Historic Truth in Anastasia the Film

1335 Words6 Pages
The year is 1916. In St. Petersburg, Russia, Tsar Nicholas II is throwing a grand ball to celebrate the 300th anniversary of Romanov rule, while his daughter Grand Duchess Anastasia, is seen rejoicing among the crowd, spreading her spark. The ball is interrupted by the arrival of wicked Grigori Rasputin, a monk once trusted by the Russian Imperial Family, having since been thrown out by Nicholas as a traitor. Wishing to enact his revenge, Rasputin summons a curse that sparks the Russian Revolution, so the movie goes. Anastasia, directed by Don Bluth and Gary Goldman and produced by 20th Century Fox is known to be based on the historic tragic of the execution of the Romano family and the possibility of there being a survivor, Grand Duchess Anastasia. The film has pictured Rasputin to be the single-handed cause of the Russian Revolution? Is this so? Is he really the undead sorcerer, claimed in the film? And what of Anastasia? Had she escaped the overthrow of the Romano family as told by the film? Or was her survival a conspiracy theory, bought into by the Russians, in hope that in a time of political corruption and great economic devastation, she would return? In terms of visually representing the character of Grigori Rasputin, the film ‘Anastasia’ has been historically accurate with slight embellishments. Rasputin was a man of tall broadness, constantly adorned in a black robe that trailed to the ground, though shown to be of a rotting, pale green tone and skeletally long fingers and fingernails in the film. Representing his wise and holy stature, his beard remained long and uncut whilst his hair was of a simple fashion, tied to the nape of his neck. A rather significant characteristic of Rasputin was his protuberant eyes of a seemingly satanic nature. Count Stolypin, the loyal Prime Minister of the Tsar Nicholas had records revealing an argument he once had with
Open Document