The Scarlet Empress (1934)

Very very predictable, including the post credit scene !!!

I love this movie so much

Fantastic!

One of the worst ways to make a cult movie is to set out to make a cult movie.

Josef von Sternberg as director provides gothicness, garishness, German Expressionism, Russian madness, style and Marlene Dietrich looking goregous.The film is archaic nowadays, Sam Jaffe is a looney tune as Grand Duke Peter who reminded me of Harpo Marx. Louise Dresser steals the show as the stern and wacky Empress of Russia. It is a film that shows you the early development of cinema as art.The film is flawed in its narrative, it is almost maniacal at times.Yet Dietrich carries it through as Catherine who plots to take over as Queen of Russia by getting the army onside once the old Empress croaks it. At least she and her dashing lover Count Alexei appear to be subdued.

This biopic about the rise of the German Princess Sofia to Empress Catherine of Russia, from naive and deferential innocent to rapacious predator, is accurate only in the broadest outlines. Even the opening credits indicate a loose approach to fact: "Based on a diary of Catherine," "arranged by Manuel Komroff."In the first half Marlene Dietrich in the title role overplays breathless awe so emphatically that one can only wonder if she was strictly directed to do so; after her sexual awakening after months of resisting the stirring of her passions by a rakish courtier (John Lodge) and crazed with frustration by her unconsummated marriage to the repellent Tsar-to-be Peter (Sam Jaffe), she melts into the arms of a palace guard during a sudden moonlit encounter.It's hard to believe this film passed the 1934 censors, given its open suggestions of out-of-wedlock sex (and subsequent pregnancy); Dietrich's posturings call to mind pre-Code Mae West (who was a friendly acquaintance of Dietrich's on the Paramount lot where they were working at the same time). Perhaps the keepers of the Code were too distracted by the shimmering vision of the blonde icon as lit by Josef von Sternberg. And make no mistake about it, this movie is a paean to Dietrich as a work of art. The "Catherine the Great" plot, scenic design and supporting players are the scaffolding and trappings supporting and surrounding the living goddess.These trappings are highly stylized and elaborate as, for example, the Lubitsch-like ritual of Princess Sophia (the future Empress Catherine) kissing the hands of all adults present whenever she enters or exits a room; when she isn't engaged in strictly supervised activities she is kept locked in her bedroom several flights above the main floor of her house; her mother is such a disciplinarian that she scolds the child even when the child obeys. Empress Elizabeth of Russia (Louise Dresser) is introduced on a grand throne in forbidding surroundings decorated with huge grimacing gargoyles festooned with dripping candles and attended by over-dressed lackeys, only to open her mouth and jabber like a bilious small-minded housewife. And the future Tsar Peter whom Sophia is sent to Russia to marry is an imbecile and described as such repeatedly in intertitles in case we miss the point.In fact the flow of exaggerations and extremes is more or less constant so that the viewer is alternately hypnotized and amused. If Dietrich is not your cup of tea, the movie will repel you, because it's all about her.

Well, it seems that you either adore this movie or you hate it. I'm glad to see that we who like it, have the advantage. One of the main objections to the movie seems to be that it is historically inaccurate. Have YOU ever seen a movie that was historically accurate? I haven't - unless it was a documentary, and even then it was rare to agree with everything I saw on the screen.Frankly, I don't usually care if a movie really is totally inaccurate. I see movies as vehicles of escape, not of information (either true, false or in between). And this fantastic recreation of Tsarist Russia, featuring Peter Ballbusch's weird sculpture and showing off some masterful photography (credited to Bert Glennon) is a spectacle you will never forget. The whole cast is superb! And the direction magnificent!

The Scarlet Empress (1934)Pageantry is not everyone's idea of excitement, but at least director Josef von Sternberg knows how to make a great movie. The pacing and filming, as conservative as it is (compared to its contemporaries, from Scarface to Dinner at Eight, take your pick, or more inventive European films), is superbly intelligent, and superbly visual. Man, the lush sets are framed to excess in a rich, beautiful way, and when I mean excess, it's impossible to imagine a more stylized, packed, overripe set of scenes, one after another in very fast succession. Of course, part of these sets and scenes is the incomparable Marlene Dietrich, by now a von Sternberg mainstay. (He practically worshipped her, and this was their seventh film together.) For my money she is not her best in this one, but she is the main spark of life in all the pomp and layered decorations and astonishing lighting. She is also sculpturally vivid, if that's the right word. Take the close-ups through a veil about 32 minutes in. Simple, moving stuff, with a flickering candle and her eyes catching the light. But that's one of hundreds (literally) great short clips and moments.The story is of course limited by history--it's based (loosely, for sure) on the life of Catherine the Great. Too bad the real horror of a ghastly arranged marriage is dampened by all the cinematic fineness--it's to be understood and spoken of more than emotionally felt. Too bad it's generally more interested in its effect than in accuracy. Or I should say, good thing. Who needs an accurate story of Catherine the Great, anyway? What we have is a glorious bit of European-influences Hollywood in the vigorous early 1930s, a high point for sure in our movie history. Watch for the scenes of Catherine as a child--they are played by Dietrich's daughter. I think if you aren not into Dietrich (she doesn't really have to act here, just pose), or into period movies in general, or visual effects over plot, you'll find this wearying, or even unbearable. The pastiche of endless bits of Russian classical music alone might be overbearing. But still, it might all surprise you. It's a kind of masterpiece, like all of their collaborations one way or another. It's mind-blowing and unique, a victory of style of substance, but such style!