We recently saw Anastasia (1956), an engaging story loosely based on actual events.
Ingrid Bergman plays Anna Anderson, a troubled woman who claims to be the Grand Duchess Anastasia, the youngest daughter of Tsar Nicholas II.
(As you know, Nicholas II was the last Tsar of Russia, the one who was captured and imprisoned along with his wife and children during the 1918 Russian Revolution. The family was finally taken to a cellar and shot.)
There were persistent rumours in the 1920s that the young Anastasia not only survived this ordeal, she escaped and was living in Europe.
Enter the actor Yul Brynner from stage left in our movie. He plays a Russian emigrée and epicurean, one of many Russian ex-pats living in Paris in the late 1920s.
Now, Brynner and two associates have set up a corporation to raise funds to find Anastasia. Note: Much of this shareholder funding has been used for Other Things, e.g. to buy Brynner a restaurant.
Other monies are used for scouting young women who could could pass as an Anastasia under Brynner’s careful tutoring.
There are many reasons why Brynner & Co. want to produce an Anastasia – 10 million reasons, to be exact, namely a 10-million-pound trust fund languishing in a British bank.
It was one of Brynner’s associates who first saw Bergman in a Berlin asylum (one of many asylums she was admitted to), and now she’s resurfaced in Paris. Here we meet Anna/Anastasia, pale and malnourished, homeless and suicidal.
But Bergman has something of a physical resemblance to the Grand Duchess, and Brynner gets to Work.
Yul Brynner persuades Bergman to play along. Image: The Lazy Hufflepuff
Bergman gives an incredible performance by showing us there’s something a bit Off about her character. She infuses her performance with seemingly mental lapses, combined with a sometimes haughty demeanor and a cloying neediness.
This raises many questions. Is Bergman’s Anna suffering from delusions? Or is she really Anastasia?
The film has an intriguing pattern. Whenever Bergman’s character presents a new “memory” about Anastasia, another character immediately pooh-poohs it: Everyone knows that. Anyone could have told you that.
After a while, we (the audience) don’t know how much Bergman’s character actually knows. At one point she herself admits, “I don’t know what I remember and what I’ve been told.”
You’ve got to believe me. Image: Yvettecandraw.blogspot.com
As enigmatic as Bergman’s character is, Brynner’s is equally so.
Brynner gives us a shrewd military man who is both admired and mistrusted by Russian nobility.
He’s a Laser-Focused individual. Creating a faux Anastasia is not a task he stresses over, even when shareholders give him a deadline Or Else.
Brynner plays the expert con game, meaning he understands how Suckers think. For example, he knows an exact facial resemblance isn’t important. The last known photos of Anastasia were taken years ago and published in unflattering newsprint. This would make facial recognition difficult and cause people to Second-Guess their memories.
He also knows where there’s Smoke there’s Fire. There was a large Russian community in Paris after WWI, and some of these folks desperately wanted something of Imperial Russia to have survived.
Although Brynner can drill dates and names into someone’s head, he overlooks something crucial: People’s intuition. Many who met Anna/Anastasia in real life said there was something inauthentic about her.
Simply put, despite her knowledge of the Romanov family, the real Anna Anderson failed to convince enough people that she was Anastasia.*
The real Anastasia (left), and the real Anna Anderson. Image: All That’s Interesting
Ingrid Bergman won a Best Actress Oscar for her portrayal of Anna/Anastasia, although she did not attend the Academy Awards ceremony to accept it.
You see, Bergman had been blacklisted by Hollywood in 1950 when she had an affair – and a baby – with Italian director Roberto Rossellini.
Hollywood, that Paragon of Virtue, shunted her aside because no one in Hollywood had affairs, Ever. They were shocked – Shocked! – that one of their own could behave in such a manner.
Nevertheless, Anastasia is an engrossing film that will keep you On Your Toes. If you haven’t yet seen it, we encourage you to make time for it.
—-
*Click here to read more about the DNA testing that disproved Anna Anderson’s claims.
Anastasia: starring Ingrid Bergman, Yul Brynner, Helen Hayes. Directed by Anatole Litvak. Written by Arthur Laurents, Marcelle Maurette & Guy Bolton. Twentieth Century Fox, 1956, Colour, 105 mins.
I’ve always been intrigued by this true story, and have done way too much research on it. Feels different now that we know Anna was not Anastasia. But what a great performance Bergman gave of this mysterious woman!
I think the first time I read into it was a Russian history binge–curiosity about Rasputin started it, I think (you know how it goes, one thread leading to the next). I remember getting into it all again when the Romanoffs series came out. I’ve always been fascinated by historical mysteries–the Richard II and the princes binge I went on after I read Daughter of Time was especially deep, and how fascinating that it was later concluded to be accurate. Poor Richard II. He had some powerful enemies, to go down in history a family killer when he wasn’t…
Ingrid Bergman & Yul Brynner were fabulous in this. These kinds of true stories and how the lines get blurred in such a way make for an intriguing take on such a mysterious female character.
Did you see the film The Lost King (2022), starring Sally Hawkins? You’re probably familiar with this story, about a woman finding Richard III’s burial site & restoring his name.
Hi. Good essay. I haven’t seen this film. By the way, for some unknown reasons, your posts take 12 or so hours to reach my Reader. I’ve never been able to figure out why.
THE TITLE Lol. I love your writing, it’s always so creative and attention grabbing (in a good way). That was a very thoughtful analysis of the film. I must admit it’s been a long time since I saw it, so it’s not completely fresh in my memory, but I remember Ingrid’s performance was very special. Thanks so much for taking part in the blogathon!
I started watching this several years ago, but I never finished it. I’m going to take your advice, Ruth, and find it again. Thanks for a great read — and that link to the article about the DNA testing, too!
I adored your take on this movie Ruth, I love films about mental health and the Romanovs. I would recommend Nicholas and Alexandra and the 1980s miniseries Anastasia: The Mystery of Anna with Olivia De Havilland (not in the title role).
I saw this movie a long, long time ago– I might have caught it on TCM when I was in my teens, so I’m sure a rewatch would be like seeing it for the first time. With one exception: I remember being deeply moved by the scene where the dowager empress embraces Anna and says something like, “And if it should not be you, don’t ever tell me.” It was so sad. I really need to see it again.
Oh yeah, that is a GREAT scene between the Dowager Empress and Anna. Helen Hayes does it so well, hey? The fact you remembered this scene much later speaks to the power of this film. I hope you do get the chance to see it again.
Ingrid is soo good in this film. She keeps an audience guessing (of course, this was decades before any DNA testing was done IRL). Sometimes she seems like she could be Anna, while other times she seems like a fraud. Her performance is amazing.
Silver Screenings 
I’ve always been intrigued by this true story, and have done way too much research on it. Feels different now that we know Anna was not Anastasia. But what a great performance Bergman gave of this mysterious woman!
LikeLiked by 1 person
You’re right – now that we know Anna wasn’t the Real Deal, it diffuses some of the film’s mystery. But yes, what a performance, hey?
What drew you to the Anna/Anastasia story in the first place?
LikeLike
I think the first time I read into it was a Russian history binge–curiosity about Rasputin started it, I think (you know how it goes, one thread leading to the next). I remember getting into it all again when the Romanoffs series came out. I’ve always been fascinated by historical mysteries–the Richard II and the princes binge I went on after I read Daughter of Time was especially deep, and how fascinating that it was later concluded to be accurate. Poor Richard II. He had some powerful enemies, to go down in history a family killer when he wasn’t…
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ingrid Bergman & Yul Brynner were fabulous in this. These kinds of true stories and how the lines get blurred in such a way make for an intriguing take on such a mysterious female character.
LikeLiked by 1 person
You said it! Bergman’s character retains an aura of mystery throughout the film.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oops! I meant Richard III. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Did you see the film The Lost King (2022), starring Sally Hawkins? You’re probably familiar with this story, about a woman finding Richard III’s burial site & restoring his name.
LikeLike
No. But I love Sally Hawkins! Definitely checking that out. Thanks!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hi. Good essay. I haven’t seen this film. By the way, for some unknown reasons, your posts take 12 or so hours to reach my Reader. I’ve never been able to figure out why.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks for letting me know about the Reader. I wonder why that is…? I’m going to do a bit of research.
LikeLiked by 1 person
THE TITLE Lol. I love your writing, it’s always so creative and attention grabbing (in a good way). That was a very thoughtful analysis of the film. I must admit it’s been a long time since I saw it, so it’s not completely fresh in my memory, but I remember Ingrid’s performance was very special. Thanks so much for taking part in the blogathon!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks for hosting, Virginie! I look forward to this blogathon and all the Ingrid Bergman love. I hope you get a chance to revisit Anastasia.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I started watching this several years ago, but I never finished it. I’m going to take your advice, Ruth, and find it again. Thanks for a great read — and that link to the article about the DNA testing, too!
— Karen
LikeLiked by 1 person
I wasn’t in love with this film the first time I saw it, but it really grew on me the second time around. I thought the script was somewhat clever.
LikeLike
I adored your take on this movie Ruth, I love films about mental health and the Romanovs. I would recommend Nicholas and Alexandra and the 1980s miniseries Anastasia: The Mystery of Anna with Olivia De Havilland (not in the title role).
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ooh – that sounds really good! Especially if Olivia De Havilland has a role. Thanks!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I saw this movie a long, long time ago– I might have caught it on TCM when I was in my teens, so I’m sure a rewatch would be like seeing it for the first time. With one exception: I remember being deeply moved by the scene where the dowager empress embraces Anna and says something like, “And if it should not be you, don’t ever tell me.” It was so sad. I really need to see it again.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oh yeah, that is a GREAT scene between the Dowager Empress and Anna. Helen Hayes does it so well, hey? The fact you remembered this scene much later speaks to the power of this film. I hope you do get the chance to see it again.
LikeLike
I am totally intrigued–this seems like a perfect part for Ingrid! And it’s cool that she played opposite Helen Hayes.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ingrid is soo good in this film. She keeps an audience guessing (of course, this was decades before any DNA testing was done IRL). Sometimes she seems like she could be Anna, while other times she seems like a fraud. Her performance is amazing.
LikeLike