Simple and well acted, it has tension enough to knot the stomach.

The movie runs out of plot and jokes well before the end of a two-hour running time, long for a light comedy.

The storyline feels a little thin and moth-eaten in parts but this sequel is plenty of fun.

.Like the great film, it's made with a great deal of visible affection both in front of and behind the camera.

a film who could not be a real surprise. heroes and fairy tales, the brave Russian, the week enemy, the love story and few beautiful scenes. and the only error remains the ambition to use to many levels of story without any link. the beauty of images are not enough in this case because to many parts are out of sense. and it is not real a surprise because, like in many other Russian films, the purpose is only expose the heroism as the basic virtue. short, an useful film for the connoisseur of the historical events. and nothing more because the mixture of myth and history , in that case, is almost confusing. good intentions and fight scenes. a fresco about the rising of Romanov dynasty and nice characters.

I've been saying, in a lot of my reviews, that Hollywood films keep falling in a downfall of quality...but, fortunately, for us, viewers, there are a lot of good movies, form other countries...from Indonesia,Korea,China,Japan,to many countries of Europe... Russia has one of the most capable cinematographic enterprise in Europe...it can fight toe-to-toe against Hollywood, and, in many factors, Russia would win.From the remake of The Fugitive(the Russian version is more "cool", even though the American one is great) to Sword Bearer or the "Night Watch-Day Watch" duo-logy, there lots of excellent films, made in Russia...1612 is a historic movie, having the fall of the tzars in a "backstage scenario"...this movie has a well defined story, excellent acting,lots and lots of action, brutal and "in your face"...and it never becomes boring...I've seen it 3 times...and I must say, I'm enjoying it every time I re-see it...a must see for everyone...

I always watch films BEFORE coming to IMDb to read comments. If I dislike a film or am unmoved by it, I never end up here anyway. But when I really like a film, I slide over here hoping to find some fellow travelers who can help me appreciate more what I just viewed, knowing there will always be some folks who hate everything and delight in finding ways to pile on.When it comes to reviews of 1612, however, I am a bit stunned at all the negative attention this film has brought. Most of it seems centered on historical inaccuracies in the film. As I was reading them I kept asking myself...did these folks notice the unicorn? If you're watching this movie as some History Channel documentary, you're going to have problems with it. There's a unicorn playing a major role! This is not to say there are not problems with this film. There are noticeable editing nightmares that have us jumping into what looks like the middle of an intended scene. Several times we're forced to conclude "oh that must have happened even though it's on the cutting room floor." This was the most disappointing part of the film.As for the story and art of telling it, I very much enjoyed it. The winged Polish cavalry was thrilling enough to keep me going. I felt like one of the peasant children when I yelled to my wife in the other room "Lisa...they're angels!" The reproduction of Repin's "Barge Haulers" painting in one of the opening scenes was also a treat.As for the storyline, I had no trouble whatsoever following it and appreciating it. This film is part history, part fantasy, part love story (and a good one at that!), and part vehicle to bring utter mayhem to the screen in new and bloody ways. If you want only one of these you're not going to like this film. If you can put your historic snobbishness aside, however, you can appreciate the splendid qualities of this film.

Title in English is "1612. Chronicles of the Time of Troubles"Well, one should know post-Soviet cinema to rate this movie. As a whole, it is not so bad as it can seem, especially against a background of lots of new films (mostly very bad ones), which our TV shows everyday on every channel.Some expressions about History. The plot is fantastic. 1. Poor Xenia Godunova! If she knew what she would "do" in the director's imagination 400 years later, she would die of shame :))) Her travel with some "hetman" is a nonsense - just see any source about Xenia, she was one of the unhappiest women of the Time of Troubles. Also she never betrayed her country or used to live with a Polish robber. Actually she was not able to, because she had been in a monastery for about 7 or 8 years by the time of the movie action. 2. Fedor II Godunov was killed by Russian supporters of the Impostor, not by Poles! 3. Strangely enough, but the leather cannon is not a fantasm of the movie creators. Such cannons did really exist even though it is unlikely that they were used by Russians during the Time of Troubles. 4. Another (at least) strange thing is Kuzma Minin's absence in the action. Probably, he was just cut off as not wanted :)) Actors. It's impossible to understand the reasons Porechenkov was set as Prince Pozharsky. Porechenkov is no actor. If no actor tries to play such a great person you can imagine the result. Almost the same about the girl who played Xenia. She really tried and really did not manage. Zolotuhin is no doubt the great actor, but his character looks and behaves like Gandalf, but not an Orthodox Elder at all. Guys, you live in traditionally Orthodox country, is it really too hard to take a little care of your work? The actor who is absolutely excellent is Michał Żebrowski. Brilliant! Maybe, he saves the whole movie.Picture. Nice. Battle scenes, especially storm of the fortress, are quite good.Action. Not bad, not too slowly.The End. It is disappointing because it's a pure propaganda. They write "November 4th, 1612, Russians liberated Moscow". Ha-ha, they are as stupid as Duma of Russian Federation: both don't even know the difference between Julian and Gregorian calendars. Bad promotion for new "holiday".And one more thing. Positive. The movie is kind, and that's fine for such kind of film, I think.As a result my rate is 6, maybe 7. This movie is watchable but definitely not a masterpiece.