Anastasia Cartoon circa 1995

[Imperial_Grounds]

Now I loved the fox one as a kid, and it has a beautiful soundtrack and score, truly wonderful. Historically though not much is correct, but for me it was the reason I got into the Romanovs. As a little boy my likeness for royals showed in animated movies and their fairytale princesses(disney, Swann Princess and this one), next to Princess Diana atleast.

Now, I found another cartoon. The cover told about Anastasia living at the palace with her family, that she and her family got in exile and eventually got executed and the back showed the Imperial Family. I wouldn't have bought this one because I supossed it would be bad, but perhaps this one tells a more correct story...

Will see if I have watched it:p And if I don't like it it'll go to my little cousin

[RomanovMartyrs]

Here is a children's reproduction of the cartoon.

http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=C1260CCAB697AB27

The parts are in the above playlist, or can be found by following the YouTube Channel link in my signature.

(Yes, I am in this, I play Sophie. lol My friends and I made this six years ago for fun. We didn't mean to be poking fun, we were simply *having* fun. Of course none of it is supposed to be accurate, or insulting to the memory of the Last Family. I do not own the rights to the soundtrack used in the play, which is from the original cartoon production, copyright 20th Century Fox.)

Hope you enjoy! (Or at least get a giggle or two.)

[Katya90]

I just found this video, it's a brilliant and funny send-up of the cartoon Anastasia and shows the truth vs. fiction of it (although there are still some innacurate parts).

http://thatguywiththeglasses.com/videolinks/thedudette/nostalgia-chick/1950-anastasia

[TimM]

I remember reading a critic's comment when this movie came out.  He said something along the line of being like a cartoon movie that showed Anne Frank happily living with her boyfriend in New York City!

I found that comparison stupid.  There is a big difference between Anastasia and Anne Frank.  It has only been in the last twenty years or so, since the Soviet Union fell, that the truth of Anastasia final fate has been known.  Before then, there was always doubt.

However, as far as Anne Frank was concerned, it was an open and shut case.  Everyone knew what happened to her.  As far as I know, no one after World War II popped up, claiming to be Anne Frank.  If they had, they would have been quickly debunked.

What I'm saying is that this movie was based on the legend of Anastasia that existed until the fall of the USSR and the DNA tests finally laid that legend to rest.  There never was any legend of Anne Frank because her fate was always known.  So that critic's comments were absurd, IMHO.

[RomanovsFan4Ever]

I remember reading a critic's comment when this movie came out.  He said something along the line of being like a cartoon movie that showed Anne Frank happily living with her boyfriend in New York City!
What I'm saying is that this movie was based on the legend of Anastasia that existed until the fall of the USSR and the DNA tests finally laid that legend to rest.  There never was any legend of Anne Frank because her fate was always known.  So that critic's comments were absurd, IMHO.

Effectively, that comment was definitely "out of place"...

I remember that there were some critics around the cartoon here too, all related to the various mistakes that are present in the movie as for example the fact that they didn't changed the name of city from St. Petersburg (or most correct, Petrograd that was the name of the city in that time) to Leningrad, about the fact that the movie shows Rasputin as the responsible of the death of the Romanovs when instead Rasputin, in the reality, was killed before the revolution, and so on....
Obviously, Italian childrens didn't cared about the critics at all (I was very young in that time too)...the criticism was actually exagerated in my opinion, it was just a cartoon movie after all...

[Nicola De Valeron]

I remember reading a critic's comment when this movie came out.  He said something along the line of being like a cartoon movie that showed Anne Frank happily living with her boyfriend in New York City!
What I'm saying is that this movie was based on the legend of Anastasia that existed until the fall of the USSR and the DNA tests finally laid that legend to rest.  There never was any legend of Anne Frank because her fate was always known.  So that critic's comments were absurd, IMHO.

Effectively, that comment was definitely "out of place"...

I remember that there were some critics around the cartoon here too, all related to the various mistakes that are present in the movie as for example the fact that they didn't changed the name of city from St. Petersburg (or most correct, Petrograd that was the name of the city in that time) to Leningrad, about the fact that the movie shows Rasputin as the responsible of the death of the Romanovs when instead Rasputin, in the reality, was killed before the revolution, and so on....
Obviously, Italian childrens didn't cared about the critics at all (I was very young in that time too)...the criticism was actually exagerated in my opinion, it was just a cartoon movie after all...

RomanovsFan4ever, it was not just a cartoon.

Effectively, I think that the true bad consequences of that movie are far more serious and major, compared to it's with no doubt high professional qualities (screenplay, sound and so on). When you have a huge army of blinded and "obsessed fans" of Anastasia and IF just after one preview, it's something wrong. I think that people who are going to make similar things in the future (innocent and bright fairytale, but dragged out of the difficult context of Russian History. Something like: there was Anastasia, then she was suddenly killed by the evil Yurovsky), they should think a hundred times before they decided to create such an "art".

If you still want to create this thing, please add some historical facts and other necessary elements. For example, Anastasia and her family was killed not suddenly, but because of the old regime and the stupidity of authorities, weak power of N-II , endless Imperial Russian problems, prosecutions and repressions, and so on....

Or, it's need more regulation in the theatres. Something like: only for sober-minded people without any prerequisites to obsessions and who don't believe in fairytales. And show only after 23:00;).

[RomanovsFan4Ever]

Or, it's need more regulation in the theatres. Something like: only for sober-minded people without any prerequisites to obsessions and who don't believe in fairytales. And show only after 23:00;).

LOL! ;- )

Reflecting about what you said, I have to admit that probably that cartoon was the cause of that too distorted and romanticized view of the Imperial Family among many people...
It's also true that a correct conception of history must begin to be built in early age...

[TimM]

Well, I guess when you're making a cartoon aimed at kids, historical accuracy is not exactly top priority.

[aleksandr pavlovich]

The bottom line was two-fold: compete (just ask people as to who produced/marketed the CARTOON, and 9 out of 10 times for those who EVEN RECOGNIZE the name, they will give "Disney" as the answer) and MONEY.  It probably succeeded in those two areas.  Once on here some years ago, a younger simplistic fawning admirer of the real GD Anastasia N., was bemoaning the lack of a "true" movie not yet  to have been made on the object of her "passion," and remarked that if one wasn't made, she felt that she would do it herself!  Of course, everyone could humorously see through that bravado and "girlie crush," as some people have described it. (It does seem that she has since had an epiphany.)  Shortly thereafter, I had an opportunity to speak in an informal social setting with a "connected" official with one of the larger movie producing companies at that time, and out of sheer curiousity, broached the subject this younger female had remarked upon, and asked for his opinion.  It was basicly "What planet does she live on?"  I smiled over the rim of my water glass.  AP

[TimM]

Ah, but Disney didn't make this one, 20th Century Fox did, unless I'm mistaken.

[aleksandr pavlovich]

Exactly my point!  The name "Disney" is given time and time again as the producer, leaving an incorrect misconception. As I said above, ask 9 out of ten people, who EVEN RECOGNIZE the name "Anastasia," as to who made the cartoon, and you will get "Disney."  YOU are obviously an exception! Time and time again, new posters are amazed to be corrected.  OF COURSE, Fox did this CARTOON, hoping to COMPETE and get its share of the cartoon market (revenue) and market spin-offs of action figures, books, etc. Oh, and let us not forget the MUSIC Box/es, that so many still have today to aid their desire to live in another time, when "things ended happily ever after." The Fox Production was obviously aided by Disney's works because of the similiarity in cartoon/s presentation. As to the actual art work, how many ordinary attendees can distinguish between the two?  Note the similiarities of inclusion of cutesy little pets/creatures with "cuddly" names.  But this is a digression: the movie is over and dying a lingeringly sentimental death.  Will there be an "accurate" movie made of this subject ("ANASTASIA N.", et al) ?  No, IMO, it will not sell, and there is the bottom line. The unvarnished, correct truth is "stranger than fiction," but it will not satisfy, like the "romanticised" deviation. Look at all the hopes people had for the "Kitchen Boy", which of necessity will have to be fictionalized, especially in its ending.  While there are some basic initial movements, it will be YEARS before it is completed (if ever) and then will most likely die on the altar of the HD TV.   AP

[TimM]

Yeah, I think for the most part, moviegoers like a happy ending, the Prince rides in and saves the fair maiden.  Sadly, with the real Anastasia, that didn't happen.

[RomanovsFan4Ever]

Ah, but Disney didn't make this one, 20th Century Fox did, unless I'm mistaken.

Produced and directed by Don Bluth and Gary Goldman at the 20th Century Fox Animation Studios.
Maybe, "Anastasia" it's often wrongly considered as a "Disney" production because Don Bluth worked as animator for the Walt Disney, but actually his very last work for the Walt Disney was in 1978.
After, he founded the "Don Bluth production".
Don Bluth it's also the producer and director of other world famous cartoon movies like "An American Tail" and "The Land Before Time"...(that in my personal opinion were much more beautiful than "Anastasia").

EDIT: Talking about Don Bluth productions, I remember that in "An American Tail" there is another mistake...it shows the Statue of Liberty of New York still under construction exactly where it's now placed: The Liberty Island, but actually the statue was built in Paris (France), not in the United States.

[TimM]

Thanks for the info.

[Olga Bernice]

I really liked this movie, IMO. I am, of course, a bit late to this discussion. Before anybody pounces on me - I saw the movie AFTER I had learned about the real Anastasia. My cousin had saw it and LOVED it (she could do the dance moves and sing along with all the songs she loved it so much). She got it for me for Christmas and I watched it. I don't love it for it's historical content or for any of the behind-the-scenes things, but for it's way to make kids interested in the tragic tale of the Grand Duchess! Before this movie, to MOST kids the Romanovs were nothing more than pictures on a page. Now, with that movie, Anastasia seems alive to four and five year olds.

Yes, I know the historical content is far from right. They could have tried a little harder on that aspect. But, IMO, besides that (and apparently some of the things they said - yes, I have read most of this topic) it was a cute movie. And because of that, if they look up "Anastasia", they will see this Forum, they will see the special page Bob Atchison made about the GD, and so much else.

But I can not stress this enough: This is my opinion. IMO.