The Death of Stalin

Making fun of a scum like Stalin and the Bolshevik cadres deserves praise, but I didn't find the film very funny. The humour was quite forced and ham-fisted, I guess I'm not the right viewer for such unbridled shenanigans. The casting, with the exception of Khrushchev and Molotov (the always reliable Buscemi and Palin) was one big blunder, especially with Stalin himself, who came across more like a nice old man than the charismatic, demonic Satan. (28.04.2018)

The perfect film to “celebrate” the Victorious February. It’s very funny and dark, but also chilling when you realise that some of the events portrayed are not that far from the realities of a totalitarian regime. So, let’s hope that the gradual stupidisation of this country won’t make us go through something like this again. Otherwise, when compared to this film, the Czech satire President Blanik looks pretty sad. It’s on another level. (25.02.2018)

Stalin is dead and needs to be replaced. There are plenty of ambitious candidates to replace him, and the battle for the throne begins. Winner takes all, loser takes a bullet to the head. It's going to be a ride. The Death of Stalin is a clever comedy that relies on the fact that it features situations that are as absurd as they are terrifying, rather than classic humour. And with a great cast, too. As a purposefully slightly over-the-top reminder of what was happening just a few decades ago, the film works excellently. And as a clever comedy, too. (26.07.2018)

Excellent post-war satire, interwoven with very funny and apt black humour, great acting performances (Steve Buscemi and Simon Russel Beale are excellent), plus traditional executions and a stiffing atmosphere, so for me great satisfaction and surprisingly decent entertainment. From the turn of the year quite possibly, the best we've had. Long live Stalin! It should definitely be shown in schools. 85%. (28.02.2018)

We lost the pace. I don't even recognize Armando Iannucci because this could not possibly be the same writer who was responsible for the first four seasons of Veep. I'm not saying that he didn't touch upon controversial and sensitive topics there, but he definitely didn't handle them with subtlety. This controversial area deserves deep and sharp cuts, but instead you get good humor and some kind of secondary layer for the audience to search for, not to mention the clever and discreet jokes. The last salvation, of course, are the actors, especially the truly despicable Simon Russell Beale and the eagerly anticipated Jason Isaacs, who gets about one-tenth of the screen time that I expected after watching the trailer. (06.08.2018)

House of Cards demonises politics as a rotten evil, the Danish government presents an explosive ideal of how politics should look, the classic satire Yes, Minister ridicules the incompetence and stubbornness of top politicians and the Czech Kancelář Blaník takes the blame off of politicians and depicts professionally depersonalised and opportunistic lobbyists as the instigators of all evil. This map, on which every viewer can choose which of these image of politics suits his or her prejudices or ideals, is essentially supplemented by the British satirist Armando Iannucci, who, unlike all the others, depicts politics as uncontrolled chaos. Thanks to this, he is characteristically able to include in his screenplays, with the phenomenal – and for many epigones, inspiring - political sitcom The Thick of It at the fore, all of the above-mentioned views on politics through individual characters. The initial situation of The Death of Stalin is exactly Iannucci's characteristic political chaos, not only in the sense of what started immediately after Stalin's death, but also in the sense of the entire degenerate totalitarian regime of the USSR of late Stalinism, where only incompetents, nutcases, toadies, manipulators and morons remained in high positions, because all of the capable people had been eliminated. (07.07.2019)

Satire is not an easy genre and is highly scarce in the film market. With minimal competition, Iannucci's film would not only be called the satire of the year but with the highest probability, it would also rank among the top in the satire of the decade competition. I do not accept the criticism of the topic being outdated and exhausted. The subtle charm of authoritarianism is successful wherever you look, and the cult of personality flourishes not only in Turkey but also in countries that have not cultivated this tradition before. The audacious struggle for political influence led by all means is a timeless theme, and in Russia, the Georgian Stalin was voted the greatest Russian in a popular vote. Just watch any episode of the Russian documentary series Forgotten Leaders and you will understand how deeply Stalinism is embedded in Russian society. Iannucci has been dealing with satire for a long time and it is his home ground. However, you must forgive him for not wearing velvet gloves in his approach to satire, but rather his cynicism, vulgarity, and shallowness. A problem may arise if you associate satire with slapstick comedy. Although Iannucci is great at working with caustic sarcasm and biting irony, it is far from being a pronounced, lighthearted, and uproarious ride like, for example, Life of Brian was in its time. The film is sometimes chillingly cruel, and its authenticity of the environment and characters may present another stumbling block. It cannot be said that Iannucci failed in this regard - he simply did not care about it or address it. Michael Palin would be a great representation of Neville Chamberlain in a hypothetical satire about the Munich Agreement, but it would be hard to believe in him as Vyacheslav Molotov. Similarly, if I were looking for an actor to play Marshal Zhukov, Jason Isaacs would certainly not be on my list. However, the casting is so remarkable that it earns the highest rating from me. Jeffrey Tambor is simply perfect in his portrayal of the narcissistic weakling Malenkov, but the film is stolen by the mercurial Steve Buscemi as the cunning Khrushchev and the predominantly theatrical, and therefore relatively unknown actor Simon Russell Beale is fascinating as the brutal and cynical Beria. At times, he is truly terrifying and you are glad to be sitting in the movie theater and not face-to-face with him. The Death of Stalin is a film that won't sit well with many people, but I devoured it with relish. Overall impression: 90%. (14.07.2018)

Eine absolut tolle Komödie, bei der mir am meisten gefällt, dass sie kein bisschen dumm ist. Der Film erzählt auf eine witzige Art und Weise über ernste Dinge, ohne dass er sie lächerlich machen oder missachten würde. Das Drehbuch ist voller toller Witze, die Schauspielbesetzung funktioniert präzise (Steve Buscemi und Michael Palin sind ein Garant für den Erfolg, wenn aber auf die Szene Schukow, gespielt von Jason Isaacs, stürmt, bekommt der Film noch mehr Schwung) und jeder Witz hat eine Pointe. Hand aufs Herz – die Russen würden diesen Film verbieten, auch wenn es keine Komödie wäre und der Film alles wörtlich und todernst schildern würde. Dann hätte ich aber keine Lust, ihn immer wieder zu sehen. Und immer wieder. (17.04.2018)

To be honest, I wasn’t sure what to make of this film at first. It felt weird without Russian language, although I understand that it would be impossible. Some of the jokes didn’t work for me. Gradually, I started having fun, and by the time Zhukov arrived on the scene, I was laughing like crazy. The worst thing about the film was the casting of Stalin, which went horribly wrong and made Joseph Vissarionovich look like a parody of himself. By contrast, Robert Duvall was practically perfect in 1992 Stalin. (04.09.2018)

You almost want to say that this event could only be conceived as an absurdist comedy, if it indeed was a comedy, but in the end, it turns out that it can be a funny comedy that is clever, but at the same time presents historical events not outright faithfully, but does not distort them that much - only with the humor. (19.03.2018)