57
Metascore
10 reviews · Provided by Metacritic.com
- While it remains a treat for the eyes, NICHOLAS AND ALEXANDRA suffers from the filmmakers' attempts to tell too much.
- 70Chicago ReaderDave KehrChicago ReaderDave KehrOne of the best of a bad genre, Franklin J. Schaffner’s Sweeping Historical Romance manages some moderately intelligent historical observations amid its lavishly re-created period decor and the puppy-dog pathos of the two central characters (Michael Jayston and Janet Suzman).
- 63Chicago Sun-TimesRoger EbertChicago Sun-TimesRoger EbertThe problem with "Nicholas and Alexandra" is that it considers the Russian Revolution from, in some ways, the least interesting perspective.
- 60The New York TimesVincent CanbyThe New York TimesVincent CanbyThe problem with "Nicholas and Alexandra" is not inflation, but deflation, the attempt to cram too big a picture into too small a frame.
- 60EmpireDavid ParkinsonEmpireDavid ParkinsonA lengthy, visually impressive period piece with little in the way of new material or fresh spins on history to distinguish it.
- Nicholas and Alexandra boasts terrific performances and gorgeous production design, but it's bloated and unwieldy. There is more history here than the film-makers know what to do with.
- 50Village VoiceAndrew SarrisVillage VoiceAndrew SarrisThe sobriety of the entire enterprise is ill-suited to the lurid period in history it represents. [23 Dec 1971, p.61]
- 40Time OutTime OutOld-fashioned, overlong costume epic, comfortably reactionary in its view of the Tsar Nicholas as a saint who knew not what he was doing to the Russian people, and of the revolutionaries as potential tyrants reaching hungrily for power.
- 40The New YorkerPauline KaelThe New YorkerPauline KaelAs obsequiously respectful as if it had been made about living monarchs who might reward the producer with a command performance. Viewers are put in the position of celebrity-lovers eager to partake of the home life of the dullest of the Czars.