Peter the Great (Miniseries Rewatch)
Aug. 20th, 2021 08:04 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
selenakRecently rewatched for the first time since the 1980s: the miniseries Peter the Great, based on Robert K. Massie's biography. Back in the day, I watched it on German tv and remember liking it. However, I hadn't seen it since then (i.e. my teenage days), and certainly not since I acquired a bit more knowledge about about the era.
So, rewatch thoughts: it's instantly recognizable as an internatiional 1980s co production with a lot of British and German money in it. Why? Because a great many of the prominent roles are played by actors of either nationality. Russian actors are way more rare (Boris Plotnikov as the ill fated Tsarevich Alexis is an exception, and he's dubbed by Derek Jacobi). The 1980s givaway is, among other things, the make-up for the actresses (very good and gorgeous costumes, though, and since the change from traditional Russian to Western European style fashion (and who does and who doesn't follow it when Peter orders it) is a big plot point, there is a pleasing consistency there. (Meaning: even when the focus is just on two or so characters in any given scene, you can check out who wears what in the background and it fits with that characters' attitude and loyalties.) Something that I only discovered now and couldn't have earlier, because naturally when I saw this as a teen on German tv it was dubbed into German, is that the English language version does that accent thing, i.e. the characters (except those who are supposed to be Brits) all talk with a slight accent, which is, in all fairness, not the kind of caricature pseudo Russian one otherwise so common. Something else I didn't notice as a teen: the series is a bit odd about patronyms. While Peter himself is consistently addressed as Peter Alexejevich by people in his personal circle when they talk to him, no one else is. Meaning: Peter's older half sister is Sofia, not Sofia Alexejevna, Peter's bff is Alexander (Menshikov), not Alexander Danilovich, and so on. Oh, and one more "technical" remark: When music gets played within the story (i.e. when people are dancing, or when they are singing in church), it feels period appropriate; when there's "mood" music for the audience, it feels very 1980s tv again, sometimes way over the top signaling whether our hero or a sinister villain has just entered the scene, and so forth.
On to the storytelling and acting. Here my teenage impressions hold: Jan Niklas, whose break-out role this was, does a great job being young, dashing and charismatic as Peter from ca. age 17 to his mid 20s; Maximilian Schell is good as older Peter and brings on the brooding and the darkness, but fails to sell the intensity of the emotional connections to Menshikov and Catherine; Hanna Schygulla (who plays future Catherine I., who, for newbies in Russian history, is NOT Catherine the Great (who was Catherine II), but is the first female monarch on the throne) is still one an actress whose reputation I never understood, as she keeps having the same facial expression and tone of voice, but she's still better than I remembered, since in her introduction scene - where Catherine the canny survivor in a recently conquered city goes from one officer to Menshikov to Peter in one sequence - she manages to come across as both clever and exuding warmth. Which is necessary since the script doesn't give her much help to explain why this is the woman Peter stays with for the remainder of the series.
However, it's very clear why the one who got an Emmy nomination for this miniseries was Vanessa Redgrave as the Tsarewna Sofia, the half sister who starts the show organizing a brutal uprising which makes her regent instead of Peter's mother (when Peter and older brother Ivan are child Czars). She's ruthlessly smart and so thoroughly enjoying herself in power (and, when later out of it, plotting to get it back), with zero scruples, a playful sense of humor, and yet, unlike a great many other female villains, never sexualized. (Not de-sexualized, either. Her lover in episode 1 is also her right hand man.) The miniseries gives Peter two Worthy Opponents, the other one being Swedish King Charles XII. in the last episode, but Sofia is the more interesting one you wish there was more of. In their last scene together, after her last plot against him failed, she's chiding him for still not killing her and waves aside his declaration that he won't shed family blood with "you will before this is over" (he will). Then he says: "Let's just say I see something of me in you to admire, then?" And indeed, the miniseries definitely positions Sofia and Peter as the two ruling magnificent bastards of the Romanows, only she's handicaped by being female. (Peter the Great would later alter the laws of succession which would enable a near century of female rulers, but when he was a child, this hadn't happened yet, so a regency was all Sofia could get.)
Covering decades of Russian and European history means this miniseries is simplifying like no one's business when it comes to the convoluted politics. The Great Northern War features solely Russia and Sweden (who were the main protagonists in history, but by no means the only nations involved) and seems to consist of only two battles (the first won by Charles, the second won by Peter), which is a bit like telling WWII as consisting of Dunkirk and the fall of Berlin. When Peter does his first great European tour and makes an ally out of the new just-coming-into-existence kingdom Prussia, I had a coughing fit when he told its King, Friedrich I (that's Frederick the Great's grandfather, for those of you keeping score) that he'll help him rule not just Prussia but "most of Northern Germany". Not yet, Peter, not yet, not for several generations. The Hannover in-laws and the Saxons would both have word to say at this point, as would the rulers of Brunswick, the Holsteins who are not unimportant for your family's future, and the Hanse cities. Northern Germany indeed. And speaking of Peter's future in-laws, the series cuts down his children to two, Alexis from his first marriage and Elizabeth from his second. This leaves out no less than twelve other kids. Granted, most died as infants, but Elizabeth wasn't the only one to survive into adulthood, Anna Petrovna did as well, and without Anna, you don't get her son Peter III and without him no reason for Catherine II to come to Russia and marry him. I guess in this AU the Romanows die out with Elilzabeth already? Just kidding. I do get why the number of kids are cut down to those who are a plot point, but - all the dead babies and toddlers in rl were a plot point, too.
Anyway, a miniseries has to pick and choose which stories from the many many possible to tell about Peter I. to emphasize. So we get several red threads:
- Peter the radical modernizer vs the power mad Orthodox Russian Church (there's not a single priest in this series who is not evil and scheming; this in a Western series at the height of the Cold War; I'm impressed), but also against a considerable part of his disapproving Russian people who think he's the anti christ
- family tragedy, which is mostly, though not exclusively a father/son tragedy, starting with "yay, my first born!" and ending in brutal death (and the one reason why Friedrich Wilhelm of Prussia ISN'T the worst father of the era); other parts of the family tragedy are Peter's awful (first) marriage reproducing itself in Alexis' awful marriage, and Peter's capacity for violence directly connected to the violence he saw and was threatened by as a child
- Ships! Trade! Russia needs baltic harbors and access to the sea => Peter vs Charles of Sweden
The whole "forcing Russia out of its medieval state and forcing a transformation into a modern European power" tale is also mirrored in a subplot where the father of Peter's bff Alexander Menshikov - who famously hailed not of the nobility but started out as a vendor of stuffed buns and servant - is a traditional Russian peasant, who unlike the evil priests isn't evil and power mad, just stubborn and seriously convinced change is of the devil. So whenever the series needs to demonstrate the human cost to modernization, Danilo Menshikov comes into play.
Violence: happens, but in a 1980s for mainstream tv way. Meaning: for example, in the first episode, two people get torn part in front of child!Peter, but the audience doesn't see this, we see the mob of Strelsky soldiers moving in and the two people disappearing. The battle scenes, such as they are, are the type where soldiers fall from horses but nobody bleeds. The infamous mass executions in episode 3 are shown from a distance (the hangings) and or via the camera showing the reactions from the people who see them (the beheadings - no separated heads later, either, but bloody hands on the part of the one swinging the axe). And the one (historical) on screen torture scene is staged in a less explicit way than Picard's torture in the TNG episode Chain of Command II.
Sex: I remember a bit more nudity, and so I wonder whether the English version was the one aiming at the US market. (Hey, I'm a Highlander: The Series fan of old. Though the famous "Euro minutes" were usually the result of the US versions being cut down to make more room for advertisements.) In any case, sex is usually indicated by fully dressed people clutching each other, and the one exception - where Peter and his first serious mistress Anna Mons undress each other - happens via the camera showing the various bits of clothing landing on the floor. There are also two rape scenes, justified by plot and shown via close up of the woman's face.
Non-straight sexuality: does not exist. Charles XII, who as far as his wiki entry is concerned was either asexual or had homoerotic leanings or both, is given a fictional mistress (who also works as a spy and is played by Ursula Andress). Peter's relationship with Menshikov, which, I take it, has at least a "Maybe? In their youth?" question mark above, is also, well, played straight, as expected by 1980s tv, but also where wiki says they were both the same age here Menshikov is already at least a teenager when he meets and rescues child!Peter. (Which might also be so he can be played by Helmut Griem in the entire series, unlike Peter who is played by a child actor, by Jan Niklas, by Maximilian Schell and by yet another actor in the "Peter narrates his life" scenes for which they apparently couldn't get Schell back.) Otoh this being the 1980s also means there are a lot of manly comradly hugs, and while the series cuts down the "Alexander Menshikov is caught at financial corruption, Peter is pissed, Peter forgives him because this is his bff of bffs" pattern in their loves down to one occasion, this works better in the interest of drama, and has Peter throwing his arm around a drunk Alexander's shoulders and asking him "Sasha, what am I going to do with you?"
All in all: not a must, I'm still in the "like" rather than the "love" section, but you can do worse in the historical miniseries department when you're into beautiful costumes, screwed up royal families and (some) history.
So, rewatch thoughts: it's instantly recognizable as an internatiional 1980s co production with a lot of British and German money in it. Why? Because a great many of the prominent roles are played by actors of either nationality. Russian actors are way more rare (Boris Plotnikov as the ill fated Tsarevich Alexis is an exception, and he's dubbed by Derek Jacobi). The 1980s givaway is, among other things, the make-up for the actresses (very good and gorgeous costumes, though, and since the change from traditional Russian to Western European style fashion (and who does and who doesn't follow it when Peter orders it) is a big plot point, there is a pleasing consistency there. (Meaning: even when the focus is just on two or so characters in any given scene, you can check out who wears what in the background and it fits with that characters' attitude and loyalties.) Something that I only discovered now and couldn't have earlier, because naturally when I saw this as a teen on German tv it was dubbed into German, is that the English language version does that accent thing, i.e. the characters (except those who are supposed to be Brits) all talk with a slight accent, which is, in all fairness, not the kind of caricature pseudo Russian one otherwise so common. Something else I didn't notice as a teen: the series is a bit odd about patronyms. While Peter himself is consistently addressed as Peter Alexejevich by people in his personal circle when they talk to him, no one else is. Meaning: Peter's older half sister is Sofia, not Sofia Alexejevna, Peter's bff is Alexander (Menshikov), not Alexander Danilovich, and so on. Oh, and one more "technical" remark: When music gets played within the story (i.e. when people are dancing, or when they are singing in church), it feels period appropriate; when there's "mood" music for the audience, it feels very 1980s tv again, sometimes way over the top signaling whether our hero or a sinister villain has just entered the scene, and so forth.
On to the storytelling and acting. Here my teenage impressions hold: Jan Niklas, whose break-out role this was, does a great job being young, dashing and charismatic as Peter from ca. age 17 to his mid 20s; Maximilian Schell is good as older Peter and brings on the brooding and the darkness, but fails to sell the intensity of the emotional connections to Menshikov and Catherine; Hanna Schygulla (who plays future Catherine I., who, for newbies in Russian history, is NOT Catherine the Great (who was Catherine II), but is the first female monarch on the throne) is still one an actress whose reputation I never understood, as she keeps having the same facial expression and tone of voice, but she's still better than I remembered, since in her introduction scene - where Catherine the canny survivor in a recently conquered city goes from one officer to Menshikov to Peter in one sequence - she manages to come across as both clever and exuding warmth. Which is necessary since the script doesn't give her much help to explain why this is the woman Peter stays with for the remainder of the series.
However, it's very clear why the one who got an Emmy nomination for this miniseries was Vanessa Redgrave as the Tsarewna Sofia, the half sister who starts the show organizing a brutal uprising which makes her regent instead of Peter's mother (when Peter and older brother Ivan are child Czars). She's ruthlessly smart and so thoroughly enjoying herself in power (and, when later out of it, plotting to get it back), with zero scruples, a playful sense of humor, and yet, unlike a great many other female villains, never sexualized. (Not de-sexualized, either. Her lover in episode 1 is also her right hand man.) The miniseries gives Peter two Worthy Opponents, the other one being Swedish King Charles XII. in the last episode, but Sofia is the more interesting one you wish there was more of. In their last scene together, after her last plot against him failed, she's chiding him for still not killing her and waves aside his declaration that he won't shed family blood with "you will before this is over" (he will). Then he says: "Let's just say I see something of me in you to admire, then?" And indeed, the miniseries definitely positions Sofia and Peter as the two ruling magnificent bastards of the Romanows, only she's handicaped by being female. (Peter the Great would later alter the laws of succession which would enable a near century of female rulers, but when he was a child, this hadn't happened yet, so a regency was all Sofia could get.)
Covering decades of Russian and European history means this miniseries is simplifying like no one's business when it comes to the convoluted politics. The Great Northern War features solely Russia and Sweden (who were the main protagonists in history, but by no means the only nations involved) and seems to consist of only two battles (the first won by Charles, the second won by Peter), which is a bit like telling WWII as consisting of Dunkirk and the fall of Berlin. When Peter does his first great European tour and makes an ally out of the new just-coming-into-existence kingdom Prussia, I had a coughing fit when he told its King, Friedrich I (that's Frederick the Great's grandfather, for those of you keeping score) that he'll help him rule not just Prussia but "most of Northern Germany". Not yet, Peter, not yet, not for several generations. The Hannover in-laws and the Saxons would both have word to say at this point, as would the rulers of Brunswick, the Holsteins who are not unimportant for your family's future, and the Hanse cities. Northern Germany indeed. And speaking of Peter's future in-laws, the series cuts down his children to two, Alexis from his first marriage and Elizabeth from his second. This leaves out no less than twelve other kids. Granted, most died as infants, but Elizabeth wasn't the only one to survive into adulthood, Anna Petrovna did as well, and without Anna, you don't get her son Peter III and without him no reason for Catherine II to come to Russia and marry him. I guess in this AU the Romanows die out with Elilzabeth already? Just kidding. I do get why the number of kids are cut down to those who are a plot point, but - all the dead babies and toddlers in rl were a plot point, too.
Anyway, a miniseries has to pick and choose which stories from the many many possible to tell about Peter I. to emphasize. So we get several red threads:
- Peter the radical modernizer vs the power mad Orthodox Russian Church (there's not a single priest in this series who is not evil and scheming; this in a Western series at the height of the Cold War; I'm impressed), but also against a considerable part of his disapproving Russian people who think he's the anti christ
- family tragedy, which is mostly, though not exclusively a father/son tragedy, starting with "yay, my first born!" and ending in brutal death (and the one reason why Friedrich Wilhelm of Prussia ISN'T the worst father of the era); other parts of the family tragedy are Peter's awful (first) marriage reproducing itself in Alexis' awful marriage, and Peter's capacity for violence directly connected to the violence he saw and was threatened by as a child
- Ships! Trade! Russia needs baltic harbors and access to the sea => Peter vs Charles of Sweden
The whole "forcing Russia out of its medieval state and forcing a transformation into a modern European power" tale is also mirrored in a subplot where the father of Peter's bff Alexander Menshikov - who famously hailed not of the nobility but started out as a vendor of stuffed buns and servant - is a traditional Russian peasant, who unlike the evil priests isn't evil and power mad, just stubborn and seriously convinced change is of the devil. So whenever the series needs to demonstrate the human cost to modernization, Danilo Menshikov comes into play.
Violence: happens, but in a 1980s for mainstream tv way. Meaning: for example, in the first episode, two people get torn part in front of child!Peter, but the audience doesn't see this, we see the mob of Strelsky soldiers moving in and the two people disappearing. The battle scenes, such as they are, are the type where soldiers fall from horses but nobody bleeds. The infamous mass executions in episode 3 are shown from a distance (the hangings) and or via the camera showing the reactions from the people who see them (the beheadings - no separated heads later, either, but bloody hands on the part of the one swinging the axe). And the one (historical) on screen torture scene is staged in a less explicit way than Picard's torture in the TNG episode Chain of Command II.
Sex: I remember a bit more nudity, and so I wonder whether the English version was the one aiming at the US market. (Hey, I'm a Highlander: The Series fan of old. Though the famous "Euro minutes" were usually the result of the US versions being cut down to make more room for advertisements.) In any case, sex is usually indicated by fully dressed people clutching each other, and the one exception - where Peter and his first serious mistress Anna Mons undress each other - happens via the camera showing the various bits of clothing landing on the floor. There are also two rape scenes, justified by plot and shown via close up of the woman's face.
Non-straight sexuality: does not exist. Charles XII, who as far as his wiki entry is concerned was either asexual or had homoerotic leanings or both, is given a fictional mistress (who also works as a spy and is played by Ursula Andress). Peter's relationship with Menshikov, which, I take it, has at least a "Maybe? In their youth?" question mark above, is also, well, played straight, as expected by 1980s tv, but also where wiki says they were both the same age here Menshikov is already at least a teenager when he meets and rescues child!Peter. (Which might also be so he can be played by Helmut Griem in the entire series, unlike Peter who is played by a child actor, by Jan Niklas, by Maximilian Schell and by yet another actor in the "Peter narrates his life" scenes for which they apparently couldn't get Schell back.) Otoh this being the 1980s also means there are a lot of manly comradly hugs, and while the series cuts down the "Alexander Menshikov is caught at financial corruption, Peter is pissed, Peter forgives him because this is his bff of bffs" pattern in their loves down to one occasion, this works better in the interest of drama, and has Peter throwing his arm around a drunk Alexander's shoulders and asking him "Sasha, what am I going to do with you?"
All in all: not a must, I'm still in the "like" rather than the "love" section, but you can do worse in the historical miniseries department when you're into beautiful costumes, screwed up royal families and (some) history.
