It is a performances centric movie

As somebody who had not heard any of this before, it became a curious phenomenon to sit and watch a film and slowly have the realities begin to click into place.

The film creates a perfect balance between action and depth of basic needs, in the midst of an infertile atmosphere.

The acting is good, and the firecracker script has some excellent ideas.

The costume drama, a genre I struggle with; wealthy, upper-class people with problems and conflicts I just can't summon any interest in. However there is a handful which I do manage to enjoy and Queen Christina is one of them; what is it about Queen Christina which makes it compelling? The craftsmanship of the underappreciated director Rouben Mamoulian is certainly a factor but ultimately I believe it all comes down to the fascinating individual at the center of the film.Queen Christina is the role Greta Garbo was born to play, the androgynous, unconventional Swedish film star as the androgynous, unconventional 17th Century Swedish Queen. Christina is one of the great gender-bending characters in film history, referring to herself in masculine pronouns to having what could be mistaken as the body of a man; just look at those incredibly broad shoulders Garbo possesses when they are exposed. In the opening to Queen Christina her confidant Axel Oxenstierna (Lewis Milestone) speaks of how Christina was brought up as a boy in order to prepare her for the throne. This does raise the question; do positions of power require a sacrifice of feminine virtues? If the role was reversed of a king dressing and living as a woman, just how powerful and noble would such a king come off? Likewise while it is a likely possibility of Christina being bisexual, the girl on girl kiss she shares with Countess Ebba Sparre (Elizabeth Young) never struck me as a particularly romantic kiss and more of a sign of friendship however Christina speaking of the two of them going to the county for three nights would certainly imply otherwise. Yet even if you're the biggest tomboy in the world like Christina, there still exists in her the desire to be a woman with her proclamation to love interest Antonio (John Gilbert) "that it had been so enchanting to be a woman. Not a queen, just a woman in man's arms".The fascinating figure of Queen Christina goes beyond her disregard of social norms. She is a figure of great intellect with her values of personal freedom, the quest for knowledge, self-improvement as well as spending the few spare moments she has reading books ("One can feel nostalgia for places one has never seen" - so true). As a Queen she has a great sense of national pride and has a fierce devotion to the individual citizens of her county; a romanticised depiction of a world leader many of us wish was more of a reality.The one portion of Queen Christina which puts realism to the side is that in which she escapes from her palace to the country in order to get away from the strain of being a ruler. I enjoy the trope of a public figure in power sneaking out disguised as a commoner as seen in films such as Roman Holiday or The Shoes of the Fisherman. What is hard to shallow however is everyone Christina meets on her escapade including future lover Antonio and the alumni of the inn she spends the night mistaking her for a man. I know it was unusual back then for a woman to ride on horseback, carry a sword and pistol and go to a tavern to drink but she still clearly has the face of a woman. Regardless I can overlook this lack of realism as it doesn't impair my enjoyment of the film. John Gilbert shows in Queen Christina that he was an effective presence in talkies (contrary to the popular belief that his failure to make the jump from silent to talkies destroyed his career). I don't find him quite great but he is good enough. After a night of lovemaking with Antonio, Christina compares the experience to how God must have felt when he created the world; yep, she went there. The ending of Queen Christina on the other hand in one which inspires even if everything is not tied up in a neat bow. It is a tragedy in one sense but with one of the greatest uses of close up in film history of Garbo's expressionless face looking out to sea, the viewer gets to write their own ending.

Greta Garbo Fans Love this Movie and it is Routinely Mentioned as One of Her Best. It is a Mesmerizing Performance and She Dominates the Screen in All Her Scenes. The Film Looks Extraordinary and Ahead of its Time Thanks to the Director's Keen Eye and Playful Style. It is One of those Period Costume Films that Most Times Linger on the Sets and Wardrobe to Boring Distraction, but not here.The Film is Haunting and Enjoyable in the Best Movie Tradition Combining all the Elements into a Seamless Entertainment that has Staying Power and Charisma. Garbo is the Star and all the Trimmings are Laid Upon Her with an Ease of Production. Her Co-Star John Gilbert seems to be in Awe of the Actress as is the Audience.The Much Talked About Bedroom Scene and Christina's Memorizing is a Metaphor for the Euphoria and Only Secondarily an Exercise. When She Opines about God and how He must have Felt after Creation it is Obvious She has had what now would be Called a Transcendental Encounter and has Become One with the Inanimate.Thus is the Motivation for the Remainder of Her Actions and the Romanticism is Full Blooded from here on. The Queen/Garbo Androgyny is also Up Front and Adds to the Film's Charm. Overall One of the Best Movies of a Decade Full of Good Movies and if You are New to Garbo there is No Better Place to Start. A Movie that is Unforgettable.

How ironic that back to back I saw what I considered to be the weakest Garbo I've seen ("Anna Karenina"), and the best, "Queen Christina." This is truly one of the great Hollywood films and the finest performance Garbo ever gave. She is brilliant as queen of her native Sweden, a role she was meant for. It's got an excellent cast with her finest co-star, John Gilbert, who co-starred in many of her silent films. The studios destroyed Gilbert by spreading the rumor (as they did with Louise Brooks) that his voice recorded badly. This was totally untrue. His voice in this movie is full-bodied and strong. He and Garbo have screen chemistry to burn. There is a love scene where Garbo walks around studying the room at an inn where she and Gilbert fell in love (He: "What are you doing?" She: "I'm remembering") that has got to rank as one of the most romantic and curiously strange of any to come out of the Hollywood dream machine. And ultimately, the film has that justifiably famous final and luminous shot of Garbo on the deck of a ship looking out to sea as she sails off to her destiny without the man she loves. Directed by Rouben Mamoulian, it has some of the most beautiful cinematography of the period. There's a single shot (a matte painting) of queen Garbo walking through the corridor of the castle at night that took my breath away. I went back and re-watched it a number of times. Wow! Masterful direction. This is the one Garbo film not to miss. Can't recommend it highly enough.

I spent 100 minutes trying to decide how much to penalize "Queen Christina" because a key part of the plot was ludicrous. That's how long it took me to watch this movie again.Thanks to the mistaken identity scenes, I considered giving "Christina" a thumbs-down, but ultimately rated it highly because it is a cinematic masterpiece aside from the aforementioned problem.Frankly, I was astounded that a movie this mature was produced in 1933. The dialogue is at a very high intellectual level with the characters debating topics like war and culture and challenging the conventional mores of 17th century Sweden.The dialogue fits seamlessly into the plot. In contrast, the writers of "Hamlet" and "The Lion In Winter" seem to be consciously creating memorable lines that often don't match the characters. The direction is also well thought-out. There are scenes where not one word is uttered, but Greta Garbo conveys the importance of something that just occurred via her expressions and actions.And "Christina" deserves enormous credit for boldly including topics that I thought were not permitted on the screen in the early 1930s. There is blatant lesbianism, a half-dressed hooker, talk about a queen being a slut, sex between virtual strangers, and a shot at religion.More importantly, I was very interested in the movie's primary character from start to finish. Christina was strong as a 6-year-old and as a woman with a powerful will who wanted to live her own life and was willing and able to confront people who disagreed with her.Given the movie's intelligence, how can so many people be so stupid that they believe Christina is a man just because she is wearing pants? I knew nothing about this movie before I watched it so I thought at first that the Spanish envoy believed she was a man because he first saw her from a distance and the innkeeper reflexively addressed authority-like figures as men.Then, Garbo took off her hat. She talked like a woman, looked like a woman, and made NO attempt to disguise herself. I didn't buy Dustin Hoffman and Jack Lemmon as women, but at least they wore disguises in "Tootsie" and "Some Like It Hot." And their dressing as women was explained!!This movie needed a scene where Christina says something before going horseback riding about wanting to experience life as a commoner and at least implying that this meant pretending to be a man. And she needed a disguise so the fact that EVERY stranger thinks she is a man is plausible.I was so upset by the mistaken-identity stupidity that I thought about "Christina" giving a 5. Then, I watched it again. This reinforced my appreciation for the rest of the movie.I gave "The Graduate" a 9 although Mrs. Robinson's daughter falling for Dustin after he treated her like dirt on a date and stalked her was implausible. I reasoned that a short scene with the daughter telling her Dad that she admired Dustin during their school years would have made her accepting two of his bad behaviors (but not his sleeping with her Mom) more plausible.Using similar reasoning, I gave "Christina" an 8. The absence of one 30-second scene just can't erase the fact that this movie is otherwise very smart and cinematically advanced.ZWrite