CALIFICACIÓN DE IMDb
7.3/10
14 k
TU CALIFICACIÓN
Con el declive de todo lo que ha luchado por conseguir, el conquistador Napoleón Bonaparte y su ejército se enfrentan a los británicos en la batalla de Waterloo.Con el declive de todo lo que ha luchado por conseguir, el conquistador Napoleón Bonaparte y su ejército se enfrentan a los británicos en la batalla de Waterloo.Con el declive de todo lo que ha luchado por conseguir, el conquistador Napoleón Bonaparte y su ejército se enfrentan a los británicos en la batalla de Waterloo.
- Dirección
- Guionistas
- Elenco
- Ganó 2premios BAFTA
- 3 premios ganados y 2 nominaciones en total
Sergo Zakariadze
- Blucher
- (as Serghej Zakhariadze)
Donal Donnelly
- O'Connor
- (as Donald Donnelly)
Evgeniy Samoylov
- Cambronne
- (as Eughenj Samoilov)
Opiniones destacadas
The miracle of modern CGI is wonderful to watch, but in any scene here, with however many thousands of real extras filmed from helicopter or plane, the local chaos of battle lends credibility to this film. The shot of the French Cavalry invading the field of British Squares is formidable, and the slow disappearance of the view behind clouds does indeed represent the fog of war. Gunpowder is a particularly dirty propellant and on the day itself I doubt much could be seen at all, but then shooting scenes composed mostly of gun smoke would not be terribly helpful or interesting.
I am slightly surprised by some IMDb commentators references to the true quotations appearing in the film attributed to the Duke of Wellington and others, and how they seem to "fit in". If the heroic character portrayed in the film actually said them, then they cannot be out of place! If you look up Wellington's quotations in any dictionary or internet site, his comment about nothing being worse than a battle lost than a battle won appears in several slight variations, in letters, quoted conversations etcetera.
Rather like Zulu, thank goodness this film was made when the focus was the battle and the generals, without endless diversions into moralising and personal stories. Waterloo was a battle between an alliance and a dictator, never mind the small print. This film deserves far greater credit than it was given. See it.
I am slightly surprised by some IMDb commentators references to the true quotations appearing in the film attributed to the Duke of Wellington and others, and how they seem to "fit in". If the heroic character portrayed in the film actually said them, then they cannot be out of place! If you look up Wellington's quotations in any dictionary or internet site, his comment about nothing being worse than a battle lost than a battle won appears in several slight variations, in letters, quoted conversations etcetera.
Rather like Zulu, thank goodness this film was made when the focus was the battle and the generals, without endless diversions into moralising and personal stories. Waterloo was a battle between an alliance and a dictator, never mind the small print. This film deserves far greater credit than it was given. See it.
"Waterloo" is a film epic, with epic performances from Rod Steiger as Napoleon, and Christopher Plummer as Lord Wellington. The battle scenes are historic, with tens of thousands of extra's and not a hint of any c.g.i.. The calvary charges in "Waterloo" surpass any battle spectacle I have ever seen. I love "Gettysburg" (1993), however the magnitude of the battle in "Waterloo" makes the charge in "Gettysburg" seem like a minor skirmish. If "Waterloo" has a weakness, it concerns the lack of character development in the supporting cast. Although Rod Steiger and Christopher Plummer are well developed, the rest of the soldiers come across simply as pawns on a chess board. Highly recommended. - MERK
I watched this movie for the first time in about 10 years today and one of the things that strikes me the most is how much more real it looks that the more recent war movies.
CGI is great for many things, but often detail get overlooked. In this film, because they are actually moving extras around there are clouds of dust everywhere. When the cannon fire, the black powder persists. The film has a real sense all through it of the fog of war.
On a personal note, I served in a Highland regiment, and it is a thrill to see a film where all of the kilts are not the same. The 92nd wear Gordon, Camerons wear Cameron of Erracht, and wonder of wonders both served at Waterloo.
While the terrain shown in the film is nothing like the field, the strength of the film lies the in characterizations of Wellington and Napoleon. Both actors are at the top of their game, although some specifics are off (Wellington wasn't a aristocrat - more younger son of Anglo-Irish gentry).
One of the things that I like about the film is the way the director has cut several times to show Napoleon and Wellington react to the same information. It does a great job of contrasting the differences and similarities of the two leaders.
Visually the film was breathtaking when I first say it in 1970, and it remains so.
CGI is great for many things, but often detail get overlooked. In this film, because they are actually moving extras around there are clouds of dust everywhere. When the cannon fire, the black powder persists. The film has a real sense all through it of the fog of war.
On a personal note, I served in a Highland regiment, and it is a thrill to see a film where all of the kilts are not the same. The 92nd wear Gordon, Camerons wear Cameron of Erracht, and wonder of wonders both served at Waterloo.
While the terrain shown in the film is nothing like the field, the strength of the film lies the in characterizations of Wellington and Napoleon. Both actors are at the top of their game, although some specifics are off (Wellington wasn't a aristocrat - more younger son of Anglo-Irish gentry).
One of the things that I like about the film is the way the director has cut several times to show Napoleon and Wellington react to the same information. It does a great job of contrasting the differences and similarities of the two leaders.
Visually the film was breathtaking when I first say it in 1970, and it remains so.
The film version of Waterloo is almost totally historically accurate to the actual events of 1815; the events of that year make for a great story to tell, and it is translated extremely well to film. Even with some dramatization and poetic license thrown in we see what these men were really like and we get to understand what motivated Napoleon to take the course of action that he did. The costumes and sets are very well done, and you almost think you stepped out of a time machine when you see them. The film is a little longer than most, and being familiar with the actual events leading up to the battle helps to understand the film, so this movie may not appeal to everyone. Still, Waterloo is a great film, and while hard to find on video you should watch it if you ever get the chance.
There is no need to extol the virtues of this movie. Probably the greatest war film ever made with superb period detail, the movie has always suffered from poor distribution. There was a VHS edition in the 1980s but it seems unlikely that it will make it onto DVD in the US. There is a British edition which has about 10 additional minutes over the earlier US VHS version. Somewhere there is an original Russian version that is rumored to contain well over 3 hours of footage. Perhaps these missing scenes fill in more the Prussian involvement in the battle, and may include their earlier defeat at Ligny which the movie only briefly shows as an aftermath scene. The same is true with the British at Quartre Bras. Some day maybe a directors cut will show these deleted scenes. Until then Waterloo shall remain an incomplete classic! Still, as it is the movie is a feast for all students of warfare in this period. Everything is accurate down to uniforms, military music, and weapons.
¿Sabías que…?
- TriviaAt over £12 million, it was one of the most expensive films ever made at the time. Dino De Laurentiis had wanted to make it for 10 years, but his production company couldn't afford it. Then Mosfilm stepped in, contributing over £4 million, 20,000 soldiers, a full brigade of Soviet cavalry, and vast numbers of engineers and laborers to prepare locations and facilities for 48 days of shooting in the Ukraine. If it had been made in the West without the Red Army's assistance, it would have cost 3 times as much. To recreate the battlefield, the Soviets bulldozed 2 hills, deepened a valley, laid miles of roads, transplanted 5,000 trees, sowed fields of rye, barley, and wildflowers, and reconstructed 4 historic buildings. The production included Italian and Russian technicians, English and French advisors, Yugoslav stuntmen, and actors from America, Canada, England, Ireland, Italy, France, and Russia.
- ErroresWhen the Prussian troops appear, the music of "Deutschland ueber alles" can be heard. "Deutschland ueber alles" only became the national anthem of Germany in 1922. It was never used by Prussia.
- Citas
Duke of Wellington: Next to a battle lost, the saddest thing is a battle won.
- Versiones alternativasAccording to an article written by the film's editor and associate producer Richard C. Meyer, the longest version is the 132 minute version. This has been confirmed by Vladimir Dorsal, the film's First Assistant and later the head of Mosfilm in Moscow. He says that they only have the 132m version in their vaults and no longer 4 hours version ever existed. The myth may derive from an earlier part of Meyer's article when he states that the rough cut was 4 hours long - not unusual for a film of this scope and scale. But after much discussion the present length was agreed on. He also says he stupidly didn't make a dupe of this rough cut, a usual process in post production. So this 'cut' will never see the light of day. It is clear from the cast list that many characters were cut. The film was planned as a Road Show release but by 1970 the practice had lost favor with the studios. Columbia Pictures also shortened CROMWELL for the same reason. Richard Heffer who play a major featured role in the film says the script as filmed was much longer than the film that came out that many of the cast had huge chunks of their roles deleted.
- ConexionesEdited into Zerkalo vremeni (1976)
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y agrega a la lista de videos para obtener recomendaciones personalizadas
- How long is Waterloo?Con tecnología de Alexa
Detalles
Taquilla
- Presupuesto
- USD 25,000,000 (estimado)
- Tiempo de ejecución2 horas 14 minutos
- Mezcla de sonido
- Relación de aspecto
- 2.35 : 1
Contribuir a esta página
Sugiere una edición o agrega el contenido que falta
Principales brechas de datos
By what name was La batalla de Waterloo (1970) officially released in India in Hindi?
Responda