Scanialara You won't be disappointed!

TinsHeadline Touches You

Noutions Good movie, but best of all time? Hardly . . .

Voxitype Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

bkoganbing For me Peter the Great was excellent. It is the kind of topic and life that the mini-series concept was invented. It would take six hours to go into both the policy achievements of his reign and the various struggles for power with all the intrigue surrounding them during his reign.Peter Romanov, Peter the first of Russia was born to Czar Alexis who was the second Czar under the new Romanov dynasty. Alexis had two wives and Peter was born to his second wife. Alexis had several children by both wives, but only two sons, one by each wife. Peter was clearly the one with the abilities and personality to rule, but Ivan who most charitably can be described as a dullard, but dullards have their uses if they can be manipulated by ambitious people. Maximilian Schell plays Peter as an adult and the mini-series allows him to develop all facets of his character. The western quarter of Moscow intrigued him, the foreign colony where people dressed so differently and seem to be always innovating. His Russia resisted all change be it technological, be it fashion, be it in its special brand of Christianity the Russian Orthodox Church. Because of that they were hemmed in and he decided things had to change. He meets resistance with those with a built in interest for resistance and the general inertia. But before he's done he has a modern army and navy, a new capital and functioning seaport on the Baltic named St. Petersburg, and certain changes in fashion come to at least the intelligentsia of the regime.But history has its ironies and Peter who won the succession battle dies without a named heir and for the next 15 years there are several czars among Peter's descendants until 1740 when his daughter Elizabeth becomes Empress and has a 22 year reign that was very popular. He also married twice and the children of both wives were rivals. Peter had a son also named Alexis and that proves to be the biggest tragedy of his reign.Some familiar faces are in the cast in supporting roles. Peter made a grand tour of Europe the first czar to see what was beyond Russia's borders. He met with such people Isaac Newton played by Trevor Howard, King Frederick William of Prussia played by Mel Ferrer and a much too old Laurence Olivier playing William of Orange King of Great Britain and Statholder of the Netherlands. If I had to single out one in the cast for special praise it would be Vanessa Redgrave as Peter's scheming half sister Princess Sophia.If you find that Peter The Great resembles I Claudius you'll be in agreement with me. What this series does represent is fine history and fine entertainment.

jonathan_lippman Nobody mentioned in their reviews that the wonderful Lilli Palmer played Natalia, the mother of Peter the Great, which gave her a golden globe nomination for best support, though she died before the TV miniseries aired on TV... Yes this was her last performance after a Forty year career in films TV and theater around the world.. She is terrific and her last scene, her death scene, is particularly poignant.. There has been criticism that the miniseries is not historically correct. OK but its a miniseries, not a serious documentary and so poetic justice is expected and acceptable. They did get the idea of who Peter was and what he did for Russia and that is what is most important. A wonderful cast in this lavish production and a marvelous chance to see the still beautiful Miss Palmer in her last role, even though she was already apparently dying of cancer and quite ill during the shoot. IT is a shame she did not live to see her nomination, which she lost.

heatherceana I read a prior comment and was rather shocked. I was always taught that if entertainment becomes too like real-life, it ceases to be entertainment. That one should suspend one's disbelief for the term of the film - unless the film is claiming to be a documentary or to be of educational value.Anyhow, I am not a Russian ex-patriot. I'm an American, born and bred. I loved this movie! My father is an History professor. I was well aware that the film was not entirely historically accurate. I will grant you that by 1986, one would wish to have a bit more accuracy regarding the major historical events.I must disagree that there was a prophetic quality to the 'visionary aspects' of the character Peter the Great. I felt that it came across more as a burning passion. He seemed better educated and thus possessed of a better understanding of what the 'Western European' knowledge/technology could do to help strengthen Russia.Maximilian Schell is perfect in this role! Although he is a Austrian actor, he is the epitome of a burly Russian Czar.If you are looking for historical accuracy - look elsewhere. If you are looking for an intense, sweep-me-away drama filled with riveting acting - you've chosen well.

Steve-602 The Polish commentator (see above) has it right. Some of the facts may be inaccurate but this is a superb film, visually and dramatically.Most important, the basic theme of a brilliant but eccentric and sometimes viciously cruel ruler who despite all of his shortcomings is determined to drag his country into a modern world is undoubtedly correct.Roosevelt and Churchill would have loved him. The Massie novel has been described as one of the most illuminating portraits ever of Russia as it really is.Too bad old Karl XII (actually it was a Swedish General namedLoewenhaupt) lost the battle of Poltava, but he did. And when Karlhimself fell victim to a stray battlefield bullet a few years later,one of his senior officers commented, "Gentlemen, the comedy is over."