Last Of The Czar Movie Analysis

964 Words4 Pages
Last of the Czar was the documentary which showed the life of the last Czar of Russia Nicholas II and his family. The documentary accurately illustrated that Czar Nicholas II’s reliance on his wife, superstition belief, and pugnacity were the major causes of the destruction of his reign. Specifically, Nicholas II always did what his wife – Alexandra decided, believed in the superpower of Rasputin, and brought Russia into many wars that she would be the loser.
The documentary correctly portrayed how Nicholas II was being controlled by his empress. He loved her so much that whenever he had to command the army in a faraway land, he always let her manage the country until he returned. In evidence, before Nicholas II moved to the front line to lead
…show more content…
The Czar’s heir, Alexei, had serious hemophilia that no doctors at the time could cure except of one man, Grigory Rasputin. By using his mystical invocation and hypnosis, he successfully saved Alexei’s life in March 1907. Nicholas II totally believed in that witchcraft and wrote in his diary: “We became acquainted today with Grigory, a man of God from Tobolsk province.” Rasputin quickly built a strong relationship with the royal family, and then he started to do a lot of inhuman and barbarous actions like raping other female priests and involving in corrupt practices. Therefore, many loyal officers tried to ask the Czar to eliminate this mad man as soon as possible. The most famous one was the Chairman of the State Duma, Mikhail Rodzianko, he said to his emperor: “I implore you my sovereign, banish this dirty interloper from the court.” The Czar then replied: “No, I cannot promise you that.” Mistakes followed by mistakes, Nicholas II’s reign started to ruin when he decided to command the troops in World War I and leave the whole of Russia to his wife and Rasputin as adviser. The Czar’s foolish in “leaving the inexperienced and untalented Alexandra to run the empire along with the evil and ambitious Rasputin” paved the way for the destruction of the 300 year-long Romanov dynasty. That was…show more content…
Because of this characteristic, his Russian Empire had to receive an infamous defeat in the Russian – Japanese war. In February 1904, the Japanese attacked Port Arthur of Russia to show its power to the western world. However, Nicholas was very confident when he received the news. His pugnacity brought him the subjectivity in war. He believed that “the upstart Japanese would soon be taught a salutary lesson.” He also wrote to his mother: “So the war has begun, our brave men will surely be victorious over the foe.” In contrast, the Russian navies were “all sunk in a single day in the battle of Tsushima.” Nicholas II still did not awaken; he even showed his pugnacity to his own people on the Bloody Sunday. On January 9, 1905, thousands of protesters were killed by Nicholas II’s infantries. After that day, Nicholas wrote on his diary: “Serious disorders took place in Petersburg when the workers tried to get into the Winter Palace. The troops were forced to fire in several parts of the city and there are many killed and wounded.” Even Rasputin did not had the capability to stop the Czar’s pugnacity. When Nicholas II decided to go to war with Germany in 1915, Rasputin wrote to him: “Let Papa not plan for war, for with war will come to the end of Russia and of yourselves, you will lose to the last man.” Then the Czar “read it, tore it into shreds and gave the
Open Document