MovieChat Forums > Rasputin (1996) Discussion > Rasputin the man

Rasputin the man

posted 17 years ago by Tbags180
10 replies | jump to latest

I just saw this movie and Rasputin is totally the man, hes like a superhero

He was an old fraud. I don`t know what he did to stop the kid`s bleeding, admittedly. But this movie focuses alot on the myths surrounding the man. A lot of that stuff (the cakes for instance), didn`t happen. True, there were poisoned cakes, but he didn`t touch them. There are other examples, but I shan`t bore you with the details.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ke_edo 17 years ago

Yeah he completely hoodwinked Tsarina Alexandra, and playted to her religous fanaticism. As much as I adore this film, I don't like the emphasis they place upon Rasptuin's importance. Yes he was very detrimental to the Romanov family but lets face it, their monarchy was on the way out anyway. They were already very unpopular long before Rasputin came along, the people were fed up with Nicholas' autocratic mindset. Rasptuin was one of many straws that broke the camels back, yet they made it look it was primarily Rasputin that brought down the monarchy. He wasn't quite that powerful.

[–] Noruh 17 years ago

Well put ke_edo. Rasputin truly was the straw that broke an already dying camel's back. The Russian Tsarist system was well behind the west and rife with internal problems. Rasputin was a menance, a fraud, and was detrimental to the welfare of the nation but he was not the direct cause of its ruin.

[–] Regina_Giddens 17 years ago

A lot of that stuff (the cakes for instance), didn`t happen.

Well...according to the memoirs of Felix Yussupov who killed him he did, and he was the only one there. How do you know he didn't eat them?

There is little doubt that Rasputin did posses hypnotic 'powers.' (for want of a better word)It is likely that he calmed Alexei by soothing him and calming his nerves which helped slow the bleeding. I agree that his influece is somewhat overstated, the empire was on the way out anyway, but I think if there had never been a Rasputin, the revolution may have been postphoned for a little while.

Of course this is inside your head, but why should that mean it is not real?

[–] chainsaw_metal1 7 years ago

While it's up for debate, there are two pieces of evidence (of a sort).

One, according the the autopsy, there was no arsenic found in Rasputin's body (however, this could have been falsified). Two, Rasputin's daughter stated that her father never touched sweets, for some stomach related issue, I believe.

Again, all of this can and will be debated for time immemorial, but it seems pretty plausible that he was simply shot.

[–] elven_vampire86033 17 years ago

It is my belief that Rasputin was a catalyst but that is not entirely true. While Rasputin sped up the revolution he did change. He did have immense power, in that he controlled the head of the empire and if you control the head - you control the body. He had common sense and by that I mean he told the Tsarina not to let the doctors bother Tsarevich Alexei. If he had the control to stop a mother from doing everything possible for her dying son, I believe he had control over as much control over Russia as the Tsar did. By the way Rasputin’s advice to the Tsarina and possibly the calming theory did help Tsarevich Alexei.

And it’s almost three in the morning so I’ll be back! LOL.

Some moments don’t rule, some moments do.

[–] hippy_chick952 16 years ago

Honestly he was a tiny factor that contributed to the revolution!
True, he did have great influence over the Tsarina.
But to call him the catalyst is going way too far.

[–] bwfc1975 16 years ago

I agree with the hippy-chick...

There were many factors that combined to bring down the autocracy that was the Russian monarchy. The failure to understand or deal with the peasant question was one of the main factors. There was also the issue of nationalism in countries like Ukraine, Georgia and Chechnya!! Sound familiar?

Rasputin may have caused a scandal in the Palace and amongst the upper classes in Petrograd and Moscow but I don't think he had much to do with the Revolution of 1905 (Rasputin only met the Tsarina that year) or the final downfall of the monarchy in 1917.

[–] JeromeSilberman1 9 years ago

The Russian monarchy collapsed on its own turns …there is one man to blame not Rasputin , Nicholas II - He was a weak man , his wife dominated him , Rasputin was a mysterious "Starets" nothing more he happened to meet the royals , by accident. There is also some evidence to back up that he had a relationship with the tzarina sexual nature. Which in turn means he controlled her and she controlled Nicholas.