|
Overview
Nicholas and Alexandra is a British period drama film first released in 1971,
directed by Franklin J. Schaffner.
The film is based on a novel by Robert K. Massie and stars Michael Jayston, Janet Suzman, Tom Baker, Roderic Noble and Timothy West.
Our overall rating for this film is: very good.
Synopsis
In 1904 Tsar Nicholas II of Russia ignores the advice of his closest
allies and launches a war against Japan to protect his nation’s
interest in Korea. It is a war that will cost thousands of lives
and marks the beginning of the end of the reign of the tsars.
Coincidentally, this is the year in which Nicholas becomes more
confident of the succession, through the birth of his son Alexei.
But it is a fragile succession built on hope and fear, for Alexei
suffers from hemophilia and could die if he incurs even the slightest
injury. With both Nicholas and his consort Alexandra preoccupied
with their son, political events soon begin to over take the
Tsar. Unrest is growing amongst the ordinary people of
Russia, fuelled by Alexandra’s patronage of the mystic Grigori Rasputin.
Meanwhile, covert political
organisations plot the downfall of
Tsar Nicholas and the creation of a new Communist state. When a
peaceful protest at the Winter Palace ends in a bloody massacre, the
spirit of revolution fills the air of Russia. The country’s
losses in the First World War provide Nicholas’s enemies with the
opportunity they need to take power from him and so bring an end to
three centuries of Romanov rule...
Film Review
One of the most lavish historical dramas ever made, this ambitious
adaptation of Robert K. Massie’s epic novel remains cinema’s most
thorough and compelling account of the Russian Revolution.
With its stunning production values, the film conveys not only the
turmoil of the period with graphic brilliance, but also vividly evokes
the anguish of the players caught up in this drama – not just the Tsar
and his entourage, but the ordinary people of Russia. It is a
shame that the film’s visual impact is undermined by a mediocre
screenplay, which drags the pace to a lumbering crawl in the second
half of the film and fails to make the main protagonists much more than
caricatures of their real-life historical counterparts.Franklin J. Schaffner’s direction is effective but lacks the inspired touch he showed on his previous two great films – Planet of the Apes (1969) and Patton (1970). By contrast, his cinematographer, Freddie Young, excels himself, achieving the same eye-pleasing artistry that he brought to his collaborations with David Lean, on such films as Lawrence of Arabia (1962) and Doctor Zhivago (1965). Young’s work is complemented by the film’s Oscar-winning art direction and costumes, which also contribute greatly to the mood and opulence of the film. Surprisingly, the failings in the screenplay do not greatly tarnish the performances. Whilst some of the dialogue may seem trite and slightly absurd there is hardly a single character in this film who is not portrayed with the utmost conviction. It is hard to believe that this is Michael Jayston’s first (and only) leading film role. Better known for his stage work, Jayston shows here that he is also a very capable screen actor. He has a magisterial screen presence that makes him an ideal casting choice for the role of the last Tsar of Russia. Jayston’s scenes with Janet Suzman, another remarkable actor (best remembered for her TV work), are easily the most moving, bringing a humanity and realism which are lacking elsewhere in the film. And who better to play the debauched mad monk Rasputin than Tom Baker? The future Doctor Who pretty well steals the show with a performance that seethes with a manic intensity and the kind of wide-eyed religious fervour that would now earn you a one-way ticket to Guantanamo Bay. The supporting cast reads like a Who’s Who (no pun intended) of British acting talent, including such legendary performers as Laurence Olivier, Michael Redgrave and Jack Hawkins. Nicholas and Alexandra is an outstanding production, a gripping tale of court intrigue and human tragedy played against a backdrop of monumental proportions. The film has often been criticised for its length, but it is hard to see how the story could have been told in a shorter space without sacrificing historical accuracy or dramatic impact. It may drag a little in places, some of the characters may be too thinly sketched to be credible, but such is the visual power and emotional restraint of the film that such failings are easily forgiven. The simplicity and total lack of sentimentality in the final sequence, depicting the tragic fate of the Romanov family, is ultimately what makes this film so poignant and memorable. © Chris Alderton 2010 Write a review for this film... User Comments
What do you think of this film?
Related links
Recent DVD releases
|
Credits
Similar films:
If you like this film you may also like the following: 10 Rillington Place (1971) A Night to Remember (1958) A Tale of Two Cities (1958) Anne of the Thousand Days (1969) Battle of Britain (1969) Becket (1964) The Devils (1971) Gandhi (1982) Lawrence of Arabia (1962) Monty Python and the Holy Grail (1975) Reach for the Sky (1956) Richard III (1955) The Tragedy of Macbeth (1971) Zulu (1964) |


