It is perhaps because of the legend of the alleged surviving daughter, Anastasia (as well as a spooky priest named Rasputin),that the historical saga of Nicholas and Alexandra is remembered today, but unfortunately, the story of the end of the Russian royal line is cemented only in history, not in culture. This film shows the last years of their reign, the strong love that kept them going in spite of the many trials and tribulations in their marriage that brought a nation to its knees, and their determination to remain strong as they lived in exile. It is a story of family. It is a story of a poverty stricken country where millions of undocumented children died of starvation, leading to a revolution, and then finally, it is the story of a new power rise that is a story all in its own, touched on here by the brief presence of Vladimir Lenin, a Bolshevik leader who founded the Russian Communist party. As played by Michael Jayston and the Academy Award nominated Janet Suzman, it is obvious from the start that Nicholas and Alexandra are truly in love, but the weak-willed Nicholas doesn't really have what it takes to really be a great leader, and the single minded Alexandra has only one agenda: to cure her son Alexi from hemophilia.

It was very wise of the casting directors to choose the rather unknown Suzman in the role of Alexandra over a more popular British actress, with both Vanessa Redgrave and Glenda Jackson very busy at the time. She is obviously a loving wife and mother, but as history has pointed out, she never was able to connect with her husband's people. Looking glorious in the lavish gowns, furs and hats (one of which makes an appearance in Alexandra's ghostly state in the Broadway musical version of the animated musical film "Anastasia"),Suzman is a conflict of emotions, often cool with her husband and daughters, and one sighted as she becomes manipulated by the sinister Rasputin (an excellent, multi-dimensional performance by Tom Baker) who soon has the nation in an uproar. Assassinations of other various Russian political figures and the Arch-Duke and Duchess of Austria, show the onslaught of World War I, and the very bitter war between Russia and Germany becomes the catalyst of Nicholas's decision to abdicate, setting into motion his own death sentence.

The last hour of this film that shows the royal family in captivity is particularly sad because of the audience's knowledge of where this will lead them to in the final scene. There are moments when it seems that they might make it out, but when even Nicholas's own cousin (King George V of England) must deny him a place of exile, they all seem to know that their destiny is set. The actor playing the crippled guard in their final home might be creepy looking from the first long shot of his appearance, but from my childhood memory, it was the kindness he showed them that stood out which leads to the shocking developments of their final moments. There are great moments of joy where the royal daughters have a snowy Siberian dance with the soldiers guarding them, and yet the sad fate, particularly of the ailing Alexi who shows much more strength in many ways than his own father. Also particularly memorable is the way in which Rasputin is dealt with and the two strong scenes of Irene Worth as Nicholas's mother, a character who would later play an important part in the legend of the allegedly fake Anna Anderson who claimed to be Anastasia.

This is a beautiful film which is best seen on a large movie screen or digital TV in its original widescreen format. The costumes, sets, photography, music and editing are all spectacular, and as directed by Franklin J. Schaffner (fresh off his triumph of "Patton"),it is rarely dull in its over three hour length. Certainly, even with the long running time, some of the facts or details seem to be missing, and a few facts have been proven to be altered, particularly the assassination scene which history has shown to be much more brutal than what is presented here. There are so many well known actors in small roles that it is very difficult to really review their participations in it, but such legendary actors as Laurence Olivier, Harry Andrews and Jack Hawkins do deserve at least a brief mention. Nicholas and Alexandra marked the end of an era in the history of any monarchy where their absolute power meant much suffering for the poor and much frivolity for the rich. They might not have the fame of the guillotined Louix XVI and Marie Antoinette of France, but theirs is a story which after seeing this film you will not soon forget.

In Russia, the story of czar Nicholas (Michaels Jayston) and Alexandra (Janet Suzman) until their death after the bolshevist Revolution of 1917 is presented in a beautiful reconstitution of a period. This long movie is a super-production, having a great cast, wonderful costumes and locations. In my opinion, there is a great flaw in the screenplay: the story is too much focused in the breast of the czar's family, and does not provide a great picture of the political situation in Russia and the atrocities committed by the czar with his own people. The war, starvation, execution of the opponents to the system, peasants and workers are only partially described in a shallow way. This movie is very adequate for persons who know history of Russia. In the end, the viewer becomes too much sympathetic with Nicholas, since the story presents basically his relationship and concerns with his own family. And of course, nobody likes to see a family suffering bad treatment and being executed. With such a long running time and available budget, this movie could have presented more details of European history in that period. My vote is eight.

Title (Brazil): `Nicolas e Alexandra' (`Nicholas And Alexandra')

I was really interested in seeing this film, I am intrigued by the story of the Romanovs and when I saw the cast I was like it looks as though I was in for a good film. When I did see it, I was impressed. It isn't perfect though, for one thing at 165 or so minutes it is too long, consequently some scenes felt drawn out and very padded. Pacing was a problem too, I am not saying that Nicholas and Alexandra is the only film to suffer from this problem because it isn't, but there are moments where the film does drag. Finally, there were moments towards the end where it could have done with more drama. The Romanovs's deaths especially could have been chilling, instead whereas I felt sad and angry at how any family could be killed in such a way, the actual scene itself wasn't quite as powerful as it could have been.

Flaws aside, Nicholas and Alexandra is sumptuous to look at. The cinematography looks fabulous and fluid, the costumes are colourful and lush and the scenery and buildings are both imposing and beautiful. The score is also beautiful, there are some parts in the film when there is no music and even no dialogue(not a problem at all, merely an observation),but regardless when the music was playing it was rich and sensitive. I also liked the quality of the script, it was thoughtful and intelligent, with a film like this that's what it needed to be. The direction is solid, and the story while some scenes could have done with more drama as I have mentioned already is still absorbing. The strongest asset though is the cast, Michael Jayston and Janet Suzman are both wonderful as the Tsar and Tsarina, Alexandra is the more interesting character but both actors did superbly. Tom Baker is a very charismatic and cunning Rasputin, and the ever great Laurence Olivier is impeccable as Witte.

Overall, not absolutely superb but it is absorbing and it looks great. Plus it has the benefits of being impeccably acted by a strong cast and a good script. 7/10 Bethany Cox