Rating: - Truth
A true characterization of a truly pathetic individual. Historically, Stalin & Hitler were no more than two lost souls, losers in every way, that found a home in subjective, reactive rhetorical organizations.
Stalin used his power to turn his delusions into reality, and untold
horrors for the Russian people. This movie accurately portrays the
beast and his place in history.
Rating: - History or Hollywood? STALIN delivers an excellent balance
I agree with Leaming. Any time Hollywood depicts history, there are going to be issues of inaccuracy, artistic license, etc. In the case of the film STALIN, this is mostly due to the need to compress about thirty years into less than three hours. The portrayals of the primary characters are sometimes simplistic and inaccurate, but Bukharin and Kirov's characters (for example) are portrayed so as to accentuate the perception of Stalin as a monster (which is accurate). In other words, the truth is adapted somewhat to generate a dramatic foil. Films are never a substitute for reading the real ... Read More
Rating: - nevermind the "purist" reviews - this is an excellent film
This film is historically excellent. What most reviewers seem hung up on are accents, make-up and costumes. Most comment that it is historically inaccurate but give nothing very specific. The film is a broad overview of the life of Stalin and could never include every element of his life. All the important stuff is there: the Revolution, the power struggle between Trotsky and Stalin, Stalin's rise to power, The great famines, The Great Purges, WWII, etc. The film gives great insight into Stalin and the paranoia that he experienced and how that paranoia influenced the way he ruled over the ... Read More
Rating: - Good Characterization of Stalin, Bad History
In the past, apologists for Stalin (including many of his victims) said that Stalin was good, but he was surrounded by bad people. This film turns this on its head saying that Stalin was bad, but he was surrounded by good people. Both of these are wrong--the leaders of the Bolshevik Revolution and the leaders of the USSR in the period following the revolution were all up to their necks in blood. Robert Duvall gives an excellent portrayal of Stalin, emphasizing that he, unlike his ranting partner in mass murder Hitler, was soft-spoken and basically uncharismatic. Duvall correctly does not use ... Read More
Rating: - Problems abound
To all the reviewers who think Duvall captured the "real" Joseph Stalin, please run to a bookshelf and consult a non-fictional history of the man. The real Stalin does not appear in this sometimes facile, oftentimes inaccurate biography of the Russian dictator. Originally airing as an HBO TV movie, there are an abundance of errors in the script, as well as a host of other problems.
First, the make-up is amateurish and truly detracts from the viewing experience. Duvall's mustache is a clear paste-on job and in several scenes, the left side of the whiskers almost falls off his face. It's ... Read More
- 
- 