1612: Chronicles of the Dark Time

2007 "The Tsar is dead. Chaos reigns."
1612: Chronicles of the Dark Time
5.6| 2h15m| en| More Info
Released: 11 November 2007 Released
Producted By: Central Partnership
Country: Russia
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Synopsis

The czar of Russia has died and a power vacuum has developed. This period in the late 16th and early 17th century has been called "The Time of Troubles." There are many impostors who claim to the right to rule, but there's only one heir, the Czarina Kseniya Godunova. She has married a Polish military leader who wants to claim the Russian throne in her name so he can rule all of Russia. As the Poles move in on Moscow in an attempt to install the czarina on the throne, Andrei, a serf with a life-long infatuation of the czarina attempts to save her from her brutal Polish husband.

... View More
Stream Online

The movie is currently not available onine

Director

Producted By

Central Partnership

Trailers & Images

Reviews

steven-222 This is a terrifically entertaining action-adventure fantasy from Russia. I say "fantasy" instead of "historical epic" because as the movie proceeds the story and the main character, a serf who rises to superhero, become increasingly larger than life. This boldly heroic storytelling makes 1612 seem very old-fashioned, in the best way, even as the film-making is state of the art, with some amazing action scenes and superbly staged battles. The hero is played by Pyotr Kislov, Russia's answer to Orlando Bloom; the antagonist, a Polish warlord intent on marrying the kidnapped daughter of Boris Godunov and making himself master of Russia, is played by Poland's #1 leading man, Michal Zebrowski, who has headlined some impressive action films himself, such as With Fire and Sword. The initial set-up is a bit wordy, but once the action starts it just gets better and better. Great fun (though be prepared for some startling battle gore).
kombaat The movie was terrible. There were very big holes in screenplay and direction... The most important problem was the characters. They, especially that Polish knight, were totally not consistent. You don't know what actually drives him, whether it is love, passion, greed, hate or power... the director actually didn't have any logical concept on that. The makers also didn't have a consistent idea on how to put fantasy moments into the movie. The unicorn, the oracle and others could be, without a doubt, removed causing no loss for the movie. But the stupidest moment was when the Russian defenders almost destroyed the whole Polish army with a gun made of leather during one night. That made me laugh for a few minutes. But it wasn't funny... it was pathetic. One thing I liked were parts of battle scenes. They were pretty realistic (considering the way they were filmed, not their probability). But this is not enough to make make this film worth watching.
daeris History is my field of interests. I am in a historical re-enactment society, read quite a lot about the European history etc. This was wrote to point, that I do treat history as an important part of my life. I also like fiction and fantasy literature and I like when there is a solid border between fiction and historical scenarios/books/etc. I particularly despise productions, where “historical costume” is used only as an excuse to tell quite present-day politically correct stories about love and patriotism. And I was really worried this could be such a production especially since it was made “by the order” of Kremlin. But it was not. On the contrary – there is love, there is patriotism, there is pride of being a part of Russian nation and even some political correctness (a little) but all of it is served in the funny, warm and definitely not serious way and not the standard pathetic Hollywood-style. As for the history in the picture it is treated similarly, I mean not to serious. There are historical figures and historical events but they are mixed with fiction and fantasy. To do such a thing without losing the “spirit” of the period requires a great deal of talent and is almost impossible. But they have done it and they have done it great! But when I wrote that they treat history not too serious I did not mean “without respect” since there is a great deal of such respect that shows in costumes, characterisation, armament and in the commentaries throughout the movie. Well – there are some mistakes especially in polish cavalry (especially for me – this is the part I am interested the most J) but one can live with that. Treat it as a half historical half fantasy-adventure one and you will have a great time. The actor playing main character adds a lot to this adventurous mood – I think he has a potential for being next Johny Dep! His young and some times it shows that he need practice but he definitely has a talent. Small warning – movie might be a fantasy-adventure one but hen people die there they die, well…, realistic enough, so this is not a “family” movie. In my opinion it’s 9 out of 10 since there are some minor imperfections like the beginning is a little to slow and to mystic sometimes, there are some mistakes in costumes or armament I have mentioned above and some “wooden” background dialogs. Also this is another movie where the heavy cavalry really do not know what the charge should look like. But the movie is definitely a “must see” especially if you like historical and/or adventure shows.
Grzegorz It was my first impression after watching this movie. If someone decides to spend serious amount of money on costumes, special effects, on employing the best Russian actors... well, one would assume the producer got also at least semi-decent scenario. It was definitely not the case here.Without giving out too many details, the main plot of "1612" is a little similar to that of "Patriot". Just move the action to the early 17th century in Russia, and replace British troops with those from Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. The problem is that "Patriot" was somewhat realistic (even if one might have some doubts if all Brits are really brutal sadists), and "1612" is not. Frankly, I have not seen such BS story since I quit watching American B-grade action movies and it was so bad even the best actors could not help it.Do you know who would be able to build a cannon from leather and then use it with marksman accuracy? Maybe MacGyver? Well, no, but if you want to know the answer for this (and many other, but equally absurd) question, just watch "1612". Otherwise, do something else. I still give it 4 of 10 - mainly for decent historical costumes, great cavalry charges, and other secondary details.