Coming off War and Peace (1965-67), it seemed Sergei Bondarchuk was looking if lightning could strike twice with Waterloo (1970), almost looking like a sequel, minus the philosophy. This time promoting Napoleon from supporting character to protagonist, Waterloo chronicles the Hundred Days and the French Empire's final defeat.
I see Waterloo being called "the real thing"; the Soviet Army kindly took a break from destroying Czechoslovakia to pitch in with the battle scenes, just as they did with War and Peace (only they weren't devastating Czechoslovakia at that time). The result does make for some large battle scenes, but they're just an imitation of War and Peace. The rest of the film tends to drag, unfortunately, and tries to include too much: I didn't see the need to start with Napoleon's initial abdication, then see the whiplash from "France won't follow you" to promoting him to emperor again.
There's no doubt there's a lot of technical competence here, and outside the battle scenes too: the costumes and sets create that period flavour. It's a film set up well and deserved a better script.
I see Waterloo being called "the real thing"; the Soviet Army kindly took a break from destroying Czechoslovakia to pitch in with the battle scenes, just as they did with War and Peace (only they weren't devastating Czechoslovakia at that time). The result does make for some large battle scenes, but they're just an imitation of War and Peace. The rest of the film tends to drag, unfortunately, and tries to include too much: I didn't see the need to start with Napoleon's initial abdication, then see the whiplash from "France won't follow you" to promoting him to emperor again.
There's no doubt there's a lot of technical competence here, and outside the battle scenes too: the costumes and sets create that period flavour. It's a film set up well and deserved a better script.