different
Kirpianuscus
for Romanian Comunist regime, the film was a tool of propaganda. the historical movie has a special status, for legitimate the policy of regime. sure, it was…
for Romanian Comunist regime, the film was a tool of propaganda. the historical movie has a special status, for legitimate the policy of regime. sure, it was not only the case of Romania. The Return of Lapusneanu is one of rare exceptions. not only for the aesthetic value, for the profound influence of Eisenstein's Ivan the Terrible, for the performances who are more than ideological dolls , but for the status of reflection of Ceausescu's political evolution. the first years of regime defined by the connections with the Western Europe and USA, a large autonomy for people, and the final period - a Stalinist dictatorship. the reign of Lapusneanu, the revenge against nobles, the fall in a paranoid circle, the end of reforms who could transform the country are perfect mirror for regime's evolution. but, in same measure, for the director Malvina Ursianu is only a detail. because the purpose is to present the role of personality in history. the good cast, the good script are the axis of a profound reflection about power and about the solitude of the leader. and about the fight for create the good projections. a beautiful film. maybe, not only for the image but for the message.
Read full review
★ 9 / 10
Portrait of a Moldavian medieval prince
Vincentiu
At first sight, "Intoarcerea lui Voda Lapusneanu" is a clone of Eiseinstein's "Ivan Groznyy". Same atmosphere, same gestures, same acting. The commons elements…
At first sight, "Intoarcerea lui Voda Lapusneanu" is a clone of Eiseinstein's "Ivan Groznyy". Same atmosphere, same gestures, same acting. The commons elements are the result of the rules for a historical film, of a similar message and of an era taste. But, George Motoi is not Nikolai Cherkasov( in spite of obvious similarities) and Malvina Ursianu is victim of desire to transmit medieval halo with accuracy.
Alexandru Lapusneanu is one of important Moldavian rulers. A Macbeth figure, who obtains his throne in fight, who reeves any possible danger out of his way, a good "hospodar", husband and father. His reign is result of relation with the Great Powers of the XVIth century. The strain relation with the boyars (noblemen), the economic and spiritual contribution in the country's development, tensions of his own family, the loss of reign and the revenge, the second reign are elements for define the man and the prince like touching character.
Malvina Ursianu's movie is a web. Legend and authentic facts are mixed in an interesting story about power and his limits, about desire and doubt, love and refuge. The medieval actions are reflexions in a "golden era", the era of Ceausescu. And this is the supreme similarities with the masterpiece of 1944: fight of creator with a Communist regime this same final result.
The first merit of director is the art to not create a propaganda instrument. Then the choose of talented actors (the delicate, subtle acting of Silvia Popovici like Lapusneanu' wife is magnificent). At the end of soft period in Ceausescu's regime , the film marks the end of a life's style and the beginning of North Coreea's communism style in Romania.
"The Return of Prince Lapusneanu" at power, in the second reign, in his revenge, suspicion forms is description of a paranoid political system, living in a personal world, in strange dreams of a perfect megalomania.
But this film is not a form of resistance. The Caravaggio's light, the recreate atmosphere are only cages for the history interest of many Romanians. But the historic stories has the qualities of good narcotic.
For all that, a beautiful film (I hope that this verdict is not only the result of the memories of a age, amber drop with a gorgeous dragon fly inside).
Read full review
6.8/10
164
