chengiz The production of this series is top notch and a treat. The sets, the snow, the costumes, everything is brilliant.The casting and acting are respectable as well, although I'd have liked to see a taller, fitter Peter. At one point an out of shape Schell huffs while liting an axe then wields it with the wrong hand. Peter, always described as tall, strong and with boundless energy, would disapprove.What truly lets down this series however is the scriptwriting. Here you have a great story, a stellar cast, and all the right ingredients, but the screenplay is a series of shockingly fake sounding set pieces. It's just a mystery to me with all the nice things this movie has to offer why they couldnt have come up with a better script. After the battle of Poltava, Menshikov says to Peter, "You have saved Moscow" and Peter says, "We have secured our access to the sea". Really? You're gonna announce the conclusions of a battle you just fought like you wrote a term paper? This sort of thing abounds in the series. Another example is the highly unnecessary and historically doubtful "Peter in Newton's lab" scene. It's like their research dug up that Newton was around at the same time Peter was in England, and hey let's have them meet. Then it's also the struggle between keeping things chronological yet interesting, which kinda falls flat. Peter talks about St. Petersburg from a rather early age, and builds it only towards the end of the movie. It's never really shown. That is like one of his most interesting achievements and the screenplay pays it the usual lip service.This could have been so much better.

jdouglas-16 I found this TV min-series to be absolutely superb. The acting by the international cast was excellent and the costumes seemed like they belonged to the time period. It is a great, sweeping story about one of the greatest monarchs of all time and this film does not disappoint. The filming in Russia I think made the movie all that much more convincing.It may be subject to the criticism that it is not completely historically accurate, but then the point of the mini-series is to entertain with a delightful story and I think it is understood that some freedom to re-write the history is acceptable. The main outline is correct and the characters look and act the part well.I do not make this rating lightly. I have it on a VHS tape I bought years ago and still watch it often. I highly recommend it. Find it on the Internet and buy it. That's my recommendation.

heatherceana I read a prior comment and was rather shocked. I was always taught that if entertainment becomes too like real-life, it ceases to be entertainment. That one should suspend one's disbelief for the term of the film - unless the film is claiming to be a documentary or to be of educational value.Anyhow, I am not a Russian ex-patriot. I'm an American, born and bred. I loved this movie! My father is an History professor. I was well aware that the film was not entirely historically accurate. I will grant you that by 1986, one would wish to have a bit more accuracy regarding the major historical events.I must disagree that there was a prophetic quality to the 'visionary aspects' of the character Peter the Great. I felt that it came across more as a burning passion. He seemed better educated and thus possessed of a better understanding of what the 'Western European' knowledge/technology could do to help strengthen Russia.Maximilian Schell is perfect in this role! Although he is a Austrian actor, he is the epitome of a burly Russian Czar.If you are looking for historical accuracy - look elsewhere. If you are looking for an intense, sweep-me-away drama filled with riveting acting - you've chosen well.

DrMMGilchrist (Some historical spoilers, lest the unwary are taken in by this serial!) I first saw this on BBC1 in 1987, shortly before beginning my doctoral research on the historical iconography of the Petrine era, and it stood me in good stead as an unintentionally comic point of reference. Nikolai I, with his cult of Official Nationality and near-deification of Peter, would have *loved* this series; this viewer, however...Chronology, geography and characters are wilfully distorted, sometimes to comic effect. General Gordon, who strangely appears *without* an Aberdeenshire accent, gets to bed a Swedish belle - loosely based on Aurora von Königsmarck - and fight at Narva several years *after* his death. Peter picks up his future second wife at Azov, instead of in Peterburg after the Baltic campaigns. Tsarevich Aleksei, actually an 8 year old, is shown as a grown man at the time of the execution of the Strel'tsy and the banishment of his mother! But more often than not, the distortions are to show Peter in the best light possible. The reforming Regent Sof'ya and her highly Westernised, intellectual adviser Golitsyn are shown as conspiratorial opponents of change. (The casting of Vanessa Redgrave as Sof'ya is amusing if you know the portraits of the real Sof'ya, a decidedly plump young woman.) Evdokiya, Peter's harmless first wife, is depicted as a treacherous, frigid shrew. Tsarevich Aleksei - scholarly, consumptive, abused Aleksei - is played by Boris Plotnikov (who was superb as the Christ-like partisan hero of 'The Ascent' - did he need hard currency so badly to appear in this?) as a geeky, reactionary schemer with a terrible haircut. (Aleksei was actually strikingly handsome, with huge brown eyes and long dark curls.) Meanwhile, the corrupt, power-hungry Menshikov and duplicitous, torturing Tolstoi are depicted as lovable rogues, and Marta/Ekaterina as decidedly wholesome... The tough (and prematurely balding) young Swedish soldier-king Carl XII, who resembled a shorter Max von Sydow, is depicted as a vaguely camp cherub with golden curls. All stuff which would have gone down well with Nikolai I-era or Soviet historiography, but not with modern scholars in Western Europe or Russia.The series leaves a nasty taste with its automatic demonisation of anyone who tried to resist Peter: "blaming the victim" writ large. It even tries to enlist viewers' sympathy for him while he's watching his own son being tortured! The script is also clichéd and awkward ("I'll drag you kicking and screaming into the modern world!" says Peter on one occasion). Characters are depicted wandering around in traditional dress long after the Court had been dragooned into Western clothes, and there is no depiction of 'Sankt-Peterburg' itself, although it is talked about.If you have a warped and twisted sense of humour, this series is actually very funny, like 'Blackadder' played by a cast who don't realise it's a comedy. That's why I'm giving it 3/10, instead of just 1 - for black humour value. I had to laugh at it, or I'd have thrown a brick through the TV. The BBC's own, much lower-budget production, 'Peter in Paradise' (2003), is superior, as is the 1996 Russian film 'Tsarevich Aleksei', based on Merezhkovskii's novel.