Why is burning the bodies and pouring lye on them such a major sore point? It's kind of after the fact. Besides, they could get enough DNA to prove identidy (thru Prince *sshole Phillip in the UK using matralineal-excuse sp.-DNA). And (Tori Amos reference, lol) "Yes, Anastasia" was there (in the basement-the kill room) Russian history, going back to the Mongol invasion, is the most traumatic history of any people I know of. It explains much of all the repressive cruelty be it whoever in power
There's truth to both arguements. Killing the Romanovs was awful, but the Tsarist regime was every bit as violent and repressive as Stalin. Take an Imperial Russian History course. They still had serfdom in the 1860's! Also, they were gathered under the guise of needing a "proof of life photo" that's how they lined them up. And the jewels in the dress? All the females deflected the bullets due to that. Freaked out the shooters. This is from an interview of a firing squad member decades later.
Okay... there are some parts that are not right, like the boy Alexei couldn't walk. But, looking at both the history side of the movie side of this, I don't want to be too picky. It's still a good portrayal of what happened.
Nonsense! These ridiculous reenactments are confirming the hoax! They take photos of them before the kill them, however none afterwards to prove they are dead. This is preposterous! Terrible propaganda.
If he had saved his cousins (the romanovs) from being murdered, then I would have more respect for George V.....he just abandoned them for his own political reasons, I believe that if they were brought to England, there wouldn't have been any trouble. I wonder what he was truly thinking when he was told of their brutal execution....how could he do that...especially to the czar's children. They didn't even deserve to die, they were totally innocent, so young ,at the beginning of their lives.
I laughed at this scene, don't get me wrong. I have seen a lot of Romanov protrayals of the execution scenes from various movies.
What I found funny was the servent telling George that the family were living in a farm house. When in reality they were living in a mansion of a wealthy merchant. lmao.
This is actually a really bad portrayal of the Romanovs. In the movie Alix and the daughters speak Russian all the time when they rarely spoke it. Alix the least as she always struggled with the language. She was largely raised in England, close to her English Mother and family, English her first language. She was a German pirncess but the family never spoke German. And she was very well acquainted with English ways, she preferred them, she was not arrogant as she is portrayed in this movie.
The Bolsheviks do not have to pour acid and burn the bodies.... They should have never killed the Romanov family because some of them did not deserve to die...The royal children weren't able to fulfill their dreams in life and Alexei wasn't able to be emperor of Russia. If they were not murdered I'm sure the Romanovs would still rule Russia.But, It's too late to change it. They are now dead and in heaven and we could not change the past if only we could.. I could change the past,I could...
it was a little inacurrate in that movie.. Alexei couldnt walk at the time they were murdered because he injured his foot badly while sliding down in the stairs..
God rest there souls, nobody not Emperor King Politician or Citizen deserves that kind of death and humiliation, except a few mass murders which I will not dignify by stating there names.
I hate to see how their bodies were treated after they were murdered. Thrown around like rag dolls. Thank you for sharing this clip! It is one of the most emotional I've seen.
I blame the parents (Nicholas and Alexandra) for not getting their children out of there. Their daughters were all old enough to be married (except maybe Anastasia). They could have married the girls off to various petty princes that were all over Europe pre-WWI. Why didn't they send Alexei to the Sorbonne or Oxford or Cambridge. No. They kept them close out of selfishness when the whole country was sinking. Nicholas was called Bloody Nicholas by his own people. His children paid the price.
@russkie69 They certainly couldn't send Alexei to either the Sorbonne or Oxbridge as he was 14 years old. He was too immature and in any case hadn't finished his schooling/tutoring. Possibly they could have sent him to Eton. As for the girls, well they were in the process of negotiating their marriages, I'm given to understand. But the first revolution came to a head too quickly, but certainly Nicholas and Alexandra should have been aware of the dissent. They were warned by HM's Ambassador, etc.
well, they had it coming, "if you sow misery, you will reap anger."
besides if you read the detailed history of the Civil War you would see that the Bolsheviks had no choice in the matter. more importantly, there are many more deserving of your tears, and they are dying NOW. as we speak.
@franzfaramir Yes you're so right. Obviously the girls, the Tsarevitch, the doctor, the spaniel, and all of them sowed misery, they all deserved to die.
The Bolsheviks were illegal coup d'etat runners, responsible for the deaths of millions. Absolute bastards, there's no denying the White Russians could be terrible too. But this fucking cruel outrage was unjustified, and Bolshevik rule was illegal. You must be clueless
@trixwiz7 OMG you've got to be joking. The Tsar yes but his daughters and son no. They had no idea what was going on outside the palace walls. There father shielded them from it. They did not deserve to be punished for there parents sins.
@TudorRose85 lol I was being sarcastic, none of them deserved to die, not even the Tsar, and certainly not the children or doctor. Couldn't you detect the sarcasm in the first part of my comment? The fact that I called the executions a "fucking cruel outrage [that was] unjustified" in the second part of my comment should have made my opinion rather clear.
I was replying to franzfaramir's comment below, with the same tack that you're replying to mine
What big men Lenin, Trotsky, the Bolsheviks in general, were. Killing girls, a boy and unarmed adults. Those chaps in the basement with the pistols must have felt so grand as they looked into the eyes of the Grand Duchesses as they were seated, and coldly opened fire
If I had ever got my hands on those men, I would have ripped them limb from limb. Bastards. If there's a god, a heaven and a hell, they'll burn for eternity
George V was a coward too, I hope that was on his conscience til he died
Though it may seem on the surface to be merely an observable fact that "revolutions always devour their children" I would submit that it is a strong indicator of not just his existence, but that he is just.
There are countless examples of humans undergoing a horrific medical condition or death that is clearly the fruit of the way they lived their lives.
And the Bolsheviks are burning in Hell I can assure you. :-)
king george V was such a jerk!!!He could have saved Romanovs but he chose to ignore the situation and save his ass. Sometimes you have to make very difficult decisions in order to be a proper human being he chose to be a jerk!
i am trying to find out the real story so help me out if u want so can u give me some tips and dna could not be done on anna anderson because she died before dna testing was possible so that is what i think
@bmbjl Anna's story makes exciting reading, and "Anastasia" is a wonderful movie (the scene where the skeptical & bitter Dowager Empress finally accepts Anna as her lost grandchild is heartbreaking & then joyful).
But the real Anna Anderson was merely one of many imposters. DNA tests on Anderson's hair and tissue showed that her DNA did not match either that of the Romanov remains or the living Romanov relatives. Anna Anderson was a fraud.
@bmbjl No. She was a fraud. They have blood and hair samples from when she was alive, which prove she was a fraud. You can do DNA tests on someone after their dead if there is extant tissue.
Why are any of you even having this discussion? It gives honor to claims of the Communist apologists here who argue that the Soviets :"had to" kill the Romanovs. The very idea is ludicrous; as if it can be defended to kill children. The Soviets were thugs and brutes who instituted a barbaric and brutal system out of their desire to become the new rulers. They were far more cruel, murdering tens of millions more, than even the worst of the czars (who were a very bad lot).
@jum1801 So true... And let us not forget, what they did to the Romanovs was so terrible and they were so cruel and vicious up to the end. Of all the Romanovs exiled to Siberia only one survived, Princess Elena of Serbia, the wife of Prince Ionn, but all the rest of them were killed... And kept apart too. Imagine what horror it must have been to Alexandra and her sister Elisabeth, to be so near and yet so apart. And what they did,killing them all, shows cruelty on its worst.
i read somewhere that is was planned for Olga and Edward (the duke of Windsor) to marry, if it is true does anybody know why i didn't happen? I don't really know what to believe about that but it would have been less sad if atleast one of the children survived!
I work in higher education, and my department head, a self-proclaimed Marxist-Socialist (even though he has two luxury cars, two homes, and sent his children to private schools) heralded the assassination of the Romanovs as a great day in history. Two of my colleagues are in agreement with him, and one of them belongs to a bicycling club that calls itself the "Red Spokes". I fear this is what is infecting our young people of today, and there is not much we can do about it.
From what I've read, Alexandra hated speaking Russian, she would have talked to her husband in English. Most of their letters to each other as well as her journals were in English.
@manuelherrera777 you were horribly wrong, it seems like you've been reading soviet propaganda. She didn't mind speaking or writing in russian but since the day Nicholas and alexandra met most of their letters were in english, i think they wanted to do that out of affection.
Just the books by Massie,Radzinsky and others who all say she never took to Russian as her sister or mother-in-law did. Her own letters to her grandmother Victoria and her sisters say she didnt like Russian. She was lucky Nicholas spoke English and German well.
@joyann1 Pierre Gilliard states Alexandra spoke to the children ONLY in English and to her staff she also spoke English and French. She only spoke Russian if the person she addressed spoke no other language.
It was all the daughters that had jewels sewen in their underclothes. Although Marie/Maria was a question mark considering she was the first to be sent to Yenkaterinburg with Nicholas and Alix.
The other girls sewn the jewels in their underclothes while in Toblosk.
yes...but they can be killed coz the children has not enough strength to fight those bolsheviks or should i say bullshitviks! They also said that they were shot in the head...but on Maria's body there was no sign in her bones of how she die
Maria's face had been almost entirely crushed because when they were moving the bodies she cried out and one of the guards hit her in the face till she was silent. I'm assuming she died from the trauma, though sources don't state exactly what it was that really killed her.
It all goes to show that monarchies might be romantic in fairly tales, but they make no sense when running a country like Russia.
The Tsar believed he was appointed by God to rule; consequently he did all he could to thwart the democratic process of representative government and reform. Russia then went from the tyranny of monarch to tyranny by the Bolsheviks.
Even though they were really staying in a wealthy merchant's house "Ipatiev House". I'm guessing this film is showing how George V imaged the Imperial family staying in a farm house and imaging their murder.
It depends how you look at it. Most historians agree that the Tsar was an incompetent ruler but he was a fairly good man who loved his family. I think thats what makes it tragic..especially when you think of other truely evil leaders who knowingly murdered thousands and yet died peacefully in their sleep. Even Hitler shot himself - he never had to answer for his crimes.
Could someone please tell me what this movie is about? I watched it with my mother when I was a little girl but I don't remember any of it....if someone could tell me I'd be very greatfull!
This film shows a bit of how both familys delt with the illnesses with their sons.
Alexei with his hemophilia and Alexandra and Nicholas, Alexei's sisters who all took great care of him and were over protective, although they let him be out in public and go to formal occassions.
While Prince John's epilipsy was seen as an "embarassment" and thought it best to shield him from the public in case of reactions. His parents thought it best to leave John in care with his Nanny Lala.
so whos the man talking to that guy in the beard with the suit, is that John. I just can't believe how they killed the Tsar Nicholas II and his family, history will never forget that.
The massacre of the entire family was a crime, but NIcholas was not innocent. Lenin shoud had let Trosky to have his trial (Trostky wanted to put the Tsar on Trial) and hang him.
What a unnatural cruelty, those savages led by Lenin was truly the world's tyranny I think it's unfair that the Bolsheviks came away with murder on The Romanovs unpunished by the rest of the alliance of "The Triple Entente" & the rest of the world. The world would have been a much better place without Karl Marx ideals of the so-called called "Communism". It is a nice idea but it does not work the ideology has killed more than Nazism, if you look back on history, and that is sick!
I absolutely agree (TsarPutte91). But their are two sides to every story. Tsar Nicholas was not a very attentive Tsar and made several poor decisions during his reign which led to the to the revolution. He was busy leading his army in WWI and left his country to the Tsarina who was not very good at running the country. Still, their treatment and their murder was completely unjust like you said.
lol I know this may sound way off the chart but my grandfather claimed to be a descendant now I don't know if it was true but he believed it till he died this year and swore to us that he never wanted us to say anything. His name was changed by the goverment many times. He has pictures of the family and letters and greatly resembles them. He always was a very sain man but he did believed that he was a romanoff greatly. This leaves me with this question coiuld he have been the little boy???
Things are never as simple as they sometimes seem. Nicholas II is the only leader who tried to stop the oncoming apocalypse of World War I. To me, it was never the "Great War". There is a famous Irish Saying that the worst battles aren't between right and wrong, the worst battles are between right and right. I think in the light of history, all Russians should celebrate Nicholas's efforts to stop the war and regret his failure to convince other leaders that he was right. He was. Hitler is proof
The Russians had no contingency plans for a partial mobilization, and on 31 July 1914 Nicholas took the fateful step of confirming the order for a general mobilization. Nicholas was strongly counselled against mobilization of the Russian forces but chose to ignore such advice. Nicholas put the Russian army on "alert" on July 25. Although this was not mobilization, it threatened the German and Austrian borders and looked like a military declaration of war.
As far as policy went, the russian had no alternative to eneter the war. The Austro_hungarian ultimatum to the serbs was designed by AH and germany to bring Russia and therefore France to war.
i agree with anastaciaexpert lol they tried their hardest for the country, for the people oh and to Balela the tsarina was not queen victorias grand daughter, tsar nicholas was her cousin
Alexandra Feodorovna was the grand daughter of queen Victoria of the United Kingdom as she was daughter of Alice of Great Britain, the wife of the Louis, Grand-Duke of Hesse. Alice was the second daughter of Queen Victoria.
She was also Nicholas II second cousin. they shared a comon great grandmother, Willemina of Baden. Willemina had as descendents the Grand Dukes of Hesse thru her son Karl and the Tsars of Russia thru her daughter Maximiliane (later Maria) who married tsar Alexander II.
I think that thi is horrible. I don't care how rich they were, or about the fact that they let millions of people starve. you don't answer bad with bad. Remember that the same type of stuff was going on in England, in denmark and all the other royal countries of the time. There are always going to be the really poor, and middle, and the unimaginably rich. Plus at that time royalty was a thing of dreams. They most of the time could care less about others. unfortuanate but true.
Very sad but you know.....that family *did* allow vast amounts of people to starve, and die with absolutely no human dignity, while living in a fricking gold palace.
Didn't the Tzarina call those begging for food "troublemakers"?
You obviously don't understand the family at all. If you did, you would know that they would never want anyone to die in any way. They didn't live in a 'fricking gold palace'. There was a palace such as that where they lived but they lived in the smallest one, and it was decorated as any other wealthy person would of that period. They were highly religious people and reigned because they felt it was God's Will - that's what they had to do. Nicholas never even wanted to be the Tsar. Try reading.
how is it that everybody still thinks it was King George who refused them entry into England?
Edward VIII made it quite clear what happened in a direct quote almost 40 years ago! It was Edward's mother and George's wife - Mary of Teck- who refused entry. End of story!
Disregarding who's fault it was, it certainly was not England's finest hour. Nikolay II had asked asylum to his English cousin and not to Denmark or France, as far as I know. Probably because the empress Alexandra felt deeply for her English roots, being the grandaughter of Queen Victoria.
can someone help me finding the episodes when prince john was about to take a test if he fits to come back to the palace? i mean when he discuss about his family tree
It's mostly about the Windsors during World War I. The Queen's grandfather is the king in this movie. It's mostly about his youngest son, who had epilepsy and was hidden from the public.
i feel the need to point out a small inacuracy: in the clip, Alexi walks to his chair. Alexi was unable to walk at the time of his murder. He had hurt himself riding a sleigh down a flight of stairs. He was carried into the room.
It's not good, of course. But the reasoning was that by eliminating all of the direct heirs, they could prevent the monarchy rising up once more. (Althought Nicholas abdicated for himself and Alexei, any grandchildren he might have would still be in line for the throne.)
@MaPaCha the bolshavics killed the children to end the bloodline. they wanted a full garantee that there would be no chance of restoring the monarchy.
@MaPaCha It wasn't about killing the children for the parents mistakes. It was about killing off the bloodline so that no more of them could be created in this world. They killed them all so that none could tell of what really happened
@MaPaCha They would grow up to be just as evil as their parents, and if they didn't the royalists would assure they did.
Their fate was decided, besides, this was a great day for my people, no more would would we be forced into a war that we did not want, and one that the Tsar was almost assuring we would lose. They died so hundreds of thousands more would live.
If a few evil people die so hundreds of thousands of people can live so be it.
@promdawg Ah, so your father was evil, you are also prone to be evil? That's idiotic. I make my own destiny. I know that sometimes we carry the mistakes of our parents, but destiny is within my grasps. And the Communist did any different than the Czarist Russia? I don't think so. They could have killed the Czar and his wife. But they should have spared the children and send them off to some distant land.
@AvatarMarxon90 The Communists made cruelty, barbarism and terror instruments of state policy. No western nation has ever been as debased. To find rulers as savage and brutal as the Soviets one must go back to the ancient Persians and Assyrians.
Communism was built on rage, hatred and envy. Once born, its only hope of existence is the massive use of state terror, a permanent war on God, and the utter overthrow of morality. It is as ill-conceived, unworkable & evil as any system ever devised.
@jum1801 Couldn't agree more with you. You're totally correct! I only hope that the Russians, and other people living/ lived under that terrible regime, open their eyes.
@promdawg What did they do with the Habsburgs after the First World? Sent them to Azores - which was by that time, a remote island (Portugal) such as they did with Napoleon by sending him to St. Helena. But one cannot find reason amongst the Russian majority. As I've recently seen that several of your people still support monsters like Stalin. It's disgusting that point of view of yours. If power was on your hands, the whole world should burn itself to ashes.
@promdawg You are totally right - the war that Nicholas was pursuing in the Koreas (Port Arthur) was useless. In my point of view, Russia had no use of those lands (as their gole was to have an ice-free port in Asia). But as I told you before, it would only be reasonable to set the Emperor on trial for his crimes against the Russian people. Your people made a revolution just for fun? No - they wanted a change! Not only in war policies, but also in the attitude of politicians.
@promdawg But what happenned? Blood for blood? "An eye for an eye, the world will end up blind." - I understand the Russian people were thirsty of revenge, but for God sake, they should have stroke a deal with some country and send the kids to some remote land, where the Russian Royalists wouldn't get there easily. This is why I can never understand Communists. Never. They screw everything in every place they put their feet. Portugal, Angola, Mozambique, China, N. Korea, Eastern Europe. *sigh*
@MaPaCha However sad it is unfortunately they believed that if they came to power then they would follow their parents footsteps. And if they just killed the Tsar abd Tsarina, what would they tell the children?
The scene isn't intended to be historically accurate as the series focuses on the young Prince John and it's through his and his family's imagination we see the scenes they did not witness, and so they felt some freedom when showing this and other events. Alexandra in particular is seen as a rather snooty cruel characature of herself because this is how they imagine Prince John seeing her
LOL! George V even recorded in his diary that for the hated Alexandra "it was perhaps best so." He did attend a memorial service against the advice of Lord Stamfordham though.
that isn't really answering my question. What parts of Rose's biography suggest he felt no remorse? And what is the diary entry in its totality, as well as the date for it?
Articles I've read by Kenneth Rose, mention that King George V did feel regret, but that at the time no one could reasonably foreseen that the family would be murdered. It is also important to remember that how the crown was seen in 1935 was different than in 1917.
Related to this it is poignant that Lord Mountbatten (H.S.H. Prince Louis of Battenberg) kept a photograph of his cousin H.I.H. Grand Duchess Maria (his first crush) on his dressing table until the day of his own murder.
According to King George's son, the Duke Of Windsor, the King always said, "Those damned politicians", referring to his government. Apparently he believed or wished to believe that it was his government that to blame. But it was the King who sent his private secretary to the Prime Minister to say that the King no longer insists that the Imperial Family be given asylum in England.
That's right. Mountbatten always maintained that it was Lloyd George, but in reality it was George V who personally forced the government to deny the family asylum in Britain. The involvement of the King's private secretary Lord Stamfordham cannot be overstated.
Nicholas's mother was almost age 70 when her son and all of her grandchildren were shot to death. She couldn't bring herself to believe that they were dead and continued to write them letters until her own death ten years later. She was convinced that they had escaped.
This is so awful. I cant believe there have ever acually been people who would round a family up like cattle then shoot them, steal their valubles and burn them like pieces of old rubbish on a trash heap.
Very moving, Very poignant, I have just bought the book of the Last Diary of the Tsaritsa written from Jan 1st 1918 until the very day of the Familys execution, and seeing the scene from this film brings it all home, Communism really is the most blood soaked ideology ever.
Sadly, I think you are absolutely right... I think, it wasnt King Georges fault. HE didn't kill them and what was about denmark btw? Why didn't gave they the czar no asylum? His mother was a princess of denmark... or france or whatever? I think, its unfair to blame King George alone. The Mountbattens didn't blame him - and they were closely related to the Romanovs -, so why should we?
there may have been a glorious revelation to put a end to rich and poor but to slaughter this royal family like this is unjust and cruel it makes them sink to the level of their oppressors.
@BPFanatico I have studied Alexei and his family for more years than you are old. The Tsarevich did not need leg braces to walk. Further, if there was a day when he could not ambulate, he was carried.
Despite the inaccuracies, what I find most interesting is this scene's portrayal of George V's reaction, and his questioning "did we have a choice?" Just a few months after the Romanovs' execution he sent a British ship to bring his aunt, Nicholas' mother the Dowager Empress, and any other Romanovs that wished to leave Russia at British expense. So I found this scene well portrayed in showing the guilt the king felt over the fate of his Russian cousins.
Well maybe there's no evidence that he actually said "I feel guilty", but he certainly was alarmed by the reports of his cousins' murders and certainly questioned whether his decision to agree with the Prime Minister and deny them asylum in Britain did seal any chance of them escaping this fate.
He didn't agree with the Prime Minister. Lloyd George had offered the entire family sanctuary in Britain but George V personally forced the government to withdraw that offer. He never showed any remorse at denying the family their only chance of escape, and after the executions he recorded in his diary that for the hated Alexandra "it was perhaps best so."
I agree, for example after "execution" of Russian royal family, he felt fault and when the monarchy was fallen in our country, he send guards to protect our emperor and his family. Because some of the Republicans wanted "execute" them too.
They did not deserve to die like this, and in such a young age. nobody does, i wished someone could of saved them from such horrendous people like Yurovsky.
OH GOD BLESS THEM! it is so hard to see my heros die! thank you for posting this i can not believe that any monster in the world could kill such sweet faces!
There are many reasons to look to them as inspiration. They were devoutly religious, put family first, cared about their country more than anything, etc. Why don't you try really learning about them before you make yourself look uneducated. They didn't 'let' anyone starve. You need to learn about Russia before Communism. There's no reason to kill innocent young people simply because they were born into a particular family and refused to abandon their parents.
Well, first I never said they deserved to die. (Why do people always go overboard with their presumptions?) I said they shouldn't be in power. They may have been nice people but really...How can you think they were good rulers? And, considering this, why would they be anyones heroes? They were completely oblivious to the suffering in their country, and when people tried to enlighten them (peacefully and with
the support of the church) they were shot. Seriously now...what about those innocent young people?
...I think we are outraged at the same thing. It just..makes me uncomfortable how people seem to romanticise the death of this family. It's not about them being rich...and I believe execution is inexcusable whenever it occurs...Sorry, but it just creeps me out when people express such sympathy for them which as a regime did so many more terrible things and executed so many other innocent families
Why is burning the bodies and pouring lye on them such a major sore point? It's kind of after the fact. Besides, they could get enough DNA to prove identidy (thru Prince *sshole Phillip in the UK using matralineal-excuse sp.-DNA). And (Tori Amos reference, lol) "Yes, Anastasia" was there (in the basement-the kill room) Russian history, going back to the Mongol invasion, is the most traumatic history of any people I know of. It explains much of all the repressive cruelty be it whoever in power
livedreamincolor 3 weeks ago
There's truth to both arguements. Killing the Romanovs was awful, but the Tsarist regime was every bit as violent and repressive as Stalin. Take an Imperial Russian History course. They still had serfdom in the 1860's! Also, they were gathered under the guise of needing a "proof of life photo" that's how they lined them up. And the jewels in the dress? All the females deflected the bullets due to that. Freaked out the shooters. This is from an interview of a firing squad member decades later.
livedreamincolor 3 weeks ago
Okay... there are some parts that are not right, like the boy Alexei couldn't walk. But, looking at both the history side of the movie side of this, I don't want to be too picky. It's still a good portrayal of what happened.
ujump411 4 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Nonsense! These ridiculous reenactments are confirming the hoax! They take photos of them before the kill them, however none afterwards to prove they are dead. This is preposterous! Terrible propaganda.
1toscany 1 month ago
If he had saved his cousins (the romanovs) from being murdered, then I would have more respect for George V.....he just abandoned them for his own political reasons, I believe that if they were brought to England, there wouldn't have been any trouble. I wonder what he was truly thinking when he was told of their brutal execution....how could he do that...especially to the czar's children. They didn't even deserve to die, they were totally innocent, so young ,at the beginning of their lives.
T
jedimasterjoe 2 months ago
I laughed at this scene, don't get me wrong. I have seen a lot of Romanov protrayals of the execution scenes from various movies.
What I found funny was the servent telling George that the family were living in a farm house. When in reality they were living in a mansion of a wealthy merchant. lmao.
MermaidBlueFins 2 months ago
This is actually a really bad portrayal of the Romanovs. In the movie Alix and the daughters speak Russian all the time when they rarely spoke it. Alix the least as she always struggled with the language. She was largely raised in England, close to her English Mother and family, English her first language. She was a German pirncess but the family never spoke German. And she was very well acquainted with English ways, she preferred them, she was not arrogant as she is portrayed in this movie.
BoborGlenn 3 months ago
@RichardElden He was 13 poor Alexei.., R.I.P the Romanovs...
aaronmarasigan03 4 months ago
The Bolsheviks do not have to pour acid and burn the bodies.... They should have never killed the Romanov family because some of them did not deserve to die...The royal children weren't able to fulfill their dreams in life and Alexei wasn't able to be emperor of Russia. If they were not murdered I'm sure the Romanovs would still rule Russia.But, It's too late to change it. They are now dead and in heaven and we could not change the past if only we could.. I could change the past,I could...
aaronmarasigan03 4 months ago
I think it's horrible how they could shoot the poor girls. Olga the oldest was on 22. So young to die OTMA.
TudorRose85 5 months ago
bastards smh
msgales1 5 months ago
it was a little inacurrate in that movie.. Alexei couldnt walk at the time they were murdered because he injured his foot badly while sliding down in the stairs..
kryztyn127 8 months ago
what a an awful thing to have happend
jjs1300000 9 months ago
God rest there souls, nobody not Emperor King Politician or Citizen deserves that kind of death and humiliation, except a few mass murders which I will not dignify by stating there names.
mak34237 9 months ago
I THINK THE POMS (PRISONERS OF MOTHER ENGLAND) SHOULD ALL FEEL GUILTY - YOU C**NTS HAVE 'BLOOD ON YOUR HANDS*
MermaidMoonGoodess 9 months ago
I hate to see how their bodies were treated after they were murdered. Thrown around like rag dolls. Thank you for sharing this clip! It is one of the most emotional I've seen.
Splee331 10 months ago
fuck niggers
jetulik 11 months ago
Shame on the Regicides and their families forever.
briefboyz 11 months ago
The Romanov's were slaughtered like cattle via talmudic ritual murder.
Though this movie very dramatically portrays their death, based on this scene, they don't quite seem to capture those details.
The Bolshevik rebels are burning in Hell.
confoundtheidols 11 months ago
@confoundtheidols good
jjs1300000 9 months ago
I blame the parents (Nicholas and Alexandra) for not getting their children out of there. Their daughters were all old enough to be married (except maybe Anastasia). They could have married the girls off to various petty princes that were all over Europe pre-WWI. Why didn't they send Alexei to the Sorbonne or Oxford or Cambridge. No. They kept them close out of selfishness when the whole country was sinking. Nicholas was called Bloody Nicholas by his own people. His children paid the price.
russkie69 1 year ago
@russkie69 They certainly couldn't send Alexei to either the Sorbonne or Oxbridge as he was 14 years old. He was too immature and in any case hadn't finished his schooling/tutoring. Possibly they could have sent him to Eton. As for the girls, well they were in the process of negotiating their marriages, I'm given to understand. But the first revolution came to a head too quickly, but certainly Nicholas and Alexandra should have been aware of the dissent. They were warned by HM's Ambassador, etc.
trixwiz7 1 year ago
well, they had it coming, "if you sow misery, you will reap anger."
besides if you read the detailed history of the Civil War you would see that the Bolsheviks had no choice in the matter. more importantly, there are many more deserving of your tears, and they are dying NOW. as we speak.
oh the hypocrisy of liberalism..
franzfaramir 1 year ago 4
@franzfaramir Yes you're so right. Obviously the girls, the Tsarevitch, the doctor, the spaniel, and all of them sowed misery, they all deserved to die.
The Bolsheviks were illegal coup d'etat runners, responsible for the deaths of millions. Absolute bastards, there's no denying the White Russians could be terrible too. But this fucking cruel outrage was unjustified, and Bolshevik rule was illegal. You must be clueless
trixwiz7 1 year ago
@trixwiz7 OMG you've got to be joking. The Tsar yes but his daughters and son no. They had no idea what was going on outside the palace walls. There father shielded them from it. They did not deserve to be punished for there parents sins.
TudorRose85 1 year ago
@TudorRose85 lol I was being sarcastic, none of them deserved to die, not even the Tsar, and certainly not the children or doctor. Couldn't you detect the sarcasm in the first part of my comment? The fact that I called the executions a "fucking cruel outrage [that was] unjustified" in the second part of my comment should have made my opinion rather clear.
I was replying to franzfaramir's comment below, with the same tack that you're replying to mine
trixwiz7 1 year ago
@franzfaramir I can't think what you imagine this clip, or the death of the Romanovs for that matter, have to do with "liberalism".
amcoca 10 months ago
What big men Lenin, Trotsky, the Bolsheviks in general, were. Killing girls, a boy and unarmed adults. Those chaps in the basement with the pistols must have felt so grand as they looked into the eyes of the Grand Duchesses as they were seated, and coldly opened fire
If I had ever got my hands on those men, I would have ripped them limb from limb. Bastards. If there's a god, a heaven and a hell, they'll burn for eternity
George V was a coward too, I hope that was on his conscience til he died
trixwiz7 1 year ago
@trixwiz7
Oh, there is a God friend.
Though it may seem on the surface to be merely an observable fact that "revolutions always devour their children" I would submit that it is a strong indicator of not just his existence, but that he is just.
There are countless examples of humans undergoing a horrific medical condition or death that is clearly the fruit of the way they lived their lives.
And the Bolsheviks are burning in Hell I can assure you. :-)
confoundtheidols 11 months ago
king george V was such a jerk!!!He could have saved Romanovs but he chose to ignore the situation and save his ass. Sometimes you have to make very difficult decisions in order to be a proper human being he chose to be a jerk!
KKislitsyna 1 year ago
Anna Andrson was a fraud. She was a Polish Factory worker. All of Nicholas II, his family, Dr and servants have been found and properly burried.
Wildflower01749 1 year ago
i am trying to find out the real story so help me out if u want so can u give me some tips and dna could not be done on anna anderson because she died before dna testing was possible so that is what i think
bmbjl 1 year ago
@bmbjl Anna's story makes exciting reading, and "Anastasia" is a wonderful movie (the scene where the skeptical & bitter Dowager Empress finally accepts Anna as her lost grandchild is heartbreaking & then joyful).
But the real Anna Anderson was merely one of many imposters. DNA tests on Anderson's hair and tissue showed that her DNA did not match either that of the Romanov remains or the living Romanov relatives. Anna Anderson was a fraud.
jum1801 1 year ago
@bmbjl No. She was a fraud. They have blood and hair samples from when she was alive, which prove she was a fraud. You can do DNA tests on someone after their dead if there is extant tissue.
NYCBlonde 1 year ago
This is the one scene that I can remember vividly from when it was on television, and it gets me every time.
Cuppus94 1 year ago
how sad
TheMompa1 1 year ago
They are saints now...
nagainavyborg 1 year ago
Comment removed
BlondePoisonOfLuck 1 year ago
russians and the greeks get along very well!
ladygagamusicvideos1 1 year ago
Why are any of you even having this discussion? It gives honor to claims of the Communist apologists here who argue that the Soviets :"had to" kill the Romanovs. The very idea is ludicrous; as if it can be defended to kill children. The Soviets were thugs and brutes who instituted a barbaric and brutal system out of their desire to become the new rulers. They were far more cruel, murdering tens of millions more, than even the worst of the czars (who were a very bad lot).
jum1801 1 year ago 2
@jum1801 So true... And let us not forget, what they did to the Romanovs was so terrible and they were so cruel and vicious up to the end. Of all the Romanovs exiled to Siberia only one survived, Princess Elena of Serbia, the wife of Prince Ionn, but all the rest of them were killed... And kept apart too. Imagine what horror it must have been to Alexandra and her sister Elisabeth, to be so near and yet so apart. And what they did,killing them all, shows cruelty on its worst.
EsIstNurLiebe 1 year ago
i read somewhere that is was planned for Olga and Edward (the duke of Windsor) to marry, if it is true does anybody know why i didn't happen? I don't really know what to believe about that but it would have been less sad if atleast one of the children survived!
Rain89Sweed 1 year ago
I work in higher education, and my department head, a self-proclaimed Marxist-Socialist (even though he has two luxury cars, two homes, and sent his children to private schools) heralded the assassination of the Romanovs as a great day in history. Two of my colleagues are in agreement with him, and one of them belongs to a bicycling club that calls itself the "Red Spokes". I fear this is what is infecting our young people of today, and there is not much we can do about it.
ligreekguy 1 year ago
Wonderful and very moving. Thanks for posting!
MyPicklepie 1 year ago
where's the sound for this
mylittelucy 1 year ago
This is such a beautiful film everyone should see it!
steemsdis 1 year ago
From what I've read, Alexandra hated speaking Russian, she would have talked to her husband in English. Most of their letters to each other as well as her journals were in English.
manuelherrera777 1 year ago
@manuelherrera777 you were horribly wrong, it seems like you've been reading soviet propaganda. She didn't mind speaking or writing in russian but since the day Nicholas and alexandra met most of their letters were in english, i think they wanted to do that out of affection.
joyann1 1 year ago
@joyann1 I Dont Read Soviet Propaganda!!!!!!
Just the books by Massie,Radzinsky and others who all say she never took to Russian as her sister or mother-in-law did. Her own letters to her grandmother Victoria and her sisters say she didnt like Russian. She was lucky Nicholas spoke English and German well.
manuelherrera777 1 year ago
@joyann1 Pierre Gilliard states Alexandra spoke to the children ONLY in English and to her staff she also spoke English and French. She only spoke Russian if the person she addressed spoke no other language.
manuelherrera777 1 year ago
@manuelherrera777 This is correct. Her Russian was not that good. English was her language of choice, and German was her language of nationality.
1toscany 1 year ago
I read it was harder to kill the younger daughters because they had sewn jewels into their corsets that acted like a shield against the bullets.
Bluebelle9289 2 years ago
It was all the daughters that had jewels sewen in their underclothes. Although Marie/Maria was a question mark considering she was the first to be sent to Yenkaterinburg with Nicholas and Alix.
The other girls sewn the jewels in their underclothes while in Toblosk.
MermaidBlueFins 2 years ago
yes...but they can be killed coz the children has not enough strength to fight those bolsheviks or should i say bullshitviks! They also said that they were shot in the head...but on Maria's body there was no sign in her bones of how she die
PrincessMelody6 1 year ago
Maria's face had been almost entirely crushed because when they were moving the bodies she cried out and one of the guards hit her in the face till she was silent. I'm assuming she died from the trauma, though sources don't state exactly what it was that really killed her.
Bluebelle9289 1 year ago
i wouldnt agrree if they hit maria's face coz she's beautiful...but no one really knows what exactly happend right?
PrincessMelody6 1 year ago
Right. I'm just stating what I've read.
Bluebelle9289 1 year ago
@Bluebelle9289 This is not true at all!
1toscany 1 year ago
It all goes to show that monarchies might be romantic in fairly tales, but they make no sense when running a country like Russia.
The Tsar believed he was appointed by God to rule; consequently he did all he could to thwart the democratic process of representative government and reform. Russia then went from the tyranny of monarch to tyranny by the Bolsheviks.
manuelherrera777 2 years ago
Even though they were really staying in a wealthy merchant's house "Ipatiev House". I'm guessing this film is showing how George V imaged the Imperial family staying in a farm house and imaging their murder.
MermaidBlueFins 2 years ago
It depends how you look at it. Most historians agree that the Tsar was an incompetent ruler but he was a fairly good man who loved his family. I think thats what makes it tragic..especially when you think of other truely evil leaders who knowingly murdered thousands and yet died peacefully in their sleep. Even Hitler shot himself - he never had to answer for his crimes.
kookyChimes 2 years ago 15
Hitler was a great leader, or would have been a great leader, but he abused his power and let his ego and bigotry get the best of him.
Bluebelle9289 1 year ago
Could someone please tell me what this movie is about? I watched it with my mother when I was a little girl but I don't remember any of it....if someone could tell me I'd be very greatfull!
AerithGainsborough11 2 years ago
It is about the "forgotten" prince John, who was kept out of sight because of his epilpsy.
MermaidBlueFins 2 years ago
Oh,thank you!
AerithGainsborough11 2 years ago
yw :)
MermaidBlueFins 2 years ago
Who's John? there was no John in the Romanov family.
MobHeataEnt 2 years ago
No Prince John, the son of King George V and Queen Mary.
I'm a Romanov and Royal history buff lol.
MermaidBlueFins 1 year ago
This film shows a bit of how both familys delt with the illnesses with their sons.
Alexei with his hemophilia and Alexandra and Nicholas, Alexei's sisters who all took great care of him and were over protective, although they let him be out in public and go to formal occassions.
While Prince John's epilipsy was seen as an "embarassment" and thought it best to shield him from the public in case of reactions. His parents thought it best to leave John in care with his Nanny Lala.
MermaidBlueFins 1 year ago
so whos the man talking to that guy in the beard with the suit, is that John. I just can't believe how they killed the Tsar Nicholas II and his family, history will never forget that.
MobHeataEnt 1 year ago
No Prince John died at a young age of 13 ironically 5 months after the Imperial family.
Look up Prince John of United Kingdom
The man talking to King George is his advisor.
MermaidBlueFins 1 year ago
The massacre of the entire family was a crime, but NIcholas was not innocent. Lenin shoud had let Trosky to have his trial (Trostky wanted to put the Tsar on Trial) and hang him.
DelValle1980 2 years ago
What a unnatural cruelty, those savages led by Lenin was truly the world's tyranny I think it's unfair that the Bolsheviks came away with murder on The Romanovs unpunished by the rest of the alliance of "The Triple Entente" & the rest of the world. The world would have been a much better place without Karl Marx ideals of the so-called called "Communism". It is a nice idea but it does not work the ideology has killed more than Nazism, if you look back on history, and that is sick!
TsarPutte91 2 years ago 4
I absolutely agree (TsarPutte91). But their are two sides to every story. Tsar Nicholas was not a very attentive Tsar and made several poor decisions during his reign which led to the to the revolution. He was busy leading his army in WWI and left his country to the Tsarina who was not very good at running the country. Still, their treatment and their murder was completely unjust like you said.
Halroo5 2 years ago 9
lol I know this may sound way off the chart but my grandfather claimed to be a descendant now I don't know if it was true but he believed it till he died this year and swore to us that he never wanted us to say anything. His name was changed by the goverment many times. He has pictures of the family and letters and greatly resembles them. He always was a very sain man but he did believed that he was a romanoff greatly. This leaves me with this question coiuld he have been the little boy???
vanitycandi 2 years ago
No. Alexei died along with the rest of his family in 1918. Perhaps your grandfather was related to another wing of the family.
darkangelle80 2 years ago 3
La masacre fue horrible, y la familia no era culpable, el zar sí, tal vez la zarina, pero no los hijos.
reinadegrillos 2 years ago
wonderful production this was. and this scene was heartbreaking.
celticghirl88 2 years ago
Things are never as simple as they sometimes seem. Nicholas II is the only leader who tried to stop the oncoming apocalypse of World War I. To me, it was never the "Great War". There is a famous Irish Saying that the worst battles aren't between right and wrong, the worst battles are between right and right. I think in the light of history, all Russians should celebrate Nicholas's efforts to stop the war and regret his failure to convince other leaders that he was right. He was. Hitler is proof
bkohatl 2 years ago
The Russians had no contingency plans for a partial mobilization, and on 31 July 1914 Nicholas took the fateful step of confirming the order for a general mobilization. Nicholas was strongly counselled against mobilization of the Russian forces but chose to ignore such advice. Nicholas put the Russian army on "alert" on July 25. Although this was not mobilization, it threatened the German and Austrian borders and looked like a military declaration of war.
Anyacat3 2 years ago
As far as policy went, the russian had no alternative to eneter the war. The Austro_hungarian ultimatum to the serbs was designed by AH and germany to bring Russia and therefore France to war.
juzt156 2 years ago
i agree with anastaciaexpert lol they tried their hardest for the country, for the people oh and to Balela the tsarina was not queen victorias grand daughter, tsar nicholas was her cousin
MrLoz20 2 years ago
Alexandra Feodorovna was the grand daughter of queen Victoria of the United Kingdom as she was daughter of Alice of Great Britain, the wife of the Louis, Grand-Duke of Hesse. Alice was the second daughter of Queen Victoria.
She was also Nicholas II second cousin. they shared a comon great grandmother, Willemina of Baden. Willemina had as descendents the Grand Dukes of Hesse thru her son Karl and the Tsars of Russia thru her daughter Maximiliane (later Maria) who married tsar Alexander II.
greenday1978 2 years ago
In contrast to all the posted debate, I simply shall say thank you for posting.
sfkcbf 2 years ago
I think that thi is horrible. I don't care how rich they were, or about the fact that they let millions of people starve. you don't answer bad with bad. Remember that the same type of stuff was going on in England, in denmark and all the other royal countries of the time. There are always going to be the really poor, and middle, and the unimaginably rich. Plus at that time royalty was a thing of dreams. They most of the time could care less about others. unfortuanate but true.
delo3934 2 years ago 3
Very sad but you know.....that family *did* allow vast amounts of people to starve, and die with absolutely no human dignity, while living in a fricking gold palace.
Didn't the Tzarina call those begging for food "troublemakers"?
Possibly not the people that should be in power.
whathuhwhere 2 years ago
You obviously don't understand the family at all. If you did, you would know that they would never want anyone to die in any way. They didn't live in a 'fricking gold palace'. There was a palace such as that where they lived but they lived in the smallest one, and it was decorated as any other wealthy person would of that period. They were highly religious people and reigned because they felt it was God's Will - that's what they had to do. Nicholas never even wanted to be the Tsar. Try reading.
AnastasiaExpert 2 years ago
how is it that everybody still thinks it was King George who refused them entry into England?
Edward VIII made it quite clear what happened in a direct quote almost 40 years ago! It was Edward's mother and George's wife - Mary of Teck- who refused entry. End of story!
PBSmithy 2 years ago
Disregarding who's fault it was, it certainly was not England's finest hour. Nikolay II had asked asylum to his English cousin and not to Denmark or France, as far as I know. Probably because the empress Alexandra felt deeply for her English roots, being the grandaughter of Queen Victoria.
Balela1912 2 years ago
George V did the right thing.
PeterFirthFan 2 years ago
can someone help me finding the episodes when prince john was about to take a test if he fits to come back to the palace? i mean when he discuss about his family tree
PULSAT 2 years ago
what is this movie about finding Alexei?
anastasiagirl1342 2 years ago
It's mostly about the Windsors during World War I. The Queen's grandfather is the king in this movie. It's mostly about his youngest son, who had epilepsy and was hidden from the public.
DesertLynx83 2 years ago 2
thanks and what is it called?
anastasiagirl1342 2 years ago
The Lost Prince
DesertLynx83 2 years ago
i feel the need to point out a small inacuracy: in the clip, Alexi walks to his chair. Alexi was unable to walk at the time of his murder. He had hurt himself riding a sleigh down a flight of stairs. He was carried into the room.
amendris 2 years ago 5
It's just so sick how they were all killed like that.
Bluebelle9289 3 years ago 21
This comment has received too many negative votes show
No it isn't, it was good.
ObamaRules4Ever 3 years ago
how can it be good to kill the children.. they shouldnt be punished for their parents mistakes
MaPaCha 3 years ago 21
It's not good, of course. But the reasoning was that by eliminating all of the direct heirs, they could prevent the monarchy rising up once more. (Althought Nicholas abdicated for himself and Alexei, any grandchildren he might have would still be in line for the throne.)
ScarletPimpleCo 2 years ago
@MaPaCha of course not... but the point is, if the Bolsheviks had left them alive, they would have been a symbol of hope for the reactionary's.
<3 the Bolsheviks.
acmilan93333 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@acmilan93333 No. That is not correct!
1toscany 1 year ago
@MaPaCha the bolshavics killed the children to end the bloodline. they wanted a full garantee that there would be no chance of restoring the monarchy.
nationalist19 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@nationalist19 No, that is not correct!
1toscany 1 year ago
@MaPaCha It wasn't about killing the children for the parents mistakes. It was about killing off the bloodline so that no more of them could be created in this world. They killed them all so that none could tell of what really happened
mistressoftheopera 1 year ago
@MaPaCha They would grow up to be just as evil as their parents, and if they didn't the royalists would assure they did.
Their fate was decided, besides, this was a great day for my people, no more would would we be forced into a war that we did not want, and one that the Tsar was almost assuring we would lose. They died so hundreds of thousands more would live.
If a few evil people die so hundreds of thousands of people can live so be it.
promdawg 1 year ago
@promdawg i see what you mean but were the children evil?? I guess as a parent, I find the killing of children disgusting
MaPaCha 1 year ago
@promdawg Ah, so your father was evil, you are also prone to be evil? That's idiotic. I make my own destiny. I know that sometimes we carry the mistakes of our parents, but destiny is within my grasps. And the Communist did any different than the Czarist Russia? I don't think so. They could have killed the Czar and his wife. But they should have spared the children and send them off to some distant land.
AvatarMarxon90 1 year ago
@AvatarMarxon90 The Communists made cruelty, barbarism and terror instruments of state policy. No western nation has ever been as debased. To find rulers as savage and brutal as the Soviets one must go back to the ancient Persians and Assyrians.
Communism was built on rage, hatred and envy. Once born, its only hope of existence is the massive use of state terror, a permanent war on God, and the utter overthrow of morality. It is as ill-conceived, unworkable & evil as any system ever devised.
jum1801 1 year ago 2
@jum1801 Couldn't agree more with you. You're totally correct! I only hope that the Russians, and other people living/ lived under that terrible regime, open their eyes.
AvatarMarxon90 1 year ago
@promdawg What did they do with the Habsburgs after the First World? Sent them to Azores - which was by that time, a remote island (Portugal) such as they did with Napoleon by sending him to St. Helena. But one cannot find reason amongst the Russian majority. As I've recently seen that several of your people still support monsters like Stalin. It's disgusting that point of view of yours. If power was on your hands, the whole world should burn itself to ashes.
AvatarMarxon90 1 year ago
@promdawg You are totally right - the war that Nicholas was pursuing in the Koreas (Port Arthur) was useless. In my point of view, Russia had no use of those lands (as their gole was to have an ice-free port in Asia). But as I told you before, it would only be reasonable to set the Emperor on trial for his crimes against the Russian people. Your people made a revolution just for fun? No - they wanted a change! Not only in war policies, but also in the attitude of politicians.
AvatarMarxon90 1 year ago
@promdawg But what happenned? Blood for blood? "An eye for an eye, the world will end up blind." - I understand the Russian people were thirsty of revenge, but for God sake, they should have stroke a deal with some country and send the kids to some remote land, where the Russian Royalists wouldn't get there easily. This is why I can never understand Communists. Never. They screw everything in every place they put their feet. Portugal, Angola, Mozambique, China, N. Korea, Eastern Europe. *sigh*
AvatarMarxon90 1 year ago
@MaPaCha However sad it is unfortunately they believed that if they came to power then they would follow their parents footsteps. And if they just killed the Tsar abd Tsarina, what would they tell the children?
ChrisRockindamaking 1 year ago
That's communism for you. But Cold War apologists only see what they read in a manifesto..
fep70 2 years ago 3
Pretty emotional, yes. But innacurate from A to Z.
CapaodaCanoa 3 years ago
The scene isn't intended to be historically accurate as the series focuses on the young Prince John and it's through his and his family's imagination we see the scenes they did not witness, and so they felt some freedom when showing this and other events. Alexandra in particular is seen as a rather snooty cruel characature of herself because this is how they imagine Prince John seeing her
bbandy2000 3 years ago 3
@CapaodaCanoa
1toscany 1 year ago
dreadfully inaccuracy! They did not all sleep in the same room and Alexei did not walk down to the cellar on his own!
SaraFeodorovna 3 years ago
According to Keneth Rose's biography of George V the king was in fact consumed with guilt and remorse after he heard that the Tsar had been executed.
cheddernucleicacid 3 years ago
NOPE. I read it, and he did not EVER regret his decision.
HarveyCartwright 3 years ago
could you quote the parts? Accoridng to the review I read in the magazine History Today (available online) Kenneth Rose writes that he did.
cheddernucleicacid 3 years ago
LOL! George V even recorded in his diary that for the hated Alexandra "it was perhaps best so." He did attend a memorial service against the advice of Lord Stamfordham though.
HarveyCartwright 3 years ago
that isn't really answering my question. What parts of Rose's biography suggest he felt no remorse? And what is the diary entry in its totality, as well as the date for it?
cheddernucleicacid 3 years ago
It actually said he never showed any remorse for personally depriving the family of their best, and perhaps only, chance of escape.
HarveyCartwright 3 years ago
that still isn't answering my question. Please give a page reference or something from Rose's biography.
cheddernucleicacid 3 years ago
I haven't got the book any more.
HarveyCartwright 3 years ago
Articles I've read by Kenneth Rose, mention that King George V did feel regret, but that at the time no one could reasonably foreseen that the family would be murdered. It is also important to remember that how the crown was seen in 1935 was different than in 1917.
Related to this it is poignant that Lord Mountbatten (H.S.H. Prince Louis of Battenberg) kept a photograph of his cousin H.I.H. Grand Duchess Maria (his first crush) on his dressing table until the day of his own murder.
aardvark154 3 years ago 2
Didnt king George try to hatch a plan in the end to get them out secretly, after he had denied them entry?
seanowain 3 years ago
NOPE - George V vetoed all plans to rescue the family and he never felt any remorse at refusing to help his evil cousin.
HarveyCartwright 3 years ago
@HarveyCartwright This is not true!
1toscany 1 year ago
@seanowain Absolutely!
1toscany 1 year ago
According to King George's son, the Duke Of Windsor, the King always said, "Those damned politicians", referring to his government. Apparently he believed or wished to believe that it was his government that to blame. But it was the King who sent his private secretary to the Prime Minister to say that the King no longer insists that the Imperial Family be given asylum in England.
budooo 3 years ago
That's right. Mountbatten always maintained that it was Lloyd George, but in reality it was George V who personally forced the government to deny the family asylum in Britain. The involvement of the King's private secretary Lord Stamfordham cannot be overstated.
ObamaRules4Ever 3 years ago
*kindly* Why would they killed Nicholas and his family?
2RutRivera2 3 years ago
The Tsar would and his family would have been a rallying point for the opposition. They still commanded a loyal following.
No one knows who gave the order to kill them in such an inhumane degrading painful manner.
frankantoniomartin 3 years ago
Nicholas's mother was almost age 70 when her son and all of her grandchildren were shot to death. She couldn't bring herself to believe that they were dead and continued to write them letters until her own death ten years later. She was convinced that they had escaped.
frankantoniomartin 3 years ago
@frankantoniomartin She rightly knew they escaped!
1toscany 1 year ago
The worst parts of this scene are the men shaking every last bits of jewels out from the dead girls.
DraconianAngel 3 years ago 3
This is so awful. I cant believe there have ever acually been people who would round a family up like cattle then shoot them, steal their valubles and burn them like pieces of old rubbish on a trash heap.
LoisHeartsYuu 3 years ago 4
Very moving, Very poignant, I have just bought the book of the Last Diary of the Tsaritsa written from Jan 1st 1918 until the very day of the Familys execution, and seeing the scene from this film brings it all home, Communism really is the most blood soaked ideology ever.
mlr1976 3 years ago 3
The Czar would NEVER leave Russia or the Czarina for that matter-it was out of the question.
They may have sent the children out but not themselves.
To try and blame King George V for not preventing their deaths is the cruelest of hindsight and wishful dreaming.
Nicholas is the one that abdicated and didn't secure his family's safe exit.
Nicholas Romanov head of the Romanov family association and the Romaniv family today agrees Nicholas never would have left Russia.
It's a moot point.
Tigerpaw10 3 years ago
Bollocks.
ObamaRules4Ever 3 years ago
Sadly, I think you are absolutely right... I think, it wasnt King Georges fault. HE didn't kill them and what was about denmark btw? Why didn't gave they the czar no asylum? His mother was a princess of denmark... or france or whatever? I think, its unfair to blame King George alone. The Mountbattens didn't blame him - and they were closely related to the Romanovs -, so why should we?
LadyMountbatten 2 years ago
there may have been a glorious revelation to put a end to rich and poor but to slaughter this royal family like this is unjust and cruel it makes them sink to the level of their oppressors.
foxcell 3 years ago
One tiny bit of inaccuracy, Alexei is seen walking but....doesn't he needs someone to support him since he was suffering from hemophillia(sp?)
BPFanatico 3 years ago 8
you are indeed correct; he had to be carried down in cart like chair.
princetonchic47 3 years ago 3
It is a wheel chair......as it called.
BPFanatico 2 years ago
ha I have to wonder why I said "cart like chair" and not just wheel chair.
historyfreak09 2 years ago
@BPFanatico maybe he was wearing leg braces under his trousers.
nationalist19 1 year ago
@BPFanatico No. That is incorrect!
1toscany 1 year ago
@1toscany How? You don't know Alexei!
BPFanatico 1 year ago
@BPFanatico I have studied Alexei and his family for more years than you are old. The Tsarevich did not need leg braces to walk. Further, if there was a day when he could not ambulate, he was carried.
1toscany 1 year ago
@1toscany That's what I meant in my first comment.
BPFanatico 1 year ago
That is so sad! I want to see this movie, it looks interesting.
stephowrites 3 years ago
Despite the inaccuracies, what I find most interesting is this scene's portrayal of George V's reaction, and his questioning "did we have a choice?" Just a few months after the Romanovs' execution he sent a British ship to bring his aunt, Nicholas' mother the Dowager Empress, and any other Romanovs that wished to leave Russia at British expense. So I found this scene well portrayed in showing the guilt the king felt over the fate of his Russian cousins.
mjlynn 3 years ago 6
There is no evidence he ever felt any guilt over what he had done.
HarveyCartwright 3 years ago
Well maybe there's no evidence that he actually said "I feel guilty", but he certainly was alarmed by the reports of his cousins' murders and certainly questioned whether his decision to agree with the Prime Minister and deny them asylum in Britain did seal any chance of them escaping this fate.
mjlynn 3 years ago
He didn't agree with the Prime Minister. Lloyd George had offered the entire family sanctuary in Britain but George V personally forced the government to withdraw that offer. He never showed any remorse at denying the family their only chance of escape, and after the executions he recorded in his diary that for the hated Alexandra "it was perhaps best so."
HarveyCartwright 3 years ago
I agree, for example after "execution" of Russian royal family, he felt fault and when the monarchy was fallen in our country, he send guards to protect our emperor and his family. Because some of the Republicans wanted "execute" them too.
BLDKuttenBerg 3 years ago
They did not deserve to die like this, and in such a young age. nobody does, i wished someone could of saved them from such horrendous people like Yurovsky.
tanks579 3 years ago 2
90 years ago...
Manofhopeandglory 3 years ago 4
OH GOD BLESS THEM! it is so hard to see my heros die! thank you for posting this i can not believe that any monster in the world could kill such sweet faces!
adena539 3 years ago 4
....they're your heroes? Why?
whathuhwhere 2 years ago
There are many reasons to look to them as inspiration. They were devoutly religious, put family first, cared about their country more than anything, etc. Why don't you try really learning about them before you make yourself look uneducated. They didn't 'let' anyone starve. You need to learn about Russia before Communism. There's no reason to kill innocent young people simply because they were born into a particular family and refused to abandon their parents.
AnastasiaExpert 2 years ago
Well, first I never said they deserved to die. (Why do people always go overboard with their presumptions?) I said they shouldn't be in power. They may have been nice people but really...How can you think they were good rulers? And, considering this, why would they be anyones heroes? They were completely oblivious to the suffering in their country, and when people tried to enlighten them (peacefully and with
whathuhwhere 2 years ago
the support of the church) they were shot. Seriously now...what about those innocent young people?
...I think we are outraged at the same thing. It just..makes me uncomfortable how people seem to romanticise the death of this family. It's not about them being rich...and I believe execution is inexcusable whenever it occurs...Sorry, but it just creeps me out when people express such sympathy for them which as a regime did so many more terrible things and executed so many other innocent families
whathuhwhere 2 years ago