Rent The Scarlet Empress (1934)

A Romp - The Scarlet Empress review by CH

Made in 1934, this take on Catherine ll sneaked in ahead of the Code, which means that not only does Marlene have a romp in the hay (interrupted by a horse) but there is a brief shot of a clock at the Court which contains a figure in an overcoat who flashes on the hour. The pervasive American accents add to the hokum, along with somebody drilling a spyhole through the eye of a portrait while the backs of chairs sport goulish sculpted figures. And yet it has to be seen for, at quite a clip, all this is pervafed by von Sternberg's Expressionist past in Germany: light and shade, tolling bells in close up, crowds surging across the open land and these Imperial buildings - not to mention a montage of executions in the opening minute.

History as a Fever Dream: Dietrich Goes Full Imperial - The Scarlet Empress review by griggs

Some period films wear history like a stiff collar. This one loosens the tie, kicks over the furniture, goes absolute bonkers, and turns imperial Russia into a grand Hollywood fever dream. Every frame is stuffed with glorious detail — gargoyles, towering doors, obscene banisters — yet it never feels fussy. The costumes are a moving feast: big dresses, bigger attitudes, pure spectacle.

The excess has teeth. Catherine’s world is fairy-tale opulence with a nasty undertow: peasants barely register, soldiers are toys, and power treats people like props. There’s an early burst of torture and war that feels like it slipped through just before the Hays Code tightened the bolts.

Marlene Dietrich is the event. She begins wide-eyed and sweet, then sheds innocence like a cloak and becomes pure Dietrich: cool, sultry, in control. Von Sternberg carves light and shadow with such shameless relish it’s practically indecent. The Scarlet Empress isn’t accurate — it’s better: it’s cinema.

Historical Melodrama. - The Scarlet Empress review by Steve

A title card in the opening credits claims this is based on the diaries of Catherine II, Empress of Russia. But it's a Hollywood melodrama which takes only an outline from history. Its principal impact is from the astonishing costumes, oppressive sets and fabulous expressionist photography. Its visual dimension is prodigious. Everything is spectacular.

Marlene Dietrich plays Catherine the Great... from the naive German ingenue to the ambitious Russian despot. She arrives in Moscow to marry Peter III (Sam Jaffe) and finds a grotesque promiscuous hell. And to prosper in hell, you become a devil. She has her husband assassinated and seizes the throne by sleeping her way through the army.

Dietrich hardly gives a performance. For the first hour she does open mouthed astonishment. And then we get a tyrannical Mae West, played out to a score of rousing Russian symphonies. Being a Joseph von Sternberg production, sometimes we're just watching him watching his star. It cost the studio a fortune and it bombed, but it's one of the standout films of the '30s!

Maybe there was no stomach in the depression for this reckless decadence. When it opens with nudity and a montage of torture and murder, it's clear this slipped out before the Production Code was enforced. There are moments which are scarcely credible. For my money, this is among the best historical melodramas. And surely the most excessive.