A Russian historical drama about a royal romance sparked a nationwide wave of violence.

Entertainment · Published 3 October 2026 Swipe more like this →

In short: When director Alexei Uchitel released his 2017 film Matilda, he expected a romantic period piece about the future Tsar Nicholas II and a ballerina. Instead, he ignited a firestorm of controversy, leading to arson, death threats, and a high-stakes battle over historical accuracy, religious sensitivity, and the limits of artistic freedom.

The film depicts the intense, years-long affair between the young Nicholas II and the Imperial Theater dancer Matilda Kshesinskaya, beginning in 1890 when they were 22 and 17, respectively. Their relationship unfolds against the backdrop of the Romanov court, where the future monarch faces immense pressure from his mother, Empress Maria Feodorovna, to abandon his passion and marry the German princess Alix. The narrative follows their connection through the 1896 coronation, framing the ballerina's eventual heartbreak as a blend of personal tragedy and artistic defiance.

The production became a lightning rod for controversy long before its October 2017 release. Monarchist groups and religious activists, led by State Duma deputy Natalia Poklonskaya, accused the film of distorting history and committing blasphemy against the canonized Nicholas II. This opposition escalated into extreme acts of intimidation. In September 2017, Russia's largest cinema chain, Cinema Park and Formula Kino, briefly pulled the film after receiving threats. In Yekaterinburg, an opponent of the film drove a vehicle filled with gasoline and gas cylinders into a cinema entrance, setting it ablaze. The perpetrator was later deemed insane by a court, leaving the cinema owners without compensation for the estimated 19.3 million rubles in damages.

Despite the intense backlash, the film's reception remained divided. Critics like Egor Belikov and Andrey Piskov dismissed the work as an overblown melodrama, while others, such as Anton Dolin, praised its visual splendor, including its elaborate costumes—which required over 17 tons of fabric. Official responses were equally varied. While the Prosecutor General’s office audited the script and found no violations, the atmosphere of fear prompted some figures, including Bishop Tikhon (Shevkunov), to condemn the film’s content while simultaneously rejecting the calls for a formal state ban as a counterproductive approach to cultural debate.

General information, not professional advice. Spotted an error? Flag the card or see corrections and complaints.

Intellect Plus is a visual educational discovery platform for exploring fascinating facts and ideas. Brain Food, Not Brain Rot. What is Intellect Plus?

Related

• A Russian historical drama explores the collision between absolute power and moral conscience.
• Can a nineteenth-century literary classic be weaponized as modern political propaganda in film?
• Can a historical epic serve as a political tool for modern national identity?
• Two French duelists find themselves on opposite sides of a brutal historical conflict.
• The Russian aristocrat who killed Rasputin and accidentally invented the film disclaimer
• Why a Canadian folk artist’s life story was filmed in Ireland and Newfoundland
• Can a matchmaker find true love when her own life is a transaction?
• Why the 1987 film Maurice was a radical act of queer cinema
• A master con artist discovers that his most elaborate swindle is his own life
• How a 1994 Western comedy turned a historic tugboat into a gambling steamer
• Does luck dictate our moral fate, or is it merely a convenient, cold excuse?
• What happens when a bullied middle schooler realizes he has nothing left to lose?

More in Films · More in Entertainment · Latest · A–Z · All topics