Stoutor It's not great by any means, but it's a pretty good movie that didn't leave me filled with regret for investing time in it.

Gurlyndrobb While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

BelSports This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.

Phillipa Strong acting helps the film overcome an uncertain premise and create characters that hold our attention absolutely.

HotToastyRag There are two types of people who will like Catherine the Great history buffs and Catherine Zeta-Jones fans. I happen to be both, so I was highly entertained by this romantic biopic of Catherine II, in which the lead actress plays the title character in more ways than one.Catherine is married to the future Czar, Hannes Jaenicke, and while her marriage leaves much to be desired, she learns to enjoy life in other ways. She takes a lover, Craig McLachlin, and learns the subtle and powerful art of politics in preparation for her reign. With friends, advisors, and adversaries around every corner, Catherine has a very colorful and eventful road ahead of her. With a supporting cast of Jeanne Moreau, Omar Sharif, Mel Ferrer, John Rhys Davies, Ian Richardson, Paul McGann, and Christoph Waltz, the movie will grab and keep your attention from start to finish.While Catherine Zeta-Jones looks nothing like the historical figure she's portraying, she's still mesmerizing on the screen. She's never looked more beautiful, and Barbara Baum's exquisite costumes will make it impossible to choose only one gown as your favorite. The film is just as, if not more so, entertaining if you're only interested in fashion rather than history. With such incredible eye candy to stare at-the lead actress and the clothes she wears-I'm sure you'll be captivated. And you'll probably declare Catherine Zeta-Jones as the most beautiful actress in all existence.

SnoopyStyle It's 1745. Catherine (Catherine Zeta-Jones) is a 15 year old princess of a small German principality pushed into an arranged political marriage to Grand Duke Peter by Czarina Elizabeth. After 7 years, they still haven't consummate the marriage and Elizabeth arranges to get an heir at all costs. Catherine learns to play politics and maneuver the palace intrigue. She has a son but Peter continues to be abusive. She joins forces with Bestuzhev (Brian Blessed) to continue the war against the Prussians while Peter and Vorontzov (Ian Richardson) are pushing to end it. The Czarina wants victory but she dies. Peter is crowned Czar and ends the war. Catherine falls for military man Potemkin (Paul McGann). She seizes control with military and church support. She kills Peter and expands the empire by defeating the Ottoman Empire. She aims to end serfdom and reform society but is pushed back. When Pugachev (John Rhys-Davies) pleads for reforms, he is imprisoned. He escapes and eventually takes on the identity of the deceased Czar Peter leading a revolt. This is slightly before Catherine Zeta-Jones attains her full stardom. She shows quite a lot of charisma and some sexuality for this TV movie. However there is limited style and a less-than-dramatic script. It's a historical costume drama of highlights of a great ruler. It tries to be a romance melodrama but the audience can never buy any of her relationships. She tries her hardest but this is not great romantic material. She and Paul McGann have limited chemistry. They mostly yell or overact in a romantic melodrama. There are other great actors in this and they do some good work especially Ian Richardson. The action is limited and staged amateurishly. The main bright spot is Zeta-Jones and it's interesting to see her lead this.

patcars This 100 minute version severely massacred an important period of history, omitting serious events and consequences, lacking in reasoning and rationale, short in character development and recreating history superficially and with little respect to timing and reality of events. The direction was insipid; the action was disjointed; the acting seemed unmotivated and uninspired; the musical score was more suited to a western; the screenplay was incoherent; suspense was linear; the story arc lacking. There were points left unresolved along with loose ends about what happened. Except for the costumes and sets, the film was mediocre at best and trivial at worst.

TWD_Cliff_Notes Although fairly interesting to watch, Katharina is very historically inaccurate and biased, which is partly due to the horrible miscasting. Just to name a few: 1. Catherine Zeta-Jones as Empress Catherine II: a actress who is young, beautiful, dark in complexion and extremely attractive is certainly a poor choice to play a pale, plain middle-aged nimphomaniac. No one would ever address the real Catherine II as "you pretty thing", as Pugachev did in the film! 2. Jeanne Moreau as Empress Elizabeth: a 70-year old playing a 40-year old (I think this is self-explanatory) 3. Omar Sharif as Count Razumovsky: a 65-year old with a typically mediterranean appearance as a 45-year-old Ukrainian... 4. Rhys-Meyers as Pugachev... Don't know where to start... Apart from the fact that the actor is once again much older that his character, Rhys-Meyers is a BAD choice to play a violent, charismatic, almost demonic, and at the same time very folkish, Emelian Pugachev. Rhys-Meyers just doesn't look like an escaped convict-mass-murdered-highway robber-impostor or any of what real-life Pugachev was. Apart from that, a particularly striking misportrayal is the execution of Pugachev. The filmmakers have it take place in the summer in front of a crowd of about 5, while in reality it took place in the middle of winter on the Red Square in Moscow in front of a crowd of perhaps a 100,000, and was an extremely dramatic event, one the biggest public spectacles in Russia's history. So much for the fillmakers... Also, the story of Catherine's marriage to Peter III is portarayed in a highly prejudiced manner, drawing an all-too-clear line between the supposedly "good guys" (namely Catherine, Orlov, and the bunch) an the "horrible monster" Peter III. The story was not nearly so black-and-white in reality. Apart from that, the film makes fairly decent viewing. Balancing the two, I give it a 6/10