Not really a satire but an apt and very dark history (with very dark humour)

Rating: 9/10 (21 June 2020)

I don't understand how this might be termed a parody or a satire. It is neither.
That people around Stalin bumbled is actually no surprise. Certainly, the film plays up ich is often depicted in very darkly humorous tones; but such humour is wrought from actual history -- and so there is nothing here that is, in the end, satiric or parodic. And this is what makes the film oddly funny -- you cannot but be appalled and wide-eyed at the bumbling -- and deadly serious, often at the same time. Stalin's USSR was a horror show. You could be randomly shot for no reason (other than Stalin or some higher-up ordered it). Life was precarious, to say the least.
In one scene, a police force is taking over from another, and it's pandemonium. What is going on, exactly? The script intentionally leaves you guessing. And just as the scene wraps up and you think the craziness is over, one man who appears to be in charge and has triumphed, is shot point blank; and there the scene ends. The Keystone Kops cacaphony shifts registers, to something so horrific and seemingly arbirtrary that you get pulled every which way. It's unsettling, and therein lies the film's brillance.
It helps to do a bit of reading beforehand to understand which character is motivated by what. Regardless, the film is self-contained. The standout here is Simon Russell Beale as the predatory Baria. It is what would in lesser hands be a thankless role of "the bad guy." And he is indeed a bad guy. But Beale plays him so well that the character is never less than fascinating in his aggressive repulsiveness. (He does such a good job that he somewhat overshadows the movie.)
Michael Palin is excellent as well, as are the test of the cast. I was expecting more from Tambor, though; he underplayed the role, I thought. The only casting I would have changed was Buscemi. He's likely the reason people find the movie a parody, because Buscemi is often associated with it. Here, his character is actually trying (and often failing) to be the funny guy. But as the cunning Khrushchev, well, no, there doesn't appear to be any cunning there; rather, Buscemi plays the part as a man who is just trying to avoid getting caught up in the fracas. This strikes me as unfortunately incorrect.
Note: A comparison, in terms of its dark humour: Todd Solondz's Happiness.