“This is a work of ficÂtion,” declares the disÂclaimer we’ve all noticed durÂing the end credÂits of movies. “Any simÂiÂlarÂiÂty to actuÂal perÂsons, livÂing or dead, or actuÂal events, is pureÂly coinÂciÂdenÂtal.” In most casÂes, this may seem so trivÂial that it hardÂly merÂits a menÂtion, but the very same disÂclaimer also rolls up after picÂtures very clearÂly intendÂed to repÂreÂsent actuÂal events or perÂsons, livÂing or dead. Most of us would write it all off as one more absurÂdiÂty creÂatÂed by the elabÂoÂrate panÂtomime of AmerÂiÂcan legal culÂture, but a closÂer look at its hisÂtoÂry reveals a much more intriguÂing oriÂgin.
As told in the ChedÂdar video above, the stoÂry begins with Rasputin and the Empress, a 1932 HolÂlyÂwood movie about the titÂuÂlar real-life mysÂtic and his involveÂment with the court of Nicholas II, the last emperÂor of RusÂsia. HavÂing been killed in 1916, Rasputin himÂself wasÂn’t around to get litiÂgious about his vilÂlainÂous porÂtrayÂal (by no less a perÂformer than Lionel BarÂryÂmore, inciÂdenÂtalÂly, actÂing alongÂside his sibÂlings John and Ethel as the prince and czaÂriÂna). It was actuÂalÂly one of Rasputin’s surÂvivÂing killers, an exiled arisÂtoÂcrat named Felix Yusupov, who sued MGM, accusÂing them of defamÂing his wife, Princess IriÂna Yusupov, in the form of the charÂacÂter Princess Natasha.
The film casts Princess Natasha as a supÂportÂer of Rasputin, writes Slate’s DunÂcan Fyfe, “but the mysÂtic, wary of her husÂband, hypÂnoÂtizes and rapes her, renÂderÂing Natasha — by his logÂic, with which she agrees — unfit to be a wife. Yusupov conÂtendÂed that as viewÂers would equate ChegodiÂeff with Yusupov, so would they link Natasha with IriÂna,” though in realÂiÂty IriÂna and Rasputin nevÂer even met. In an EngÂlish court, “the jury found in her favor, awardÂing her ÂŁ25,000, or about $125,000. MGM had to take the film out of cirÂcuÂlaÂtion for decades and purge the offendÂing scene for all time,” though a small piece of it remains in Rasputin and the Empress’ origÂiÂnal trailÂer.
Things might have gone in MGM’s favor had the film not includÂed a title card announcÂing that “a few of the charÂacÂters are still alive — the rest met death by vioÂlence.” The stuÂdio was advised that they’d have done well to declare the exact oppoÂsite, a pracÂtice soon impleÂmentÂed across HolÂlyÂwood. It didÂn’t take long for the movies to start havÂing fun with it, introÂducÂing jokey variÂaÂtions on the soon-familÂiar boilÂerÂplate. Less than a decade after Rasputin and the Empress, one nonÂsenÂsiÂcal musiÂcal comÂeÂdy preÂviÂousÂly feaÂtured here on Open CulÂture) opened with the disÂclaimer that “any simÂiÂlarÂiÂty between HELLZAPOPPIN’ and a motion picÂture is pureÂly coinÂciÂdenÂtal” — a traÂdiÂtion more recentÂly upheld by South Park.
via KotÂtke
RelatÂed conÂtent:
The Romanovs’ Last Ball Brought to Life in ColÂor PhoÂtographs (1903)
Watch an 8‑Part Film AdapÂtaÂtion of Tolstoy’s Anna KarenÂiÂna Free Online
Watch the HugeÂly AmbiÂtious SoviÂet Film AdapÂtaÂtion of War and Peace Free Online (1966–67)
Based in Seoul, ColÂin Marshall writes and broadÂcasts on cities, lanÂguage, and culÂture. His projects include the SubÂstack newsletÂter Books on Cities and the book The StateÂless City: a Walk through 21st-CenÂtuÂry Los AngeÂles. FolÂlow him on TwitÂter at @colinmarshall.