The Irony of Fate. The Sequel (2007)

Good concept, poorly executed.

Bad Acting and worse Bad Screenplay

a film so unique, intoxicating and bizarre that it not only demands another viewing, but is also forgivable as a satirical comedy where the jokes eventually take the back seat.

if their story seems completely bonkers, almost like a feverish work of fiction, you ain't heard nothing yet.

The sequel to The Irony of Fate was clearly made with the knowledge that it had very big shoes to fill, as the declared continuation (with a returning original cast) of what by the time the sequel was made was a well-established and beloved cultural icon. It's full of reverent references to its antecedent, but these reminders don't serve it well, because overall it doesn't compare favorably. The story of The Irony of Fate was elegant in its simple confusion. The sequel has to bend over backwards to recreate an echo of that situation, while at the same time including one one but two generations of versions of the central characters. It just about comes together, but it doesn't have the appealing spontaneity and tidiness of the original. Whereas Zhenya was likable because he was hapless and placed in his baffling situation, the scenario here necessitates that his son go into things scheming, and participating in a scheme. The man he cuckolds has a decent point when he complains about his trickery -- and that makes him a much less appealing hero to watch. The original film was in two parts and much of the action remained in one apartment. It was a neat trick, but it never became boring for that, and felt like a kind of thrilling, entertaining marathon. The new movie is hampered by the standard running time which makes this impossible. There are some nicely-realized directorial touches in the camera-work and the special effects, but the context just makes them stand out, and seem out of place. There are some legitimately funny situations, and a few moments that hearken back to The Irony of Fate very nicely and touchingly, but overall it doesn't capture the intangible appeal of the film it's constructed around. And that makes it, in context, easy to see why many disappointed, even though objectively it's a decent enough sweet New Year's piece. It just doesn't add anything original or superior to the piece that is its reason for being.

Before watching the film we have read the reviews: this is a continuation of the Irony of Fate 1, but a bad one; no, this is a good continuation; still different, this film should not be considered as a continuation. There is an 'objection' that a hero drives a certain car; was he supposed to change cars every 20 minutes to give "equal rights" to different car manufacturers ? There is another 'objection' that the heroes behave as they did in Part 1; should nice people now become nasty and vice versa ? There is a still different 'objection' to lights in the city and fireworks on New Year's Eve. Rarely one sees such a diversity of views, many mutually contradictory and some outlandish.Now that we have seen Part 2, I can comment on it: on people, devices, locations and situations.There are actors known before from Part 1: Barbara Brylska as Nadya; Andrei Myagkov as Zhenya; Yuriy Yakovlev as Ippolit; Aleksandr Shirvindt as Pasha (mostly Pavlik in Part 1); Aleksandr Belyavskiy as Sasha; as well as Valentina Talyzina as Valya. It was so good to see them again ! Now we also have Elizaveta Boyarskaya as Nadya Number 2, the daughter of the original Nadya; Konstantin Khabenskiy as Kostya Lukashin son of Zhenya; Sergey Bezrukov as Irakliy (note a carefully chosen name, similar to Ippolit). There are naturally more new faces, including Igor Savochkin as Kolya the Border Guard; he makes his unique contributions – largely because most of the time he is as confused as a hungry baby in a topless bar. While Nadya Number 1 now wears large glasses, her smile is the same as before. While Zhenya now has less hair, his smile is also the same as before.As for devices, frequent use of cell phones makes this means of communication look nearly ridiculous. An original comic approach, while in more and more locations around the world there are limitations on the use of cell phones, including driving.Obviously Apartment # 12 in House # 25 on the Third Constructors Street plays its role again, as does the elevator there. We also see again the train station from which trains go to Moscow as well as two airports. This helps the impression of continuity – as does music repeated from the first film (except for the song at the end which is new).The situations are sometimes similar as before, but with interesting twists. It is not easy now to send Zhenya to St. Petersburg; this becomes a clever two parts operation executed by Sasha and Pasha. Zhenya starts to figure things out when Pasha phones to reserve "another" plane ticket. There are also new situations – well connected to Part 1. Nadya Number 2 is asked by Grandfather Frost to play his Snow Girl. She gets instant advice not to agree. However, in a wonderful twist of action, Nadya says: when I was five years old, I had to do things I hated; when I was 10 years old, it was the same; enough is enough; I agree. When one knows that Ippolit is her father and one knows his character from Part 1, the fact that he has been a despotic father is anything but surprising. Thus, events in Part 2 are admirably rooted in Part 1.One sympathizes so much with Kostya - who can hardly get a moment alone with younger Nadya. One admires his ingenuity in creating opportunities to talk to Nadya. When Grandfather Frost walks into Nadya's apartment, one wishes that inside the costume covering largely the face should be Kostya. One hears later an explanation of the original Snow Girl: he agreed to take over and complete the Grandfather Frost route but on the condition that he will have his own Snow Girl. Incidentally, I recently learned something about Grandfather Frost: Santa Claus was strictly forbidden for a number of years in the Soviet Union – until Stalin found the tradition too strong and allowed him but renamed Grandfather Frost and wearing blue instead of red. The vote of five children on who should marry the Princess is new and fresh - in spite of centuries of fairy tales.We have seen recently a US movie called "Fast Five", with virtually nothing left to imagination and much noise most of the time. Here both Part 1 and Part 2 have two levels; the amusing or moving surface level, but also a deeper level where the viewer has much food for thought. This is one more common feature of both films. Timur Bekmambetov as the director, Emil Braginskiy as the story writer – together with Eldar Ryazanov himself – have much to be proud of. One needs to say this: the richness of Part 1 has much helped the creators of Part 2 to make such a good film.Let me provide at least an example of two levels in this film. Kostya asks: "are we in Moscow or in St. Petersburg ?". Younger Nadya provides a charming – but also a profound – response: Does it matter ?".

I just watched this film and I must say I enjoyed it. I am a big fan of the original and I thought Bekhambetov did a good job overall. The plot is similar to the original and very well executed. I felt the film was funny during many scenes and actors did a good job. I only wish they elaborated more on the lives of Kostya and young Nadya before their meeting. We don't even know what Kostya does or where Nadya works or lives; it felt a bit incomplete. It felt like the movie started somewhere in the middle. The thought that Zhenia and Nadya from original film didn't live happily ever after still doesn't sit well with me. I also didn't believe that Zhenia didn't keep in touch with Nadya and never knew about her daughter, or vice versa. Just not very believable. If 2 people love each other, they would find a way to be together, or at least, keep in touch. I also agree that the role of young Nadya wasn't well developed, she seemed a bit distant; still think she did a very good job. In the original film, Zhenia and Nadya were the center of the entire movie, it was all about them. Here, we have more characters which included police, Santa clause, neighbors, and of course, close ups on Camry and cell phones. A lot of time was devoted to many different characters and not enough time given to the main actors Kostya and Nadya. The movie needed probably another hour to get more into their story. On the other hand, I enjoyed the fast pace of the film. Not for a minute did I think it got boring or uninteresting. I thought it was more about Zhenia and his Nadya than their kids. I so wanted to have seem more of Zhenia, Ippolit, Nadya. Still, a very fun film to watch. Can't say that it is better than the original but considering that most sequels do not work, I have to give credit to all who worked on this film. Really enjoyed it....

If there is one lesson that could be drawn from this movie, it is this: do not touch old Soviet classics! Does anyone really think it is possible to produce a sequel to a movie thirty years after it came out on the screens? Since the old "Irony of Fate" was made, it has become one of the most venerated Soviet cultural icons. And icons are better be left alone. I'm not sure if any director would be able to make a successful "Irony of Fate-2", but what we are offered by Bekmambetov is at best a third-rate production. Bekmambetov may be a decent thriller-movie director (see his Daywatch and Nightwatch) but he is extremely weak as a maker of romantic comedies, which is what "Irony-2" was purported to be. The plot details are not developed at all (thus, we do not learn anything about Kostya's or Nadya's occupations or previous lives); the advertising of Toyota Camry is too obvious not to be noticed; and the acting, with the possible exception of Bezrukov (Irakliy) is one-dimensional and unconvincing. The old actors (Myagkov, Brylska) look tired, lost and emotionless, as if trying to understand what it is really they are doing in this movie. Special effects (such as the one with the Aurora) may be fitting in a fantasy thriller but they look out of place in a romantic comedy. In short, this is another proof that there is little worth seeing in post-Soviet cinema.