Thoughts On the 20th Anniversary of Anastasia

*Warning: this post contains spoilers read at your own risk.

On November 21st, 1997, the animated film Anastasia hit theaters.

Loosely based on the myth that Grand Duchess Anastasia Nikolaevna of Russia somehow survived the murder of her family in 1918, Anya (voiced by Meg Ryan) is an orphan who wants nothing more to find her family. Two con men, Dimitri (voiced by John Cusack) and Vladimir (Kelsey Grammer) convince her that she is Anastasia. Unbeknownst to Anya, there is a reward for the safe return of the grand duchess to her grandmother, The Dowager Empress Marie (voiced by Angela Lansbury). Neither Dimitri or Vladimir had any plans of splitting the reward with Anya, if she is believed to be Anastasia.

While this is happening, Rasputin (voiced by Christopher Lloyd) has risen from the dead and is eager to finish what he started ten years ago.

I look at this film, as I do its 1956 predecessor starring Yul Brynner and Ingrid Bergman, as a what if version of history. Especially in regards to the fact that Anastasia and Dimitri lived happily ever after. Marriages between commoners and royalty did not happen in that period.

Granted, the remains of  all of the Romanovs were not found and made saints of the Russian Orthodox Church until after this film came out. This left wiggle room for the screenwriters to use the myth of the surviving Anastasia as the skeleton of the narrative.

As a narrative loosely based on a myth, it’s a reasonably good film. But to hold it up as historical fact requires a bit too much for me.

Do I recommend it? Maybe.

Advertisement

Thoughts On the Senate Tax Bill

The Senate tax bill was passed last night.

I’m not an economist, nor was math my favorite subject when I was in a school.

But common sense tells me two things: first that handwritten edits going to senators just before they are about to vote without reading the draft is not the wisest choice. Elizabeth Warren posted the video below last night.  The fact that the senators were expected to read and vote on a bill that has not yet been clearly defined and cleanly written by its architects just makes it that much more questionable.

Secondly, I have a sneaking suspicion that cutting taxes for corporation and the rich to create a modern version of trickle down economics is not going to go as planned. Ronald Reagan tried it in the 80’s. The results were not what he and his administration hoped they would be.

The fact is that this tax bill will not just affect this generation, but future generations. It is also dubious as to whom it will benefit, despite claims from Trump and the Republicans that middle class Americans will see a positive change in their taxes.

A tax bill, in my uneducated opinion, need to be logical, cleanly written and works for the benefit of the 99%, not the 1%.  From what I can tell, the tax bill as it stands now cannot be defined by any of these factors.