Mauricio Veliz Cartagena wrote:

>"(Alexander) Nevsky" has good moments, but "Ivan the Terrible" as a
>complete experience of image and sound in a movie is much better . . .

A good case may be made for your point of view but not if you are including
in your statement both "Ivan The Terrible," Part 1 and "Ivan the Terrible"
Part 2 (called by Eisenstein "The Boyars' Plot" at the time he made it).
I would give the nod myself to "Nevsky" because it works much better
"cinematically" than Part 1 of "Ivan," which on the screen is too static
(Pauline Kael called it "a collection of stills").

John Dalmas
[log in to unmask]