Stalin (1992)

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Movie
Original title Stalin
Country of production United States
original language English
Publishing year 1992
length 166 minutes
Rod
Director Ivan Passer
script Paul Monash
production Mark Carliner
music Stanislaw Syrewicz
camera Vilmos Zsigmond
cut Peter Davies
occupation

Stalin is a US biopic from the year 1992 . Produced by HBO and directed by Ivan Passer , the television film tells the story of Stalin's rise to power until his death and spans the period from 1917 to 1953. Thanks to his good reputation and the then prevailing politics of glasnost and perestroika , producer Mark Carliner achieved that the film was the first feature film ever to receive a filming permit for the Moscow Kremlin . Although the film was shot almost entirely on location, and Carliner insisted that the film "reflect the truth," after several scholars and historians review, the focus is less on historical context than on Stalin's character. This was seen as a flaw by many film critics, while at the same time praising Robert Duvall's performance. However, Duvall interpreted Stalin in his own way, so the film does not reveal the historical truth. The film had multiple film award nominations, including three awards at the 1993 Golden Globe Awards , with Duvall receiving his fourth Golden Globe for Best Actor in a Mini-Series or TV Movie . A German-language publication is not known.

action

Svetlana Iossifovna Allilujewa , daughter of Josef Stalin , tells how her father was brought out of his Siberian exile to fight the Tsar during the First World War and later . With the October Revolution , a new government is installed in Russia under Lenin's leadership . The young secretary Nadezhda Allilueva is put at his side for Stalin's activities . She admires him and is firmly convinced that one day he can change Russia. She falls in love with him and marries him, overlooking his weaknesses in character, such as his pronounced distrust of other people. Stalin is determined and ruthless. He has several officers executed , about which Leon Trotsky complains to Lenin. To the displeasure of intellectual Trotsky, Stalin is taken under protection by Lenin. A power struggle over Lenin's legacy develops between him and Stalin. When Lenin suffers a stroke , Stalin uses every opportunity to expel Trotsky and position himself as his successor. He surrounds himself with loyal companions like Grigory Zinoviev and Lev Kamenev , so that after Lenin's death he can ignore his will to install Trotsky as his successor and become the new ruler of the Soviet Union. As one of his first acts, he has his critics either killed or exiled. Trotsky is expelled to Turkey .

Then Stalin begins with the deculakization , where he prevails with military help against all opposition and every sacrifice that the peasants, about 80 percent of the population, have to make is fine. He demands obedience from them and threatens severe punishment. Nadezhda sees the shooting or deportation of more and more farmers on her train journey through the country, so that she stands up to her husband in a boisterous celebration. But Stalin won't let his noisy wife tell him anything and just sticks a lit cigar under her dress. Humiliated by him, she leaves the party and, since her marriage has been in crisis for a long time, she should leave him. Since a separation is not in the interests of Nadescha's parents and Stalin is increasingly ruthless towards Nadezhda, she sees no other way out than suicide . This loss leaves Stalin indifferent. Rather, he is pushing the industrialization of the Soviet Union with new major projects to develop Russia into a world power.

However, Leningrad gives him problems. After the publication of Lenin's political will, resistance against Stalin began to build up in the city. He sends Sergei Mironowitsch Kirov there to restore the necessary loyalty. But Kirov quickly became popular and a new hope for Leningrad, which is why Stalin sees him as a competitor who must be eliminated. After the successful assassination attempt, he uses the show trials to stage an alleged conspiracy. He has many of his critics and opponents murdered. But as soon as the purges are over, he sees renewed conspiracies and rivals whom he has spied on and killed, possibly Trotsky as well.

As Adolf Hitler the annexation of Austria takes, it depends on Stalin's initiative on the German-Soviet non-aggression pact . However, Hitler did not stick to it for long and started the Russian campaign in June 1941 . After Stalin digested the shock, he prepared the counter-offensive. During the war, his son from his first marriage, the artillery officer Jakow Dschugaschwili , is captured by Germans. However, Stalin rejects an exchange of prisoners with Field Marshal Friedrich Paulus . After the victory over Germany, Stalin withdrew more and more from the public and from then on only saw conspiracies. Until the end of his life he worries about Russia's future. His only regret is Nadezhda's suicide. When he dies, Nikita Khrushchev will be his successor. Since the latter recognizes in Stalin the guilty party for all Russian atrocities, he begins with the de-Stalinization .

background

Emergence

The idea of ​​a film about Stalin arose when the television film Inferno, produced by Carliner, was broadcast on Rampe 7 . The broadcast on ABC was accidentally seen by an official Russian delegation while they were in the USA. As she was enthusiastic about the anti-nuclear issue, she invited Carliner to several seminars and demonstrations in Russia . While he eventually visited the country, the film was televised and welcomed on Russian television. This later enabled Carliner to obtain filming permits for original locations.

Carliner once studied Russian history at Princeton University , which is why the idea of ​​making a film about Stalin arose. He presented the ABC project and was rejected on the grounds that it was "too expensive and too risky". Only the chairman of the cable broadcaster HBO, Michael Fuchs, agreed to take over the project. He himself had been toying with the idea of ​​making a Stalin film for years. Then it took two more years and the help of Russian officials who dealt with Stalin's time and provided access to archives and historical recordings.

In July 1991 the project was presented as the “first honest, very personal account of the controversial, dictatorial godfather of the Soviet Union”. Carliner emphasized that it would not only be a historical biography, but also a gangster film . According to various sources, a production budget of between 9.5 million and 10 million US dollars was allocated for this.

occupation

Although, according to Carliner, Al Pacino is said to have expressed his interest in the lead role, Robert Duvall was cast for the role of Stalin. Duvall had already turned down the offer to play in Andrei Sergejewitsch Michalkow-Konschalowski's feature film The Inner Circle of Stalin three months earlier , which should have been due to the different salary expectations. Duvall himself was not the first choice either, as his constitution was more like Lenin .

Duvall really wanted to have the Czech Ivan Passer as a director because he knew that Passer gave the actors a lot of freedom to create their characters. Although the producers didn't like this, Passer was hired for the project very late. Since Passer fled his home country during the Prague Spring , he had a special relationship with the project.

Make up

Profile pictures of Josef Stalin (left) and Robert Duvall Profile pictures of Josef Stalin (left) and Robert Duvall
Profile pictures of Josef Stalin (left) and Robert Duvall

The make-up specialist and Oscar winner Stephan Dupuis was hired to bring Duvall into line with Stalin . He was faced with the challenge of transforming Duvall's blue eyes, which are deep-set and appear soft, his bald head and small nose in Stalin's coarse face, dark skin and brown, slightly Mongolian eyes. To do this, he studied photos of both of them to determine the differences in their facial contours. He drove to Duvall's ranch, made an imprint of his face, and then made a clay mask from it at home. Taking into account the different areas of skin, the right color, wig, nose prosthesis and false eyebrows and mustache, he finally made Duvall's mask for Josef Stalin. The mask was finally finished a week before shooting began. Thanks to a mobile studio that was used during the shooting in Russia, however, any number of masks could be made.

Pre-production

On the eve of August 18, 1991, Passer and Carliner were in Moscow looking for suitable locations. They stayed at the Oktyabrskaya Hotel , which later turned out to be the main headquarters of the opposition that initiated the August coup in Moscow the next morning . When the military took a stand around the Kremlin, they immediately fled Russia to Budapest for fear of being mistaken for enemy CIA agents. Once in Budapest, Carliner believed that "two years of work to get the filming permits went up in smoke" and that the film could not be made. Passer suggested shooting the film in Budapest instead. The next day, Leonid Vereshchagin , then general manager of the production company of Russian writer Nikita Michalkow , who was in turn cultural advisor to the Russian government, called and said that the coup would be over in about ten days. He also urged him to shoot in Russia. Well aware of the propaganda benefits that could be drawn from the film vis-à-vis opposition critics, the filmmakers were assured of any support and were invited back to Moscow three days later after the attempted coup was over. Several interior scenes were shot in Hungary before the entire film crew was back in Moscow about a month later. On November 6th, Carliner came to Russia with Schell.

script

In 1991, Carliner hired the scriptwriter Paul Jarrico to revise Paul Monash's script . He joined the American Communist Party in 1939 and was on the “black list” because of its political connections during the McCarthy era . Carliner hoped that Jarrico would have a “unique connection to the material” and that “the project would benefit from his revisions”. But it turned out differently. For its function as a script doctor Jarrico should be a fee of 30,000 dollars received for reviewing and further $ 10,000 for the revision.

Robert Duvall developed his interpretation of Josef Stalin on the basis of archive recordings and individual conversations

Since Monash's script was around four hours long, he cut 26 pages from the script, rewrote the beginning and fundamentally changed the scenes in which the fear of Sergei Kirov's murder is expressed. He expanded Bukharin's role, so that his speech against forced collectivization was extended and a call to return to Leninism was added. He also added two scenes in which Stalin was discussing the benefits of a treaty with Germany with Maxim Litvinov and in which Stalin, in view of certain information, still refuses to understand that Germany would attack him. Monash didn't like these changes, which is why he said at a meeting with Jarrico in September 1991 that HBO didn't like these changes either and therefore owed him no money. Since he had to work three days extra after the deadline and found himself defrauded of $ 13,000, Jarrico called on the legal department of the Writers Guild of America , which suggested a settlement between him and HBO. After declining $ 5,000 and $ 7,000, he accepted the third offer of $ 8,000 and additional payments to his pension and health insurance. Most of Jarrico's scenes have been removed from the script. The actors only received the full script two weeks before shooting began.

Figure development

Robert Duvall as Josef Stalin

During the preparations for Michalkow-Konchalowskis The Inner Circle , Duvall stayed with the director in Russia so that he could fall back on some experiences and aspects. He looked at old archive recordings, read several books and spoke to former companions. But he found that in the end no one knew about Stalin. He was even surprised to find that “more was known about Hitler than about Stalin.” Since he couldn't find anything useful that portrayed Stalin's character, he had to construct it for himself. So he started from scratch and put the figure together based on his own considerations. However, he also saw the danger that he could “not get access to the figure and not anticipate with it”. It is difficult to “ intellectualize ” Stalin , which is why Duvall looked for “contradictions in his character” “in order to gain a few aspects from him.” For him, Stalin was nothing more than a normal person who “gets up in the morning with his socks and shoes attracts, brushes his teeth and goes to work. ”And because he didn't see himself as“ bad, ”Duvall“ couldn't see him as bad either ”. So he imagined Stalin as a Shakespearean character who "saw only deception, attacks and faithlessness everywhere". Duvall imagined how far Stalin would go to survive in this world. How he “would mix poison at night” and how he “would practice in front of a mirror to appear repellent, stoic or passive”. He saw Stalin as a gangster and compared it to "as if Al Capone had become President of the United States."

“He ruined everyone around him: his wife, his daughter, his sons. I kept thinking, I can't just play this guy as a monster. I've got to find contradictions. It can't be an imitation. How do you play this guy? How do you play evil? "

- Robert Duvall in the New York Times

“He ruined everyone around him: his wife, his daughter, his sons. I figured I couldn't just play this man as a monster. I had to find opposites. It cannot be imitation. How do you play this man? How do you play evil? "

"You can't play evil, you can only play behavior. It wasn't Shakespeare. I had to play this gray quality. Stalin would stand in front of the mirror practicing that, studying to make himself more and more inscrutable. Where do you find pace and energy there? In newsreels, you see that Stalin wasn't the obvious thing, like Mussolini or Castro. You never saw home movies of him, like Hitler and Eva Braun. You never saw his friends. He was a hermetic guy. He wasn't flamboyant. But he had a hypnotic face, like Rasputin. I guess I had a lot of insecurity. I didn't know it at first, but I was fighting for my life. "

- Robert Duvall in the Los Angeles Times

“You can't play evil, you can only play behaviors. It wasn't Shakespeare. I had to play these gray qualities. Standing in front of a mirror, Stalin would practice how he would become more and more obscure. But where would you find this speed and energy? In newsreel footage you can see that Stalin was not as transparent as Mussolini or Castro . You never saw his private films at home, as with Hitler and Eva Braun . You never saw your friends. He was a closed man. It wasn't conspicuous. But he had a hypnotic face, like Rasputin . I guess I was very insecure. At first I didn't know, but I was fighting for my life. "

"One general told me Stalin had the ability to freeze his conscience. That was a key to this character. It gave me a hook. Hey was guiltless. He was like a crocodile. He ate his own. He was so complex and strange. How do you convey this? I went to work every day with fear and trembling. "

- Robert Duvall in the New York Times

“A general told me that Stalin had the ability to block his conscience. That was the key to his character. That became my hook. He was blameless. He was like a crocodile. He ate his own kind. It was so complex and strange. But how do you convey that? I went to work every day with fear and trembling. "

Duvall met with several historians, including the historian and former general Dmitri Antonowitsch Volkogonov , who gave him the key to its interpretation by saying that Stalin had a “blocked conscience”. He also spoke to another historian who attempted a psychoanalysis of Stalin. He believed that Stalin had a deep need for enemies and was only so cruel and terrible because he was possessed by a latent self-loathing. He also spoke to Stalin's former bodyguard in charge. He showed him how Stalin ran and spoke, and he learned that he was a very private and mysterious person. Duvall realized for himself that Stalin was a strange and complex man for him. For him he was “a street gangster with farmer's cunning” who was also “unpredictable and devouring”. Duvall then said that "Shakespeare wrote about him because he was deep, dark and calm."

In preparation for his role, Duvall spent four days in Stalin's dacha to empathize with the character. Since one could neither “play the story” nor “play the time”, he only tried to play Stalin “from moment to moment”, “without first knowing what the result might look like.” Although he noted an interesting aspect in it to see, to uncover history, Duvall stated that he did not understand Stalin as a person. He didn't know his "dark, deep secrets and what drove him to power." He also wonders if he could ever understand him. However, Duvall's performance has been described as his "most thoughtful and effective of all roles".

Julia Ormond as Nadezhda Allilujewa

British actress Julia Ormond faced the same problem as Duvall. She did research, read several books and looked at old archive recordings to get closer to Alliluyeva's character. But apart from the book Svetlana Alliluyeva: 20 letters to a friend , from Nadeschda's daughter Svetlana Alliluyeva , she found nothing useful. She liked the fact that in Alliluyeva she had a character with whom she could play an urge for freedom. That is why she created her character “as a romantic idealist”, “who falls in love with the hero Stalin”. With the gradual discovery of Stalin's weaknesses, the mass murder and cruelty that raged in the country, as well as the disappointment that Stalin destroyed their hopes, marginalized them and made them feel superfluous, the further development of the characters was mapped out. However, it was an elderly Russian lady who pointed out to Ormond during the filming that she could play a little more apathetically, because Allilujewa would have suffered psychological damage from the fact that she had recognized that all her ideals were lapsing and thus she was her Lived life in vain. As a result, Ormond played, according to critics, "perhaps the most tragic victim in history". Her “gentle, innocent and loving” performance was later praised, like that of Duvall. Alan Parchament, film critic for Buffalo News , panned the film but praised its play. He also said that after Nadeschda's suicide there was no longer any reason to watch the film, since Ormond had "stolen the film" as the only feast for the eyes.

Maximilian Schell as Lenin

The role of Lenin was not particularly extensive, as he dies after just 35 minutes of film. Still, it was no less important. Maximilian Schell took advantage of the little time he could be seen on screen. Before each scene he had a tape recorder with him so that he could hear the recordings in Lenin's voice. He was less concerned with “imitating than with feeling it.” This was not easy for Schell, as he felt a certain aversion to Lenin, “because he allowed many people to kill, because he believed that power cannot be achieved without Terror could have. ”Nevertheless, he played this role and tried to convey a certain contrast in body language. At the beginning of the film, for example, he concentrated on using the right hand more frequently in order to illustrate Lenin's later frailty and immobility after his stroke. He was so convincing that he was repeatedly praised by film critics, who said that “you only realize very late” that “Maximilian Schell is behind the mask.” He was also nominated for an Emmy and received his first CableACE Award as well his second Golden Globe, for Best Supporting Actor - Series, Miniseries, or TV Movie .

Filming

For the first time, permission to shoot a feature film was granted in the Moscow Kremlin .

Shooting began in October 1991. In Russia, the film was shot exclusively on original locations, including in Kunzewo , in prisons, the Kiev train station and, for the first time ever, in the Moscow Kremlin . During the filming in the Russian White House , government work was not stopped, so that parallel to the film crew Mikhail Gorbachev only pursued government affairs one floor below.

Carliner's friends, who had already shot in Russia, warned him of difficult and sometimes unusual challenges. During the estimated seven-week shooting period, minor problems kept coming up. Extras went on strike because they wanted higher pay. Train drivers were already drunk by eight in the morning so they couldn't keep their signals. Even simple scenes, such as the hunt for the hare in Siberia, had to be interrupted because they were made aware that they were filming in a national park where this was forbidden. The then head of the Lenin Mausoleum , Alexander Schefow, was a conservative hardliner, which is why he not only criticized the production, but also delayed it. The KGB was also not very cooperative. For example, the film team, consisting of 25 members and the associated equipment, had to wait over seven hours before they could pass the security check for the Kremlin to be allowed onto the premises. After all, the Kremlin's power supply could not be used for lighting, as the KGB said it would interfere with the technology in their own devices, so it took four to five hours to figure out how not to overload the Kremlin's power supply. There was a power outage in Stalin's dacha after the final death scene had just been shot. A whole day of shooting was lost because extras weren't there. So Stalin's acceptance speech about the victory in World War II was to be shot in the Kremlin hall. The shooting schedule was scheduled for eight in the morning, but the extras were missing because they were ten kilometers further with the mask. After more than eight hours, shuttle buses could be made available that brought over 500 extras to the location. But since they were hungry and did not heed the director's instructions, they ate the whole buffet before the film was shot, so that the film no longer contains a scene while eating. Ormond, who in the meantime was mistaken for a prostitute in the hotel because she was waiting alone in the lobby as a woman, said that one was beginning to “believe that none of this could be coincidences and were deliberate attempts” to sabotage the film.

However, time could be saved again, because Duvall, who stayed in the Savoy Hotel in Moscow the whole time , had to put on the make-up for over four hours a day from the start of filming in order to be transformed into Stalin by two make-up specialists. In the course of the shooting, however, the procedure was reduced to around 75 minutes. Overall, the film was shot in nine six-day weeks. On December 21, 1991, four hours after the Soviet Union dissolved, the last scene was filmed in Stalin's dacha .

To test the effectiveness of their masks, Maximilian Schell and Duvall went to the people dressed as Lenin and Stalin. While Schell, who visited the GUM department store in Moscow in disguise , was often ignored, Duvall, as Stalin, often experienced only rejection and disregard.

reception

Premiere in Russia

Because of the attempted coup, Yeltsin asked the filmmakers to have the film screened on November 7, 1992 in the cinema of the DOM cultural center in Moscow before it was broadcast in the US on November 21, 1992 . The date was chosen deliberately as it was the 75th anniversary of the October Revolution . Even before the premiere, a few scenes were shown on Russian television, so that Nikolai Pavlov, a member of the opposition executive committee of the National Salvation Front , strongly criticized the film because it “oversimplified everything” and left nothing more than “extravagant” from Stalin Sadist and executioner who lusts for power. ”Yeltsin was not deterred and demanded that the film be seen by 1,000 celebrities and leaders of the Russian government. Like Gorbachev, he stayed away from the premiere. However, Vice President Alexander Ruzkoi and former Soviet US ambassador Anatoly Dobrynin appeared .

At the beginning of the event, Russian historian and Stalin biographer Dmitri Volkogonov explained the film, pointing out both the historical context and the fact that the film was merely "an American view of Stalin". The film started with a laugh when the audience saw the opening scene allegedly depicting Stalin in Siberia , with local Muscovites immediately spotting a suburb of Moscow. As the film progressed and the realization that Stalin's crimes were largely spared, the audience began to grumble and the film ended with a "superficial clap".

When asked for their own opinion about the film, people responded differently depending on whether they sympathized with Stalin or thought he was a criminal. Russian politicians saw the film as more of a "political thriller that reduces Stalin to a gangster and executioner." Many viewers said that one should have dwelled less on Stalin's life and concentrated more on his crimes. Rada Adzhubei, daughter of Nikita Khrushchev, thought it was “good that such films are shown” and saw him “with pleasure”. A senior adviser to Ruzkoi said that the film is seen as "useful for Americans, useless for Russians". Some said the film was a "farce, a forgery [...], American propaganda to tear the country apart", others criticized the fact that Stalin was being romanticized. He was too "warm and soft" for them to do justice to all those horrors for which he was responsible. For others, the film was "artificial and primitive" in that it would not have captured time. Since one also “knows too much about Stalin's excesses,” the films seem “like a parody”. Overall, it was stated that you could “not make a good film about Stalin or Hitler” because “no matter what you do in the film”, you could never “do justice to reality.” However, almost everyone was satisfied with Duvall's portrayal and the impressive original locations.

Duvall, who usually speaks with a slight southern accent, said before the premiere that his interpretation of a Georgian accent will probably cause "a lot of frowns at the premiere". After the premiere, Russian film producers offered Duvall to star in other possible Russian films about Lenin and Trotsky. Duvall refused.

American criticism

The criticism recognized the efforts for the film as well as the high production budget. In this “demanding epic”, which “is rich in scenes that are well written and sharply played and that could serve as textbook examples of what a drama should be like”, new “impressive aspects” and “powerful scenes” are revealed. Vilmos Zsigmond's camera work was also highlighted. He adapted his color scheme to the characters' attitudes towards life and initially showed a brightly colored picture that should illustrate the "very happy and optimistic" hopes after the revolution. However, the choice of color decreases more and more as the film progresses, so that in the end only black and white remain. This was recognized as “elaborate” and “beautifully filmed” as well as “splendidly staged”. That would be primarily due to the exterior shots, which give the film a “look, abundance, unpredictability” and “feeling of authenticity”. Added to this is Syrewicz's “turbulent composition”, which is “partly overwhelming”.

Another point of criticism of Stalin was Robert Duvall's game. Although a whole range of different situations, such as singing, dancing, joking, was shown, some said that Duvall remains "invisible under the mask". Opinions differed as to whether Duvall's “game was hindered by the mask” because he “could only move his eyes”, or whether, despite the “expressionless face” and his “mysterious and unfathomable” drama, “nobody has ever been more convincing and haunting to Stalin portrayed as Duvall. ”The mask in particular seemed to have an effect on the drama, because“ there are no spontaneous actions ”, since everything“ seems preserved ”and every moment of cheerfulness can turn into a dead silence. Duvall can only do that thanks to his mask, which also creates an “illusion of threat”. For others, like Scott Hettrick of the Sun Sentinel , this illusion was not given because he said that a big problem with the film is that “as soon as you see Robert Duvall, you see Robert Duvall. But when you see Maximilian Schell, you see Lenin and only realize very late that it is Schell. "

The focus on Stalin's personal life has been seen by some as the film's "greatest strength and major disadvantage". The “missing historical context” was taken up as the greatest point of criticism by almost all film critics. It is not possible to present Stalin's story in a three-hour film, which would require a “long mini-series to capture Stalin in its entirety”, but a big problem is that the film does not answer the questions it raises, not answered, so that the viewer does not know whether Stalin was a “gangster who was just lucky? A sociopath? Some kind of evil genius? A flawed visionary. ”So for John Leonard of New York Magazine the film was nothing more than a Forsyte saga , as it seemed more important to show how“ Stalin puts a lighted cigar under Nadya's dress and how mean he is to his children from both marriages is “as to explain the history of ideas and historical facts.

Press reviews

Despite being "an ambitious and grandiose project," the New York Times ' John J. O'Connor wondered what "could have gone wrong." He attributed it to the production process, because the film is not only "superficial", but also "all too often diplomatic" to be able to survive on the world market, especially in Russia. However, he praised Duvall, who "wrapped up under acrylic make-up" and "trapped in a relentlessly evil role between The Godfather and Potemkin [...] tries to make Stalin appear human".

Thanks to Passer's “impressive direction” and the excellent play Duvalls, who “has to convey its essence through clever body language because of the make-up”, the film, according to Tony Scott of Variety magazine, can fully focus on Stalin's “ruthlessness , his manipulations and his disregard for friendship ”. However, by doing so he disregards the historical context, which is why the attempt to understand the Georgian despot "failed".

In the Chicago Sun-Times , Lon Grahnke said that the film is on the one hand a "demanding epic" and on the other hand a "dark and often depressing film that traces the rise of a murderer to absolute power". He praised Duvall, who struggles to find a “spark of humanity in a cold-blooded creature” and, despite his comparable “indifferent play”, is still “more interesting than his” fellow actors. He also said that Passer and Zsigmond "in their dark pictures reflect their Slavic sensitivities and painful memories of their youth in Eastern Europe". But he also criticized the fact that the film offers too many historical facts and too little explores the “psychological motives”.

Rick Kotag said in the Chicago Tribune that the film does not do justice to historical facts and therefore cannot fully present Stalin and the “monster in man”. The film "compresses all events and people to be a more intimate and daunting portrait". But since this approach seems bumpy, it is "misguided and moderately successful". Rather, he praised Duvall's “hypnotic performance, full of physical threat that overshadows many of the film's problems”, and saw Stalin's wife Nadezhda Allilueva “perhaps the most tragic victim in history” because she is the only person to whom he is devoted and shows humanity . But because of his "brutal nature and ruthlessness" he drives them to suicide.

“On the face of it, it's a quality film. But there seems to be more superficiality beneath the surface, ”Tom Shales wrote in the Washington Post . The film offers "impressive aspects", "powerful scenes" and with its "deep, rich picture [...] was beautifully shot by Zgismond". It is even “a convincing, lively portrait of paranoia, amorality and rowdy brute force”, which, however, thanks to a “missing historical context” which, according to Shales, has to be thought of with its consequences and the history of ideas, “becomes a caricature of evil "degenerated.

"The movie is only worth a look because of Duvall's acting," criticized Fred Kaplan in the Boston Globe , because the rest of it is just "utterly stupid" and "trivial". After all, the film has nothing else to say than that Stalin was a monster. He further criticized that the "story is almost completely presented as a palace intrigue" without going into the background and causes. He praised "Duvall's haunting performance as a Soviet dictator", but at the same time regretted that the "script gives so little" with which Duvall could have alluded. The film “would only be more bearable” if it lived up to its own claim to “present a convincing anatomy of evil”, but even that “it fails”.

David Zurawik criticized in the Baltimore Sun that “HBO had lost its Josef Stalin somewhere between the script and the screen.” The film was “lavishly staged” and had “a visual structure, abundance and unpredictability that only outdoor shots can offer. But optics is not everything. ”Especially when, in his opinion, only“ essential kitchen psychology ”was used to characterize Stalin, which would represent the inner workings of Stalin far too simply. And even what is available cannot be presented correctly because Duvall is hindered by his mask and could only move his eyes, which makes his game look absolutely leaden.

In the weekly magazine Entertainment Weekly , Michael Sauter said that Duvall shows “a dominant presence as Comrade Stalin”, but the person behind it remains hidden “under all the tons of make-up”. He also wondered why the “second largest monster of the century” was so boring.

Further publication

After its world premiere on November 7th, the film was broadcast on November 21, 1992 in the USA on the commercial television network HBO . The film received sparse international exploitation, among other things it was released in Hungary with the title Sztálin . There is no indication of whether the film was released in French or in the German-speaking areas of Germany, Austria and Switzerland. In the US, the film was released on VHS and on September 4, 2012 on DVD . The film was also released on DVD in Spain. However, there is only the option to choose between Castilian and English .

Awards and nominations

The film was nominated and awarded for several film awards. The cameraman Vilmos Zsigmond and the actors Robert Duvall, Maximilian Schell and Joan Plowright received particular attention.

Golden Globe Awards 1993
Emmy Award
  • Best production design
  • Best camera
  • Best TV movie
  • Best sound mix
  • further nominations (best screenplay, best leading actor, best supporting actor, best supporting actress, best make-up, best sound editing)
CableACE Award
  • Best camera
  • Best film score
  • Best supporting actor
  • further nominations (best production design, best costumes, best director, best film)
ASC Award
  • Award for the best camera in a television film

literature

  • D'Agostino: Stalin , American Historical Review, Vol. 98, No. 4 (October 1993), pp. 1169-1171.
  • Milena Michalski: Stalin , The Slavonic and East European Review, Vol. 73, No. 1 (January 1995), pp. 192-194.

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p David Gritten COVER STORY: ON LOCATION: Awakening the Kremlin's Ghosts on latimes.com from January 12, 1992 (English), accessed April 19, 2012
  2. ↑ a b c d e f David Gritten: 'Stalin' Gets Lenin's Office in the Kremlin on latimes.com from November 16, 1992 (English), accessed on April 19, 2012
  3. ↑ a b Tom Jicha: Stalin Robert Duvall's Powerful Presence And Hbo's Quest For Accuracy Combine For A Chilling Portrait Of The Soviet Dictator on sun-sentinel.com from November 21, 1992 (English), accessed on April 19, 2012
  4. ↑ a b c d Michael Hill: Gilman graduate produces Stalin film for HBO on baltimoresun.com from July 22, 1991 (English), accessed on April 19, 2012
  5. ^ A b c Greg Dawson: There's Not Much Life To Hbo's 'Stalin' on orlandosentinel.com dated November 21, 1992, accessed April 19, 2012
  6. ↑ Duvall to play 'Stalin' for HBO ( Memento of the original from January 3, 2016 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. , Chicago Sun-Times , July 18, 1991 (via Highbeam.com) @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.highbeam.com
  7. ↑ a b c d e f g Will Englund: Hbo Brings Stalin To Life on baltimoresun.com from January 4, 1992 (English), accessed on April 19, 2012
  8. ↑ a b c d Stephanie Simon: 'Stalin' Divides Russians: Some Charge HBO Film Blackens Dictator, Others Call It Too Rosy on latimes.com November 9, 1992, accessed April 19, 2012
  9. ↑ a b c d e f g h i Lee Winfrey: That Other Stalin In The Film, Duvall Becomes The Evil Ruler Incarnate on philly.com of November 19, 1992, accessed April 19, 2012
  10. ↑ a b Tony Scott: Stalin on variety.com from November 18, 1992 (English), archived on archive.is from the original on September 19, 2012
  11. ↑ a b c d e Michael McGuire: Makeup Artist Turns Duvall Into Stalin on chicagotribune.com from April 2, 1992 (English), accessed on April 19, 2012
  12. ↑ a b c d e f g Jerry Buck: DUVALL SEES STALIN AS COMPLEX SHAKESPEAREAN VILLAIN ( Memento of the original from April 2, 2016 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. , The Buffalo News, November 15, 1992 (via Highbeam.com) @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.highbeam.com
  13. ↑ a b c d e f g h Bernhard Weinraub: Playing Stalin the Man Not Stalin the Monster on nytimes.com from November 5, 1992 (English), accessed on April 19, 2012
  14. ↑ a b c d e f g h i Lawrence Christon: PROFILE: From All-American to All Stalin: Robert Duvall's career has given us characters who have exposed the soul of our nation. Next, the evil of a dictator. on latimes.com dated November 15, 1992, accessed April 19, 2012
  15. ↑ a b c d Susan King: From Russia With Hassles: From Coup Attempts To Rabbit Chaos, The Crew Of HBO's 'Stalin' Had Its Hands Full , Los Angeles Times , November 15, 1992 (English)
  16. ↑ a b c Laurinda Keys: Making a 'gangster movie' about the life of Josef Stalin ( Memento of the original from February 25, 2016 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. , The Boston Globe , December 8, 1991 (via Highbeam) @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.highbeam.com
  17. ↑ a b c d David Gritten: Coup Stalls 'Stalin': After a Scare, Film Will Still Shoot in Moscow on latimes.com from September 2, 1991 (English), accessed on April 23, 2012
  18. ↑ a b c d Army Archerd: 'Stalin' opens curtain for Duvall on variety.com from November 1, 1992 (English), archived with archive.is from the original  ( page no longer available , search in web archives )  Info: The link was automatically marked as defective. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. on February 5, 2013@1@ 2Template: Dead Link / www.variety.com  
  19. ↑ James J. Lorence: The Suppression of Salt of the Earth: How Hollywood, Big Labor, and Politicians Blacklisted a Movie in Cold War America. University of New Mexico Press, 1999, p. 50.
  20. ↑ Larry Ceplair: The Marxist and the Movies. A Biography of Paul Jarrico The University Press of Kentucky, Lexington KY 2007, ISBN 978-0-8131-2453-7 , pp. 225-226.
  21. ↑ a b c d e f g h James P. Gallagher: 'Stalin' Not Real Enough For Moscow on chicagotribune.com from November 9, 1992 (English), accessed on April 19, 2012
  22. ^ Judith Lazarus: Playing The Woman Behind The Tyrant on latimes.com of November 15, 1992 (English), accessed April 19, 2012
  23. ↑ a b Rick Kogan: A Mesmerizing Duvall Helps Smooth The Choppy Feel Of 'Stalin' on chicagotribune.com from November 20, 1992 (English), accessed on April 19, 2012
  24. ↑ Alan Parchment: Cliched 'Stalin' Lasts Longer Than Russian Revolution ( Memento of the original from April 15, 2016 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.highbeam.com archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. , The Buffalo News, November 20, 1992 (via Highbeam)
  25. ↑ a b c Scott Hettrick: Altman Makes Movie Inaccessible on sun-sentinel.com from March 26, 1993 (English), accessed on April 19, 2012
  26. ↑ a b John Leonard: Tru Stories , New York Magazine , November 23, 1992 (English)
  27. ↑ Fred Hiatt: Anniversary Is a Flop In Moscow; Leaders Skip Protests, Give Film Top Billing ( Memento of the original from November 26, 2015 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.highbeam.com archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. , The Washington Post , November 8, 1992 (via Highbeam.com)
  28. ↑ a b Lon Grahnke: Russia's 'Man of Steel' Is No Superhero ( Memento of the original from April 26, 2016 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. , Chicago Sun-Times , November 20, 1992 (via Highbeam.com) @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.highbeam.com
  29. ↑ a b c Tom Shales: TV Preview; HBO's 'Stalin': Superficial Despite Duvall ( Memento of the original from March 29, 2015 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. , The Washington Post , November 21, 1992 (accessed via Highbeam.com) @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.highbeam.com
  30. ↑ a b c d David Zurawik: Duvall's Stalin: All made up, no place to go on baltimoresuncom of November 20, 1992 (English), accessed on April 19, 2012
  31. ↑ a b c d e Howard Rosenberg : A Brute Too Big for TV Screen on latimes.com from November 20, 1992 (English), accessed April 19, 2012
  32. ↑ a b Fred Kaplan: HBO's 'Stalin' is mostly silly ( memento of the original from April 8, 2016 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link has been inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. , The Boston Globe , November 21, 1992 (via Highbeam.com) @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.highbeam.com
  33. ↑ John J. O'Connor: Robert Duvall as Stalin, the Embodiment of Evil on nytimes.com of November 20, 1992 (English), accessed April 19, 2012
  34. ↑ Michael Sauter: Stalin on ew.com from April 2, 1993 (English), accessed on April 19, 2012
This article was added to the list of articles worth reading on March 23, 2013 in this version .