à la Woody Allen, on Eisenstein's blistering "Ivan" series. (Watch for the scene where the Swedish ambassadors come to Court in order to make their demands - it's a clear reference to Eisenstein's slimy or vicious grotesques.)
The movie does contain "it was all but a dream !" elements, but for once I'm giving this a pass : here the device is used as a comedic cherry on top of the cake, not as a means of getting away with an unfinished screenplay or a failing imagination. Besides, it's hard to get mad at a comedy which boasts the funniest, silliest time machine ever put on film...
Lastly it should be noted that the locations and sets used for the historical (or rather, pseudo-historical) scenes are extraordinarily beautiful and sumptuous. It is strange to consider that, in real life, buildings of such beauty, imagination and purity could serve as a background for demented violence or treacherous plotting.
Welcome to "Ivan Vasilevich menyaet professiyu" (I hope I'm spelling this right...), a barn-storming and whacky comedy which succeeds in mixing and matching subjects such as the science fiction genre, pop music, Russian history, Russian cinema and Ivan the Terrible. These last three topics are combined in a deliriously funny take, pretty much à la Mel Brooks or à la Woody Allen, on Eisenstein's blistering "Ivan" series. (Watch for the scene where the Swedish ambassadors come to Court in order to make their demands - it's a clear reference to Eisenstein's slimy or vicious grotesques.)
The movie does contain "it was all but a dream !" elements, but for once I'm giving this a pass : here the device is used as a comedic cherry on top of the cake, not as a means of getting away with an unfinished screenplay or a failing imagination. Besides, it's hard to get mad at a comedy which boasts the funniest, silliest time machine ever put on film...
Lastly it should be noted that the locations and sets used for the historical (or rather, pseudo-historical) scenes are extraordinarily beautiful and sumptuous. It is strange to consider that, in real life, buildings of such beauty, imagination and purity could serve as a background for demented violence or treacherous plotting.
Classic Russian Humor
m_prime200323 September 2007
All the humor in the movie was original at the time, and still is, but I guess not to everyone, especially residents of the US who are used to perverted humor and such.
I find it silly how a non Russian speaking person could rate this movie at all...
This movie is purely made for Russia and all the former USSR countries, and most of the Russian population have all seen it and love it!
A lot of phrases in the movie are commonly used everywhere in Russia to this day, and will be used for at least another century.
This film made Russian history.
I love it too!
I find it silly how a non Russian speaking person could rate this movie at all...
This movie is purely made for Russia and all the former USSR countries, and most of the Russian population have all seen it and love it!
A lot of phrases in the movie are commonly used everywhere in Russia to this day, and will be used for at least another century.
This film made Russian history.
I love it too!
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
