How sad is this?

Deeper than the descriptions

There are moments that feel comical, some horrific, and some downright inspiring but the tonal shifts hardly matter as the end results come to a film that's perfect for this time.

The thing I enjoyed most about the film is the fact that it doesn't shy away from being a super-sized-cliche;

No dubs, "Alexander Nevsky" is a Soviet propaganda. Except the fact that the described battle is a real event and Alexander led his army, all the other facts are mostly fakes. Interestingly enough, that before this movie Alexander Nevsky was not such a popular historical hero. He is a Russian saint, but previously, was mostly known for his devotion to the Orthodox Church and a refusal of any compromises with catholics. The historical sources say that Alexander Nevsky was fighting against 25-30 knights and about 500 soldiers from the aboriginal tribes.At the same time the film was so talented and so good that Russian people took all the screen story as a historical fact and truth. And yes, it's an epic story, told by two genius: Eisenstein and Prokofiev. So, its a great move and I love it. I love to listen to this music and to see these images. It's a very charismatic piece of art. And it's a very-very Russian myth. It's worth to watch, do it and probably, you understand the "strange Russian soul" a bit more.

Seen from a historical point of view, the film 'Alexander Njefski' features prominent in the life of the Soviet Union from the late 1930-s.In 1937, one year before its issue, Joseph Stalin had murdered the majority of his top-ranking army commanders. Thus 'beheading' his Red Army. As in the same period Adolf Hitler's foreign policies grew increasingly aggressive, many Soviet citizens became worried. Wondering what would happen to them if Hitler attacked their country.To soothe this public anxiety, Stalin ordered Eisenstein to revive Alexander Njefski's victorious 1242-battle against the Teutonic knights. Its message had to be clear: no German invader will succeed to defeat Russia.Backed by government support, 'Alexander Njefski' was a hit in the Soviet Union from the late 1930's. The more so, while it contains every exceptional high-quality film skill Eisenstein could provide.On June 22, 1941 Adolf Hitler attacked the Soviet Union in real. And saw his bloody defeat almost four years later, after the most savage war in history of mankind. Stalin had kept his promise from 'Alexander Njefski', but with way more efforts than Eisenstein's film shows.

There have been some interesting user-reviews so far. Two that I believe are worth mention are "A Puzzling World Classic" (10 September 2009, Flak_Magnet) and "From Meyerhold to Nevsky" (20 March 2012, chaos-rampant).One problem with elite artists (i.e., Eisenstein, Prokofiev) making a propaganda film like "Alexander Nevsky" is that there is no way it can compete in the hearts of free minds with cinema that isn't as laden with message. So, most people will prefer other 1939 releases such as the "Wizard of Oz" and "Gone with the Wind" to "Nevsky" by virtue of the fact they are more liberating. "Nevsky" would have been more impressive it had been made about five or six years before it was, because of how it resembles silent movies.If we remove Hollywood from the discussion, there is a lot to like about "Nevsky." Eisenstein's quirky and distinctive visual style is on display, and watch out for his trademark jump-cuts. "The Battle on the Ice" is in the conversation for best movie battle scenes ever. (However, it clearly has been surpassed by Orson Welles' Macbeth and Akira Kurosawa, multiple times.) Eisenstein doesn't move the camera much during the Battle on Ice, or indeed, for much of the film. He achieves his results by jumping to and from similarly composed shots. He also likes to move from sheer pandemonium to close-ups of actors, isolating them from the craziness, making them vulnerable to it.When we first meet Nevsky, he's considerably taller (Nikolai Cherkasov was 6'6") and commanding than the fisherman he is with. Unarmed, Nevsky convinces a group of invading Mongols to leave without destroying their fishing community.Nevsky's military reputation is so well known that even his rivals for power concede that Nevsky is the man to defeat the Germans. This never happens in real life. History is filled with examples of the Joseph Stalin vs. Leon Trotsky mold, where the individual who offers the least for a nation removes the one who offers the most from power.My favorite part of The Battle of Ice is in the beginning when Nevsky, ignoring advice to guard his safety, arrives at the location which is believed by his commander (Buslai) to be unsuitable for battle. Nevsky lays down the law: They are fighting on the ice. This gives Nevsky more depth; instead of being a one-note orator he's also a military tactician.The "bravery competition" between Buslai and Gavrilo for the affections of Olga interjects needed humanity in the story, and is a source of humor.Prokofiev's music is superb, one of the greatest film scores ever. I am not as fond of the music near the end when Nevsky returns to Pskov; it seems too obvious. However, up to then I think Prokofiev is in fine form.The scenes where invading Germans burn babies alive unfortunately remain in the viewer's mind afterward. That's another problem with propaganda: People tend to remember the ugly side of it more than the beautiful.I saw 'Alexander Nevsky' with the Baltimore Symphony Orchestra and a Russian soloist performing. The symphony experience is the best way to appreciate it.I recommend 'Alexander Nevsky', but swallowing the central message is not all that fun.

Not being a student of film history, this bored me. An obvious bit of Russian propaganda in a time when Germany's belligerence was causing more than a little worry in Europe. While it did hit the class warfare buttons a few times it, was far more a nationalist propaganda film than a Communist one. That is a bit interesting, since Communism was supposed to be anti-nationalist. (Hence the Soviet anthem, The Internationale) Communism was supposed to be about class only, and nationality was not supposed to matter. But then again, Stalin killed and dislocated millions of people to Russify the outlying areas of the Soviet empire, even though he was not himself Russian. I guess he knew which side of the power bread was buttered.