Impact (Jan 1972)

12 not only had they assembled all the Barrymores, they also had one of the best writers of the day, Charles MacArthur, to do the script. His treatment, unfortunately, did not meet with the stars’ approval. Finding it too sensationalistic and too damaging towards Alexandra, Ethel Barrymore refused to continue, saying. “You forget, I knew Her Majesty personally”. They changed it. Lionel played Rasputin, Ethel played Alexandra, and Harry Morgan appeared as Nicholas. The brilliant but unpredictable John Barrymore played Prince Chegodieff, confidant of the Queen and, according to this version, sole assassin of Rasputin. It was after the film was complete that MGM’s troubles really began. A preface was placed on the picture which read: “This concerns the destruction of an empire, brought about by the mad ambition of one man. A few of the characters are still alive. The rest met death by violence.” Almost immediately after release the studio was sued for damages by a couple who were claimants to the empty throne, Prince Felix and Princess Irina Yousepoff. The former was the alleged assassin of the monk and the latter was called Princess Natasha in the film, which contained a scene of her violation by Rasputin. MGM tried to prove that the characters were a composite, but Felix described to the court how he performed the grisly deed, and his summary was remarkably similar to the scenes in the film. Furthermore, the preface stated that ‘‘a few of the characters were still alive’. MGM lost $125,000 and ever since then the qualification has been placed in the credits of all movies: “‘Events and characters in this film are fictional, and any resemblance to persons living or dead is purely coincidental.” Along came the cinemascope fifties. Things had quieted down somewhat, and the events were already history. But so much remained unexplained and incomplete that legends were multiplying like the population. So why not combine the Romanovs and Cinderella? Everyone’s wish come true, fabulous riches showered down, preferably after amnesia so you do not know how miserable you actually were. A new life granted. Hence Ingrid Bergman in Anastasia. A poverty stricken amnesia victim is spotted by Yul Brynner, a White Russian exile. She looks like Anastasia, according to legend the only survivor of the massacre. But she must be trained; and if she passes the supreme test, all the riches which, according to legend, were deposited by Nicholas in foreign banks would shower down on Yul. Of course Ingrid changes from a listless girl into a remarkably close copy of the Princess. Her training gives her a personality. But then she begins to have an imperial aura, and even remembers details only the real prin _ cess could know. Everyone is convinced, but the great test remains: Ingrid is shown to the Dowager Empress Marie (Helen Hayes) in exile in Copenhagen and suddenly she coughs, excited. Only Anastasia responds to excitement by coughing, and only Marie knows this fact. The latter is convinced. But Brynner and Bergman fall in love, and ultimately, of cqurse, Bergman chooses happiness with the nobody rather than boredom with some Duke. The picture marked the return of Ingrid Bergman to Hollywood after a six year absence because of the Rossellini scandal. She also won her second Oscar for this performance, which meant, in effect: Welcome home, all is forgiven. The fact and the legend: even the historians have trouble distinguishing between the two. As numerous as the stories are the angles: Dr. Zhivago saw a new orthodoxy, this time political. Most movies see Rasputin as the cause of the ultimate downfall. But any one of these is too simple. Political events are made by man, and Rasputin’s influence, based on the hemophilia of the young heir Alexei, is only part of the picture. In any case, it is Nicholas and Alexandra themselves who must play in centre stage, and it is precisely this area that Robert K. Massie concentrated on. His bestseller has now been made into a film. Scheduled to open in Toronto February 4th, it is a lavish treatment of the marriage of the Tsar and Tsarina, and the outside events which became inextricably involved with their own personal problems. The royal couple are treated sympathetically, more as a victim of the times than of their own gullibility or of external happenings. The main characters are portrayed by unknowns (Michael Jayston as the Tsar, Janet Suzman as the Tsarina, and Tom Baker as Rasputin) with Olivier and others of similar stature doing the smaller roles. Historical accuracy is more believable without familiar faces. But the drama cannot disappear, even at this time and at this distance. No matter how calm we are in thinking about the actual events, the end of the Romanov dynasty is crucial to the history of this century and therefore to our very own day.