Weak 9 innit. The sheer scale of this work (15,000 dressed extras!) makes it one of the great Period War films ever. It was also one of the most expensive of its time, and is probably why many western studios refused to finance it. Some of the ADR really grinded my gears but hey what do you expect for 1970 and huge (verging on biblical) battle scenes shot on location. Steiger's narration in particular tickled good parts of my brain (Plummer's wasn't bad either), as I watch more and more films I learn that my ratings live and die on the quality of the voiceover delivery (if there is any).

As is often the case with my 9's, Waterloo's backstory really affects how I think about this film. Reading about what the Soviets did to recreate the Battle of Waterloo is astounding, just check the Wikipedia article. I doubt private companies would have gone to such lengths. Sergei Bondarchuk and his crew really foiled Kubrick's plans to make his own Napoleon film (he would instead go on to make Barry Lyndon, which as it so happens is another 9 in my book). I wonder if Ridley Scott was inspired by this in the early stages of his career... certainly he committed gargantuan effort to his own Napoleon film (which I am looking forward to watching) last year.

I do very much enjoy the anti-war undercurrent throught, I must say. There are no "good guys" here, just carnage and soldiers screaming for mercy (in the final battle).

A majestic piece, influential on almost every war film to follow in its wake. If you want to see what LotR epic battle scenes would look like without CGI, just put this on.

'Waterloo' is a film that, while technically impressive, feels emotionally distant. Bondarchuk and cinematographer Armando Nannuzzi never hide the influence of Napoleonic paintings on the visual language of the film, but that's essentially what 'Waterloo' becomes - a piece of history told at arm's length from the distance of time. As difficult as it is to emotionally engage with, 'Waterloo' is still an impressive production, all the more so as a demonstration of Sergei Bondarchuk's remarkable ability for balancing the inner world of his characters and the spiritual horror of war with the ultimate expression of the epic in cinema. For those reasons alone, 'Waterloo' is certainly a film that deserves attention.

Read Daniel's full article...
https://www.maketheswitch.com.au/article/review-waterloo-an-epic-recreation-of-the-legendary-battle

Sergei Bondarchuk ought to be commended for his really rather sterling effort at re-creating some of the one hundred days of Napoleon's campaign following his escape from exile on Elba in 1815. Rod Steiger is superbly cast and imperious as the maniacal but genius French Emperor who very nearly conquered the mainland continent of Europe, despite the comprehensive alliance lined up against him - and led, at the denouement, but his nemesis the Duke of Wellington (Christopher Plummer). Some considerable effort has gone into designing and delivering this whole spectacle of a film - from the grand palatial settings, the costumes, intricate uniforms - and the battle scenes are as authentic as I've seen since that other Napoleonic epic "Austerlitz" (1960). Steiger portrays the Emperor in a characterful and personal fashion; he is full of the megalomaniac but also the portrayal indicates a little more of what made the great man tick (or not). Having read somewhat more about Wellington (I'm a Brit), I was somewhat disappointed by the slightly smug - almost foppish - portrayal of the "Grand Old" Duke by Plummer. He looked the part, but somehow his efforts were always outshone onscreen - by the fleeting appearances of Jack Hawkins, the glamorous Virginia McKenna - even by a squealing piglet. That said, though - this is a film about a battle and the action scenes are superb. They look and sound genuine engendering no end of sympathy for the soldiers who served as little more than cannon/bullet/bayonet fodder as they marched around (and fell) in the mud. The narrative is quite tight; we don't get distracted by too many romantic interludes or other daft diversions, and once it gets up steam it is an effective depiction of a pretty gruesome conflagration that history (for the winners, at any rate) has successfully sanitised. Bit long, we could do with less of the preamble, but once it gets going it presents a convincing effort from Steiger and is well worth watching as an example of large scale epic cinema before the computer took over the role of the extras, the sets, the story....