Exoticalot
People are voting emotionally.
HottWwjdIam
There is just so much movie here. For some it may be too much. But in the same secretly sarcastic way most telemarketers say the phrase, the title of this one is particularly apt.
Humbersi
The first must-see film of the year.
Kirpianuscus
for each historical film, I looking to the accuracy of reflection of events. in this case, the motif for see it was Oleg Iankovski. and the gift, the splendid performance of Victor Suhorukov. it is a sketch more than a real story about the reign of a controversial tsar. not a pledge for or against Pavel I but a nice reflection about power from the Russian view point. Oleg Iankovski did an impeccable role and this is not a real surprise. the revelation is Surorokov , who explores, with precise grace, the nuances of a character who could be a hard job for many actors. because it is a film about absence and the few references are the right way to define the past of a fragile man, isolated in his personal universe. not the madness of leaders is the subject of film but the dialogue between a leader and his collaborators. a film about fragility. using a remarkable cast.
Lee Eisenberg
Vitaliy Melnikov's look at Czar Paul I of Russia is at once a biopic and a study of the Russian cultural ethos. Paul's reign was a short one - overshadowed by his mother and predecessor Catherine the Great - and it was beset by a number of crushing issues. "Bednyy bednyy Pavel" ("Poor Poor Paul" in English) does a good job focusing on this moment in history. I wouldn't go so far as to call this a masterpiece, but it's still an important movie. A lot of the humor is stuff that you'll only get if you understand Russian culture. The actors make sure to put a lot of emotion into their roles to emphasize the Russian ethos. Check it out.
Jay Bethke
In recent years I have come to anxiously look forward to any piece of Russian cinema that I am able to see. It rarely disappoints, and is almost universally at a deeper emotional level than what is produced in the U.S. Poor Pavel epitomizes the difference. While being at times very funny, it is also profoundly sad ...but not in the sappy, clumsy, staged sort of way that so many U.S. films cannot rise above. Maybe it's the Russian spirit, laughing hard and crying hard at the same time. The actor portraying Pavel, Victor Sukhorukov, gives off a unique, uneasy and disturbing feeling that works so well for Pavel, and I can't praise the other actors highly enough either. Between them and the direction of the film, there is real cinematic magic at work. The viewer is transported to the late 18th century Russia for an exciting walk with a mad king, and no reminders that it is only a film, such as formulas or cheap dialog, show up to disturb what is an all around great picture.
philip1970
A must even for people who hate subtitles! This movie is what going to the cinema is all about: it has a truly intriguing plot, a historical setting that is well represented, and for people outside Russia provides the perfect opportunity to get to know that country better while enjoying it thoroughly. I asked a friend who usually sees only American films to the movie, and after it he declared that he was ready to renounce Hollywood. The way the film keeps your interest, is historical as well as exotic, and provides a compete thrill has become uncommon.
