During the Russian Revolution, a mentally challenged peasant saves then obsesses over a beautiful countess.During the Russian Revolution, a mentally challenged peasant saves then obsesses over a beautiful countess.During the Russian Revolution, a mentally challenged peasant saves then obsesses over a beautiful countess.
- Awards
- 2 wins
Károly Huszár
- Ivan - the Gatekeeper
- (as Charles Puffy)
Johnny Mack Brown
- Russian Officer
- (uncredited)
Albert Conti
- Military Commandant at Novokursk
- (uncredited)
Jules Cowles
- Peasant Who Robs Tatiana
- (uncredited)
Tiny Jones
- Revolutionist at Protest
- (uncredited)
Frank Leigh
- Outlaw Peasant in Cabin
- (uncredited)
Russ Powell
- Man Taking Sergei to Ivan
- (uncredited)
Bud Rae
- Russian Soldier
- (uncredited)
Sam Savitsky
- Military Guard
- (uncredited)
Michael Visaroff
- Cossack Whipping Sergei
- (uncredited)
Storyline
Did you know
- TriviaThe single medal Capt. Dimitri wears is the Order of St. George, 4th Class. It was Imperial Russia's highest exclusively military order.
- Quotes
Capt. Dimitri: [to the Countess] I apologize for my lips, Countess - and I apologize for my eyes - but I cannot apologize for my heart.
- ConnectionsReferenced in Man of a Thousand Faces (1957)
Featured review
After recently viewing this film, I was rather perplexed to read the disparaging remarks aimed at Lon Chaney's performance. I will not argue with the general consensus that the film's story line is weak, and the overall feeling of the film is rather somber and oppressive. What would one expect to find when you're dealing with the stark realities of life in Siberia during the Russian Revolution? A light, carefree musical, perhaps? Danish director Benjamin Christensen does a masterful job of capturing the despair and gloom of the period, and the desperation of the central characters. The viewer never really gets to know the background of Chaney's character, Sergei, but his poignant confession to the Countess (who was disguised as a peasant woman at the time) that he never had a friend before provided a glimpse into the loneliness and harshness of Sergei's life. The Countess knew Sergei was `mentally challenged', and used this to her advantage to obtain safe passage to Novokursk. She made Sergei promise to tell any soldiers they met that she was his wife, and to say nothing more. Poor simple Sergei stuck to his story even after being savagely beaten by marauding Red soldiers. Sergei confused the woman's attentions and friendship, and believed it to mean much more.
What impressed me the most about this film was Chaney's performance. Though some dismissed his efforts as being unconvincing, or complained he `does little more than lumber about the set', I came away with a very different opinion. Chaney's gift was not only for make-up-which was expertly employed in this film-but for emotionally compelling pantomime. Chaney's Sergei exuded a rough, animalistic power in the way he moved and expressed himself. The performance was remarkably restrained, considering how easy it would have been to go over the top with this type of character. The one thing that proved to me Chaney's command of his craft is the way he looked out of his eyes. It is one thing to be able to change the expressions on your face to appear to be a simple, dim-witted peasant, but to show that in your eyes requires the height of brilliant acting acumen. Chaney's eyes reflected a supremely vacant expression that matched Sergei's mental state perfectly. Overall, I firmly believe this is one of the best performances of Chaney's career. There is even a very funny comedy scene featuring a drunk Sergei taunting the pompous Mr. Gaidaroff. The film, on the other hand, is certainly not everyone's cup of tea due to its subject matter, but I feel it has a lot of hidden meanings and pathos that can be tapped into to create a much broader picture of life amongst the privileged and lower castes of Revolutionary Russia.
What impressed me the most about this film was Chaney's performance. Though some dismissed his efforts as being unconvincing, or complained he `does little more than lumber about the set', I came away with a very different opinion. Chaney's gift was not only for make-up-which was expertly employed in this film-but for emotionally compelling pantomime. Chaney's Sergei exuded a rough, animalistic power in the way he moved and expressed himself. The performance was remarkably restrained, considering how easy it would have been to go over the top with this type of character. The one thing that proved to me Chaney's command of his craft is the way he looked out of his eyes. It is one thing to be able to change the expressions on your face to appear to be a simple, dim-witted peasant, but to show that in your eyes requires the height of brilliant acting acumen. Chaney's eyes reflected a supremely vacant expression that matched Sergei's mental state perfectly. Overall, I firmly believe this is one of the best performances of Chaney's career. There is even a very funny comedy scene featuring a drunk Sergei taunting the pompous Mr. Gaidaroff. The film, on the other hand, is certainly not everyone's cup of tea due to its subject matter, but I feel it has a lot of hidden meanings and pathos that can be tapped into to create a much broader picture of life amongst the privileged and lower castes of Revolutionary Russia.
- smgargiulo-1
- Apr 3, 2004
- Permalink
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Languages
- Also known as
- La novela de un mujik
- Filming locations
- Production company
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- $187,000 (estimated)
- Runtime1 hour 15 minutes
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 1.33 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content