I found this easy to dive into and become addicted to. There are soulful details here and there, a piece of acting, a reply that add depth to the storytelling without adding weight. It moves along sprightly and makes sense psychologically, historically and even in the context of today, politically. The intimate players of the Russian court are shown in a swath of their lives which included periods of boredom, sadness, ambition, fear, powerlessness and also enormous power.
28 Reviews
Enjoyable show, very interesting historical period
LuisaContini1419 July 2018
I'm not sure what some reviewers are complaining about here. No this is not some historical masterpiece but it is an enjoyable historical drama nonetheless with great costumes and scenery and the show portrays the characters with shades of light and dark so that they are not all good or all bad. I disagree with a previous reviewer who says the show portrays Peter III as only incompetent. If the reviewer had bothered to watch the full first series they would see that Peter is shown as trying to be a good emperor eventhough his judgement was misguided in some fatal aspects. It also shows the ruthless streak that Catherine herself had, which she needed to have in order to survive.
Apart from the first episode where the narrator is giving a historical overview of Russia at the time and says that Russia is feared by its weak neighbours, this show much less state propaganda than say a show like Madame Secretary (which I also enjoy) where America always saves the day and seems to have only a wholly altruistic foreign policy, which we all know not to be true. But as it's a tv show, and we should be discerning enough not to believe everything a tv program tells us, one can take it with a grain of salt and an eye roll.
The period of Catherine the great and her rise is very interesting and it is incredible how she managed to survive the odds against her and rise to be an empress, so I would definitely recommend this show. Oh and I am neither Russian or American so this is review is coming from a neutral territory!
Apart from the first episode where the narrator is giving a historical overview of Russia at the time and says that Russia is feared by its weak neighbours, this show much less state propaganda than say a show like Madame Secretary (which I also enjoy) where America always saves the day and seems to have only a wholly altruistic foreign policy, which we all know not to be true. But as it's a tv show, and we should be discerning enough not to believe everything a tv program tells us, one can take it with a grain of salt and an eye roll.
The period of Catherine the great and her rise is very interesting and it is incredible how she managed to survive the odds against her and rise to be an empress, so I would definitely recommend this show. Oh and I am neither Russian or American so this is review is coming from a neutral territory!
Surprisingly good.
janewarren231 October 2018
Warning: Spoilers
I clicked on this out of curiosity and ended up immersed and watching the whole first season! Set against the wonderful back drop of St Petersburg, and 18th Century Russia, the characters are excellently portrayed and I soon forgot I was reading subtitles. A great introduction to Catherine the Great, Elizaveta and the Romanovs. It gave me a thirst to know more and after setting off on a google trail, I found little to contradict it. Peter 111 was a more complex character, and tried reform, but it would be difficult to portray more in the time allotted in the part.
Magnificent~
davidorcutt3121 August 2018
I'm generally a fan of historical fiction and am not naive as to where most fall in terms of historical accuracy. For Ekaterina, I have heard it is much closer to history than most, though I cannot confirm it for myself as I personally have little knowledge of Russia's history. But the costuming and sets are stunning and the story feels more political with every choice having ramifications on the European field than most tend to go into. They tend to simply seek power for power's sake. But in Ekaterina, the political side feels much more relevant.
And if that's not enough to convince any fan of historical drams, then watch it simply for the character of Empress Elizaveta. The actress dominated every scene as the real Empress likely did in life.
And if that's not enough to convince any fan of historical drams, then watch it simply for the character of Empress Elizaveta. The actress dominated every scene as the real Empress likely did in life.
Learn Russian history before bashing.
verochka7124 December 2018
Many negative reviews have nothing to do with the series but with hatred of Russians per say. As a native Russian speaker and a fluent English speaker, I can tell you that a lot of words in Russian can not be translated into English with the presice translation, for a mere reason that they don't exist in English. The series being set in Saint Petersburg, Russia, founded by Peter the Great in 1711, and while being one of the youngest European capitals is still older then the whole country of United States of America. So before giving negative comments and low scores, read the history of Russian empire, and perhaps then you will comprehend the series.
Powerful historic drama from 2014, compared with different 2015 series.
manschelde-124 June 2019
Ekaterina (2014)
Series-1 of Ekaterina has the sub-title "The rise of Catherine the great"
I watched the Ekaterina Series-1 via Amazon-Prime-Video with English subtitles as I do not speak Russian or German.
The historical saga of Catherine The Great of Russia has been depicted on screen several times over the decades. Two recent Russian produced television series dating from 2014 (Ekaterina) and 2015 (Catherine the great) compete for viewers in the international content-streaming market. Additionally the American HBO and UK based Sky channels have a series (in English) telling this saga. But I only wanted to see the Russian productions because it is really a Russian story for Russians to tell. So I watched both series and both excelled in different ways. If you have the time then I recommend to try both series.
What follows below is a comparison between the 2014 (Ekaterina) and the 2015 (Catherine The Great). Both series come from different television channels in Russia and are in the Russian language. I cannot comment on the historical accuracy of either of the Russian produced TV series.
In short the 2014 series Ekaterina has a better script but less style than the 2015 series, it covers much more territory/history/characters in fewer episodes. The 2015 series is more lavish, has better locations, has a better score, slower pace, less geopolitical content and with stronger characterisations, despite relying on artifical devices such as Catherine's mother appearing in mirrors.
Ekaterina has more political substance but less style than the 2015 series. The series differ on which supporting characters get focus, they differ on implied paternity of the Catherine's first child and many other details. But the Ekaterina series is significantly more geopolitical in its content and scope, and portrays Pyotr III in a more sympathetic light than the 2015 series. Some sentiments echo to this very day. Ekaterina has some explanatory commentary (spoken delivery in English in my region). Ekaterina also devotes some time to Ivan VI in several scenes, which the 2015 series does not.
Ekaterina shows much more of empress Elizabeta backstory (compared to the 2015 series), details of her health struggles, her attempts to conceive and secret marriage, her penance for the victims of her own coup, her relations with the clergy and church, the awareness among her subjects of her imprisionment of the boy-emperor she usurped and imprisioned and her fearless autocratic rule.
Ekaterina makes it easier to identify characters because most of the time they are not wearning wigs (unlike in the 2015 series when characters are constantly begwigged or unwigged sometimes making recognition difficult and confusing when reading subtitles is necessary).
The score for Ekaterina is less powerful, less emotive, less stirring than the 2015 series, and both the title sequence and closing credits are very short indeed.
Ekaterina also has English subtitles with some disused English words for which a dictionary is sometimes necessary. Clearly the subtitles are not done by a native speaker of English, so that is an annoying distraction shared by both series. Ekaterina has interstitials between some scenes/locations with Cyrillic-only text and dates (no English translation on such scene transitions ) so English speaking viewers may not know the location name, or month name, even when it is important. Additionally there are a few scenes where characters are seen to write legible Cyrillic text on which the camera dwells - with no English translation of the depicted text.
For Ekaterina , the locations, interiors are less splendid, less lavish than the 2015 series, and some of the frozen snowbound or icebound St. Petersburg outdoor scenes or Peterhof background look rather faked on a big screen in 1080p resolution.
The episodes for Series-1 of Ekaterina number 10 each of varying duration (40mins - 65mins), while the 2015 series has 12 episodes each of approximately 48 minutes in duration.
The historical saga of Catherine The Great of Russia has been depicted on screen several times over the decades. Two recent Russian produced television series dating from 2014 (Ekaterina) and 2015 (Catherine the great) compete for viewers in the international content-streaming market. Additionally the American HBO and UK based Sky channels have a series (in English) telling this saga. But I only wanted to see the Russian productions because it is really a Russian story for Russians to tell. So I watched both series and both excelled in different ways. If you have the time then I recommend to try both series.
What follows below is a comparison between the 2014 (Ekaterina) and the 2015 (Catherine The Great). Both series come from different television channels in Russia and are in the Russian language. I cannot comment on the historical accuracy of either of the Russian produced TV series.
In short the 2014 series Ekaterina has a better script but less style than the 2015 series, it covers much more territory/history/characters in fewer episodes. The 2015 series is more lavish, has better locations, has a better score, slower pace, less geopolitical content and with stronger characterisations, despite relying on artifical devices such as Catherine's mother appearing in mirrors.
Ekaterina has more political substance but less style than the 2015 series. The series differ on which supporting characters get focus, they differ on implied paternity of the Catherine's first child and many other details. But the Ekaterina series is significantly more geopolitical in its content and scope, and portrays Pyotr III in a more sympathetic light than the 2015 series. Some sentiments echo to this very day. Ekaterina has some explanatory commentary (spoken delivery in English in my region). Ekaterina also devotes some time to Ivan VI in several scenes, which the 2015 series does not.
Ekaterina shows much more of empress Elizabeta backstory (compared to the 2015 series), details of her health struggles, her attempts to conceive and secret marriage, her penance for the victims of her own coup, her relations with the clergy and church, the awareness among her subjects of her imprisionment of the boy-emperor she usurped and imprisioned and her fearless autocratic rule.
Ekaterina makes it easier to identify characters because most of the time they are not wearning wigs (unlike in the 2015 series when characters are constantly begwigged or unwigged sometimes making recognition difficult and confusing when reading subtitles is necessary).
The score for Ekaterina is less powerful, less emotive, less stirring than the 2015 series, and both the title sequence and closing credits are very short indeed.
Ekaterina also has English subtitles with some disused English words for which a dictionary is sometimes necessary. Clearly the subtitles are not done by a native speaker of English, so that is an annoying distraction shared by both series. Ekaterina has interstitials between some scenes/locations with Cyrillic-only text and dates (no English translation on such scene transitions ) so English speaking viewers may not know the location name, or month name, even when it is important. Additionally there are a few scenes where characters are seen to write legible Cyrillic text on which the camera dwells - with no English translation of the depicted text.
For Ekaterina , the locations, interiors are less splendid, less lavish than the 2015 series, and some of the frozen snowbound or icebound St. Petersburg outdoor scenes or Peterhof background look rather faked on a big screen in 1080p resolution.
The episodes for Series-1 of Ekaterina number 10 each of varying duration (40mins - 65mins), while the 2015 series has 12 episodes each of approximately 48 minutes in duration.
Majestic!
lexa-3905614 February 2019
admirable work
Kirpianuscus20 December 2018
Its basic gift - it is different. And use the differences in smart manner episode by episode. It is not a pledge but a precise and realistic portrait. The acting is solide, the atmosphere is seductive, the familiar manicheism is absent. A film about power and about a young woman leaning to obtain and manage it. For the admirers of Russian historical series from the last decade - nothing surprising. For the other- beautiful nuances of portraits and the vulnerability of characters. Short, an admirable work.
Good
iconians24 March 2019
My review is based on s1 only. I know s2 is available but in the US. I was watching it in native Russian with English subs. I think subs were above average but still didn't portray the rich dialogue. Many words that I have long forgotten made me smile when they were spoken.
As far as story. I think ep 1 was a bit slow, after that it picked up the pace. I do not know how accurate it was historically as I am no expert, and I def think some things were romanticized, but overall I think it was well done. I also felt last ep could have been full length with much more detail on 2 main events, hence why it's 7/10 not 8/10.
As to what others been saying about the Petr the 3rd, his main undoing was clearly outlined and I have no pity for him for that reason. Whether he got a fair shake or not, who knows, but at least they dealt with it rather bluntly, which is not usual for such a series.
As far as story. I think ep 1 was a bit slow, after that it picked up the pace. I do not know how accurate it was historically as I am no expert, and I def think some things were romanticized, but overall I think it was well done. I also felt last ep could have been full length with much more detail on 2 main events, hence why it's 7/10 not 8/10.
As to what others been saying about the Petr the 3rd, his main undoing was clearly outlined and I have no pity for him for that reason. Whether he got a fair shake or not, who knows, but at least they dealt with it rather bluntly, which is not usual for such a series.
King & Queens ripping yarn
bellboy-7137517 October 2018
I'm a Englishman that loves the European royal family stories. This one is a fantastic Intoduction to the romanovs.
It's cracks along at a good pace which works along the game of thrones theme treachery scheming, torture etc. Some licence with the truth as all these shows like the white queen or the Tudors, but helps the story lines.
The second series has more money spent on it and looks like they have tried to use the original palaces, which gives it an authentic look. An advert to visit st Petersburg really rather than Russian propaganda...
More Seasons to Come
sbaxter-0895828 April 2020
Warning: Spoilers
I have just completed watching season three of Ekaterina. All together, they span the years 1745 to 1782. That leaves 14 years of the reign of Catherine the Great for additional seasons. I know there were three wars in those years and who knows how many lovers and court intrigues.
Season One looks at the years from Ektarina's arrival in Russia in 1745 until shortly after she is crowned empress in 1762. I used Google often to figure out who the characters were and to see if the events being described took place as they were being described (of course, this ruins any chance of being surprised). From what I could tell they were so that season was historically accurate. Julia Aug was great as Empress Elizabeth (she also played a major role in another period piece that I recommend, Love in Chains). Marina Aleksandrova is also good as Ektarina. I do wonder if her profession of love for Peter III was genuine because she was a naive romantic or feigned as part of her quest for power.
Season Two picks up from the end of Season One and takes ends with the 1782 unveiling of a statue of Peter the Great. There are two notable variations from facts. The first and most annoying was the appearance of hot air balloons fifteen years or so before they existed. Worse, they added nothing to the story. The other deviation was that, in the show, the Sultan of the Ottoman Empire died of smallpox not long before the end of the Russo-Turkish War. He died of a heart attack but the change in facts is poetic justice in the show as the story had the Sultan attempting to assassinate Ektarina by sending her a gift of smallpox infected face powder. The Empress never learned that but after the death of a noble woman who opened the gift, she got inoculated against smallpox. The show conflates two English doctors. One, at the request of Ektarina, travelled to Russia to give her, her son and others the treatment. The other did not arrive until a year later to become the court physician. The show does not point out how very dangerous that procedure was at the time. It relied upon using live smallpox virus and not the cowpox version developed decades later.
All of Season Three takes place within the period covered by Season two and only goes to December 1775. The focus is on three threats to Catherine - war with the Turks, the Pugachev Rebellion and a woman claiming to be the granddaughter of Peter the Great. While the first two seasons seem to be historically accurate, the third season goes off the rails. The major events described took place but the characters involved were changed significantly. It's still a good story.
I learned that everyone in the series who has a first name and last name can be googled. There may not be a lot of details about a few of those but they were real. It is worth checking Google about some of these otherwise, you won't get it. At least if you're not an American like me.
Case in point...the Empress and Potemkin visited a flea infested inn on their way south. Two army officers had been sent there just in case but as they did not expect the arrival to happen, they got drunk. Upon the arrival of the royal party, the drunkards were questioned by the Empress. She laughed at the last name of one of them. The show failed to explain the humor to those of us with limited knowledge of the Russian language. His last name, romanized, was Budov. In Czech it means building but in Russian it is a synonym for intercourse. The other soldier was his cousin (a detail omitted by the show). In an attempt to get out of trouble, he recited a poem to the Empress. Potemkin was unhappy that she let him go unpunished. She said as long as he could stay away from a bottle he would be famous for his poetry. He was Gavrila Derzhavin, a poet who eventually became Minister of Justice.
The CGI in the show are not good. There are quite a few errors in the English subtitles. Some of them are pretty easy to figure out but it is still a pain. The use of multiple languages is fine but if it is supposed to be a native speaker of that language he/she should sound like one. French and Italian don't roll their R's. The only thing worse than hearing French with a Russian accent is hearing it with an American one. Part of the third season takes place in Naples and folks that are supposed to be Italian had their dialogue dubbed. It was very disconcerting.
Overall, I certainly enjoyed the show and will watch the next seasons if and when they come out.
One of the reviewers here said you should know Russian history before you watch this. That's not true. But it is helpful. Russian/Ukrainian historical dramas I have watched (or will) The Golden Horde Sophia Godunov (there are many. I watched the 2019 tv series) Peter the Great (I am just starting that four episode series on Amazon Prime) Life of a Mistress Love in Chains
The last two are about serfdom and have a similar premise - a serf girl is raised inside a noble home like a daughter. Of the two, Life of a Mistress is better. "Mistress" is in the sense of a woman head of an estate, not a man's extramarital play thing.
Season One looks at the years from Ektarina's arrival in Russia in 1745 until shortly after she is crowned empress in 1762. I used Google often to figure out who the characters were and to see if the events being described took place as they were being described (of course, this ruins any chance of being surprised). From what I could tell they were so that season was historically accurate. Julia Aug was great as Empress Elizabeth (she also played a major role in another period piece that I recommend, Love in Chains). Marina Aleksandrova is also good as Ektarina. I do wonder if her profession of love for Peter III was genuine because she was a naive romantic or feigned as part of her quest for power.
Season Two picks up from the end of Season One and takes ends with the 1782 unveiling of a statue of Peter the Great. There are two notable variations from facts. The first and most annoying was the appearance of hot air balloons fifteen years or so before they existed. Worse, they added nothing to the story. The other deviation was that, in the show, the Sultan of the Ottoman Empire died of smallpox not long before the end of the Russo-Turkish War. He died of a heart attack but the change in facts is poetic justice in the show as the story had the Sultan attempting to assassinate Ektarina by sending her a gift of smallpox infected face powder. The Empress never learned that but after the death of a noble woman who opened the gift, she got inoculated against smallpox. The show conflates two English doctors. One, at the request of Ektarina, travelled to Russia to give her, her son and others the treatment. The other did not arrive until a year later to become the court physician. The show does not point out how very dangerous that procedure was at the time. It relied upon using live smallpox virus and not the cowpox version developed decades later.
All of Season Three takes place within the period covered by Season two and only goes to December 1775. The focus is on three threats to Catherine - war with the Turks, the Pugachev Rebellion and a woman claiming to be the granddaughter of Peter the Great. While the first two seasons seem to be historically accurate, the third season goes off the rails. The major events described took place but the characters involved were changed significantly. It's still a good story.
I learned that everyone in the series who has a first name and last name can be googled. There may not be a lot of details about a few of those but they were real. It is worth checking Google about some of these otherwise, you won't get it. At least if you're not an American like me.
Case in point...the Empress and Potemkin visited a flea infested inn on their way south. Two army officers had been sent there just in case but as they did not expect the arrival to happen, they got drunk. Upon the arrival of the royal party, the drunkards were questioned by the Empress. She laughed at the last name of one of them. The show failed to explain the humor to those of us with limited knowledge of the Russian language. His last name, romanized, was Budov. In Czech it means building but in Russian it is a synonym for intercourse. The other soldier was his cousin (a detail omitted by the show). In an attempt to get out of trouble, he recited a poem to the Empress. Potemkin was unhappy that she let him go unpunished. She said as long as he could stay away from a bottle he would be famous for his poetry. He was Gavrila Derzhavin, a poet who eventually became Minister of Justice.
The CGI in the show are not good. There are quite a few errors in the English subtitles. Some of them are pretty easy to figure out but it is still a pain. The use of multiple languages is fine but if it is supposed to be a native speaker of that language he/she should sound like one. French and Italian don't roll their R's. The only thing worse than hearing French with a Russian accent is hearing it with an American one. Part of the third season takes place in Naples and folks that are supposed to be Italian had their dialogue dubbed. It was very disconcerting.
Overall, I certainly enjoyed the show and will watch the next seasons if and when they come out.
One of the reviewers here said you should know Russian history before you watch this. That's not true. But it is helpful. Russian/Ukrainian historical dramas I have watched (or will) The Golden Horde Sophia Godunov (there are many. I watched the 2019 tv series) Peter the Great (I am just starting that four episode series on Amazon Prime) Life of a Mistress Love in Chains
The last two are about serfdom and have a similar premise - a serf girl is raised inside a noble home like a daughter. Of the two, Life of a Mistress is better. "Mistress" is in the sense of a woman head of an estate, not a man's extramarital play thing.
really bad
gareth-white1023 May 2018
I've been compelled to watch a few of these historical series about royal houses because my wife likes them. Versailles was OK but this is very poorly executed. The costumes are good and the backdrops pretty but these are the only redeeming features as the script is poorly put together and much of the acting as wooden as I've seen for quite some time. You are left with an impression that the Russian state has heavily influenced the production. For instance Peter III is portrayed as an incompetent and immature fantasist when in reality he tried to implement some rather enlightened reforms. I'm frankly amazed its rated 8.2 on IMDb.
only two complaints
mine-916891 February 2020
The cinematography and costumes are justly praised. Wonderful! But the CGI is positively awful! So many set shots of the palace and the "flowing Neva" are extremely annoying. Nowhere near the quality of everything else.
Secondly, the subtitles are horrible! The English is stilted and often completely ungrammatical. The reviewer who commented that certain Russian words cannot be translated into English doesn't know what he is talking about (I too speak both languages) The translation job gets worse as the episodes wear on, by the way. It is truly a subpar job. Rather disappointing
Slava Rossiya!
hopmah7 November 2020
This is a masterpiece of television: scenery, costumes, plot, drama. Perhaps not 100% historically accurate, but beautiful and very entertaining. Season 1 is very fast-paced, with the producers seemingly unaware it would be renewed. Season 2 starts off at a much slower pace, but once it "moves", it draws the viewer in as never before.
Note that my 10-star rating is for the above. Season 3 is altogether different ... I was unable to continue after the first ten minutes, as in my opinion it just did not "work".
Note that my 10-star rating is for the above. Season 3 is altogether different ... I was unable to continue after the first ten minutes, as in my opinion it just did not "work".
History at its best
martin-andersson2211 September 2020
This is an enjoable show. I am now a few episodes into second season and I am loving it. Strongly recommend and I envy those that have not seen the first season yet.
The TV series paints a loving picture of Ekaterina II, with flaws. And a splendid picture of Tsarist Russia. The show does not show social strife. The nobility, or at least rulers, have fear of the sentiment of common folks. It is a check on their behavior. But we see no meanness or abuse against common people. Rather, the relationship is paternalistic, a wish to protect. We also see a romanticization from the nobility towards common Russians. As how Potemkin is portrayed and related.
Another pleasent theme of the show is how people defer to authority, station, duty. While the series always show the characters maintain themselves, like if they were in two paralell universes, one where they are people, one where they are functionaries of the state. Unlike what we would see in a contemporary Anglo show, there is no conflict between these universes. People just do their duty to the letter, good or bad, true or just, clever or stupid. While being people wherever duty does not mandate. The Tsar(ina) obviously struggles a bit more with this. Power corrupts. But even she ends up on the straight and narrow.
Another theme is how the Tsar(ina) is bigger than life, when she has to be. I just watched the part where she defeated the religious fanatic accosting her in the street just after she met the patriarch early episode of season 2. It is as if a higher spirit descends into her and fills her with power. I think it is a way to touch upon the holyness of Tsardom, rulership, royalty.
Obviously this is a highly idealized and stylized picture of history. But if we are to tell stories of the past, why not tell the most noble and beautiful stories that history will let us? And maybe in so doing, make our life and our land just a little bit better today? As Herodotes once replied, I have been told four versions of the death of Cyrus the great. And I choose the best one.
The TV series paints a loving picture of Ekaterina II, with flaws. And a splendid picture of Tsarist Russia. The show does not show social strife. The nobility, or at least rulers, have fear of the sentiment of common folks. It is a check on their behavior. But we see no meanness or abuse against common people. Rather, the relationship is paternalistic, a wish to protect. We also see a romanticization from the nobility towards common Russians. As how Potemkin is portrayed and related.
Another pleasent theme of the show is how people defer to authority, station, duty. While the series always show the characters maintain themselves, like if they were in two paralell universes, one where they are people, one where they are functionaries of the state. Unlike what we would see in a contemporary Anglo show, there is no conflict between these universes. People just do their duty to the letter, good or bad, true or just, clever or stupid. While being people wherever duty does not mandate. The Tsar(ina) obviously struggles a bit more with this. Power corrupts. But even she ends up on the straight and narrow.
Another theme is how the Tsar(ina) is bigger than life, when she has to be. I just watched the part where she defeated the religious fanatic accosting her in the street just after she met the patriarch early episode of season 2. It is as if a higher spirit descends into her and fills her with power. I think it is a way to touch upon the holyness of Tsardom, rulership, royalty.
Obviously this is a highly idealized and stylized picture of history. But if we are to tell stories of the past, why not tell the most noble and beautiful stories that history will let us? And maybe in so doing, make our life and our land just a little bit better today? As Herodotes once replied, I have been told four versions of the death of Cyrus the great. And I choose the best one.
Overpowering beautiful!
chipjgf2 January 2022
Factual Historic Drama about a Great Russian-German Leader.
Dr_Mark_ODoherty2 December 2023
Great historic interpretation of 18th century Russia and Germany - and the bond of Love between those great countries, due to Catherine the Great.
I also liked the vivid portrayal of the vulnerability of the Russian royals - who were just normal People - like you and me :)
Most of the Russian aristocratic ladies in this factual historic drama, are portrayed not so much as power hungry people, but rather as demure and refined ladies; who only venture into sexual affairs with the utmost delicacy and elegance.
In fact, I think this is still the case today; most Russian ladies being of a very sensitive, demure and gentle disposition; which is often overlooked by the western female establishment; due to their jealousy of the chic Russian woman :)
I also liked the accurate historic portrayal of Peter III of Russia - who reminded me of my dear friend Vladimir Putin; who is responsible for the killing of Russian soldiers and the unjust imprisonment of Russian human rights activists; waging an inhuman and illegal war on Ukraine, that could have easily been avoided.
In fact, Putin has become a lame duck president, because he made some very bad political decisions, and therefore must be replaced with a new leader.
Once Putin has been replaced with a decent leader, we will support Compromise and Negotiations between Russia and Ukraine 100%.
In the meantime Russia will be led by the NGO BTB-Global Peacebuilding; to restore Human Rights, International Law, Civilization and Happiness in Russia.
Our capital will be Saint Petersburg; in honor of Catherine the Great.
NB: The Putin regime is responsible for the killings of Human Rights Defenders and critics of the corrupt and evil egime; such as Alexei Navalny. We declare all perpetrators of the Putin regime 'Persona non grata' - and order their arrest by the Global Community.
Love and Light / Peace Profound.
Mark - PRESIDENT OF THE MIDDLE EAST / IPA - INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT - UNITED NATIONS - RUSSIA - AU/EU/UK - USAN - IRAN - SOUTH AFRICA - ISRAEL-PALESTINE - POTUS - THE PENTAGON.
I also liked the vivid portrayal of the vulnerability of the Russian royals - who were just normal People - like you and me :)
Most of the Russian aristocratic ladies in this factual historic drama, are portrayed not so much as power hungry people, but rather as demure and refined ladies; who only venture into sexual affairs with the utmost delicacy and elegance.
In fact, I think this is still the case today; most Russian ladies being of a very sensitive, demure and gentle disposition; which is often overlooked by the western female establishment; due to their jealousy of the chic Russian woman :)
I also liked the accurate historic portrayal of Peter III of Russia - who reminded me of my dear friend Vladimir Putin; who is responsible for the killing of Russian soldiers and the unjust imprisonment of Russian human rights activists; waging an inhuman and illegal war on Ukraine, that could have easily been avoided.
In fact, Putin has become a lame duck president, because he made some very bad political decisions, and therefore must be replaced with a new leader.
Once Putin has been replaced with a decent leader, we will support Compromise and Negotiations between Russia and Ukraine 100%.
In the meantime Russia will be led by the NGO BTB-Global Peacebuilding; to restore Human Rights, International Law, Civilization and Happiness in Russia.
Our capital will be Saint Petersburg; in honor of Catherine the Great.
NB: The Putin regime is responsible for the killings of Human Rights Defenders and critics of the corrupt and evil egime; such as Alexei Navalny. We declare all perpetrators of the Putin regime 'Persona non grata' - and order their arrest by the Global Community.
Love and Light / Peace Profound.
Mark - PRESIDENT OF THE MIDDLE EAST / IPA - INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT - UNITED NATIONS - RUSSIA - AU/EU/UK - USAN - IRAN - SOUTH AFRICA - ISRAEL-PALESTINE - POTUS - THE PENTAGON.
Beautiful - lead actress is compelling
baffledbyhumanity22 March 2022
Warning: Spoilers
Watching some Russian series (Sophia, Ekaterina, another I can't remember..) after having watched some Chinese series (Ruyi's Royal Love in the Palace, Story of Yanxi Palace). Very much enjoying it. I love that we're seeing these scenes at the locations where they would have originally happened. Having visited St Petersburg after decades of wanting to, it's cool to see.
Confused to high heaven by season 3. It starts out earlier than the ending of Season 2, with at least one dead character inexplicably showing up again. I was looking forward to the story progressing, but it sounds like the backtrack to highlight some events missed the first time. Uncertain. I find it confusing.
But still beautiful and absolutely recommend for anyone who's worked through all the historical fodder available and needs new content.
Confused to high heaven by season 3. It starts out earlier than the ending of Season 2, with at least one dead character inexplicably showing up again. I was looking forward to the story progressing, but it sounds like the backtrack to highlight some events missed the first time. Uncertain. I find it confusing.
But still beautiful and absolutely recommend for anyone who's worked through all the historical fodder available and needs new content.
A good piece of history
leonromster29 September 2022
This TV series is marvelous. Its music is astonishing, the playing with very high standarts and the locations (many of them from Saint Perersburg) are magnifiques. I have acquired knowledge from this TV series. Also it fits the fashion of making films about Russian history(at that time). Regarding history facts, I have not checked them (as should be done with all non-documentary films), but many of them appeared to be correct, but also one should acknowledge the fact that it was shown and produced on formal Russian Tv state channel. It means that, it contains also patriotic values to show to its viewers.
EKATERINA: Gorgeous Portrayal
Jinxxa_Wolf18 April 2024
EKATERINA (2014-2023) is a historical semi-biographical Russian drama about the renowned historical figure of Catherine the Great and her glorious reign over the Russian Empire, from naive girl to powerful ruler.
"The life of Russian Empress Ekaterina II (Catherine the Great), a German-born princess who came to Russia as the wife of Peter III, chosen by her aunt Elizabeth, and who, once in power, transformed the Russian empire."
This series had excellent sets and costumes, and was pretty well acted overall, although at times it did felt a bit dry and stuffy. On the bright side though, it's definitely not the typical overly-dramatic and hyper sensationalist kind of dramas we normally see in the West. A bit more subtle and slow paced though perhaps. Immediately you feel interested in Ekaterina herself, as she portrays an innocent and naive girl and her gradual transition into power and reknown. A very interesting subject.
Overall, this series was a pretty well-made drama as well as intriguing story, especially if you are into historical costume period dramas, featuring powerful female rulers, as well as the "golden age" of Russian history, pre-soviet-communist revolution era. Very watchable.
"The life of Russian Empress Ekaterina II (Catherine the Great), a German-born princess who came to Russia as the wife of Peter III, chosen by her aunt Elizabeth, and who, once in power, transformed the Russian empire."
This series had excellent sets and costumes, and was pretty well acted overall, although at times it did felt a bit dry and stuffy. On the bright side though, it's definitely not the typical overly-dramatic and hyper sensationalist kind of dramas we normally see in the West. A bit more subtle and slow paced though perhaps. Immediately you feel interested in Ekaterina herself, as she portrays an innocent and naive girl and her gradual transition into power and reknown. A very interesting subject.
Overall, this series was a pretty well-made drama as well as intriguing story, especially if you are into historical costume period dramas, featuring powerful female rulers, as well as the "golden age" of Russian history, pre-soviet-communist revolution era. Very watchable.
soap opera
bigbundy696 January 2020
Warning: Spoilers
Was very disappointing, thought i'll learn more about that interesting period of time in Russia but instead got a soap opera (and of very low quality- not in filming but in dialogs, characters etc- writing) for 90% of time and some history parts for maybe 10%
Also they keep showing ships in the ice on the rivers, i understand it makes the picture better but in real life that would destroy them
Brilliant, gripping, and powerful - wonderful!
benjamin-s-ring26 June 2020
I have long been a student of Russian history and have seen a few Catherine II projects over the years. Catching Ekaterina on Amazon Prime was an incredible treat. My husband loved it as well and knows nothing of Russian history.
It's gripping, haunting, and some scenes will just stick with you (namely, in Season 3). The casting is fantastic: Catherine's many lovers are appropriately, sublimely sexy and Yuliya Aug is FANTASTIC as Empress Elizaveta. She really sets the tone as this powerful, intense presence throughout Catherine's introduction to Russia.
Season 2 features Sergei Kotalkov as advisor Nikita Panin who is the powerhouse of the season. Less scenery chewing than Elizaveta but engrossing. The world expands beyond Catherine to include others such as her illegitimate child, Alexei; Catherine's Lady in Waiting, Sofia Stepanova (played by Lyubava Greshnova) is the other MVP.
The problem with Season 2 is it covers a VERY large part of Catherine's reign, so much so Season 3 is actually a flashback which is very jarring at first.
Season 3 takes some strong historical liberties to expand our characters and humanize them. Nikita Panin has another stellar season with a softer side, Catherine has a couple of stellar(!) scenes, Alexei Orlov gets his time to shine, and they try to retcon Paul's wife (hideous villain in S2!) which makes no sense with how they portrayed her in S2, but I'll take it.
The most powerful performance is that of the "second" Elizaveta Peteovna, played by Angelina Strechina. Incredible. The finale of S3 will leave you feeling something, that's for sure.
I also liked how they would dub the actors in different languages appropriate for the location: Frederick II of Prussia would speak German. In Naples it's dubbed in Italian. The Poles in Polish, et cet. It adds a bit of immersion and I enjoyed it; in fact there is a funny and heartwarming scene between a Russian and German character in S3 that plays on this fact. So you're watching it subtitled one English but can hear the two different languages.
Only criticisms are that the special effects/fighting scenes are pretty weak, even by S3 when you can tell they got a better budget. Also, the Potemkin+Catherine love theme is waaaaay overused. They needed a second theme in S2. :)
You'll learn a lot and enjoy the show along the way. If you enjoyed the intrigue of Game of Thrones, you'll enjoy Ekaterina.
It's gripping, haunting, and some scenes will just stick with you (namely, in Season 3). The casting is fantastic: Catherine's many lovers are appropriately, sublimely sexy and Yuliya Aug is FANTASTIC as Empress Elizaveta. She really sets the tone as this powerful, intense presence throughout Catherine's introduction to Russia.
Season 2 features Sergei Kotalkov as advisor Nikita Panin who is the powerhouse of the season. Less scenery chewing than Elizaveta but engrossing. The world expands beyond Catherine to include others such as her illegitimate child, Alexei; Catherine's Lady in Waiting, Sofia Stepanova (played by Lyubava Greshnova) is the other MVP.
The problem with Season 2 is it covers a VERY large part of Catherine's reign, so much so Season 3 is actually a flashback which is very jarring at first.
Season 3 takes some strong historical liberties to expand our characters and humanize them. Nikita Panin has another stellar season with a softer side, Catherine has a couple of stellar(!) scenes, Alexei Orlov gets his time to shine, and they try to retcon Paul's wife (hideous villain in S2!) which makes no sense with how they portrayed her in S2, but I'll take it.
The most powerful performance is that of the "second" Elizaveta Peteovna, played by Angelina Strechina. Incredible. The finale of S3 will leave you feeling something, that's for sure.
I also liked how they would dub the actors in different languages appropriate for the location: Frederick II of Prussia would speak German. In Naples it's dubbed in Italian. The Poles in Polish, et cet. It adds a bit of immersion and I enjoyed it; in fact there is a funny and heartwarming scene between a Russian and German character in S3 that plays on this fact. So you're watching it subtitled one English but can hear the two different languages.
Only criticisms are that the special effects/fighting scenes are pretty weak, even by S3 when you can tell they got a better budget. Also, the Potemkin+Catherine love theme is waaaaay overused. They needed a second theme in S2. :)
You'll learn a lot and enjoy the show along the way. If you enjoyed the intrigue of Game of Thrones, you'll enjoy Ekaterina.
The main actress is so awful, that even great settings don't help
olegych7630 October 2019
The actress is so bad, that it seems like Catherine the Great was a woman with two face expressions only - puzzled and silly.
The actress creates a figure of the empress as of a dumb woman who was just going with a flow.
Why are they speaking Russian?
ellenrls22 September 2019
Season 2 - Less than 1 Star
crackerjack-2502915 August 2019
Thru first 2 episodes of Season 2... Seems that it's been made by 3rd graders in mood for a sandbox fight... Subtitles are very bad... Is the script been written in Kremlin...? Propaganda and jingoism... Characters are shallow, writing is atrocious, acting is horrible... And of course all Russia's neighbors are plotting against Russia but pompous Russian officers are the darlings... :) Costume designs are good... that's what the star is for...
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
