Facing the decline of everything he has worked to obtain, conqueror Napoleon Bonaparte and his army confront the British at the Battle of Waterloo.Facing the decline of everything he has worked to obtain, conqueror Napoleon Bonaparte and his army confront the British at the Battle of Waterloo.Facing the decline of everything he has worked to obtain, conqueror Napoleon Bonaparte and his army confront the British at the Battle of Waterloo.
- Won 2 BAFTA Awards
- 3 wins & 2 nominations total
Sergo Zakariadze
- Blucher
- (as Serghej Zakhariadze)
Donal Donnelly
- O'Connor
- (as Donald Donnelly)
Evgeniy Samoylov
- Cambronne
- (as Eughenj Samoilov)
Storyline
Did you know
- 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.
- GoofsWhen 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.
- Quotes
Duke of Wellington: Next to a battle lost, the saddest thing is a battle won.
- Alternate versionsAccording 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.
- ConnectionsFeatured in The Man Who Saw Tomorrow (1981)
Featured review
The problem most war movies have, especially if they depict one battle, is the addition of extraneous sub-plots. I suppose the film makers think a broader audience will appreciate a movie more if there's an ordinary fellow shoved in that we can follow, and a love interest . . . Perhaps this view is valid. "Waterloo" comes dangerously on the brink of that pitfall in an early scene, but quickly backs up and focuses on who we really need to know to understand the battle: Napoleon and Wellington. Christopher Plummer was born to play Wellington, and he underplays the part beautifully, so that you know what he's thinking by the flick of an eyebrow or the corner of his mouth. Steiger looks like the older Napoleon, and he tends to chew the scenery, but Napoleon flew into unrestrained rages.
The movie does an admirable job of doing what so many lesser war movies don't: it gives you a good idea of what's going on in the field. If you pay attention, you won't be at a loss for the strategy or tactics.
Furthermore, the way it was shot has kept it from aging. It doesn't look like a "spectacle" from the '50s or '60s -- and though it employs a few of the poor film-making choices of its time that late-sixties film makers thought were so cool but which turned out so confusing and easily dated -- it doesn't seem dated at all.
The script has a peculiarity that might well have destroyed it: the writers seem to have excavated every famous quote from Napoleon, Wellington, et al, and shoved them all into the dialogue; and, amazingly, it isn't a distraction.
The worst problem the film has as a whole is its tendency to try to duplicate famous paintings by Meissonier, Lady Butler, and others; sometimes this works, giving the color tones we have come to expect of the period from those very artworks. Occasionally, it's distracting.
There are a few very rough cuts that look pretty bad. But the movie originally was more than four hours long, and the American release suffers from somewhat poor editing and splicing. Surely it's time to bring a full (and wide-screen) release to home video?
However, if you like your historical war movies diluted with love stories and fictional characters, rather than having the real brains behind the battles at center stage, you'll probably be bored to tears by it. If you want as good a recreation of a famous battle as you can probably get, this movie's for you.
The movie does an admirable job of doing what so many lesser war movies don't: it gives you a good idea of what's going on in the field. If you pay attention, you won't be at a loss for the strategy or tactics.
Furthermore, the way it was shot has kept it from aging. It doesn't look like a "spectacle" from the '50s or '60s -- and though it employs a few of the poor film-making choices of its time that late-sixties film makers thought were so cool but which turned out so confusing and easily dated -- it doesn't seem dated at all.
The script has a peculiarity that might well have destroyed it: the writers seem to have excavated every famous quote from Napoleon, Wellington, et al, and shoved them all into the dialogue; and, amazingly, it isn't a distraction.
The worst problem the film has as a whole is its tendency to try to duplicate famous paintings by Meissonier, Lady Butler, and others; sometimes this works, giving the color tones we have come to expect of the period from those very artworks. Occasionally, it's distracting.
There are a few very rough cuts that look pretty bad. But the movie originally was more than four hours long, and the American release suffers from somewhat poor editing and splicing. Surely it's time to bring a full (and wide-screen) release to home video?
However, if you like your historical war movies diluted with love stories and fictional characters, rather than having the real brains behind the battles at center stage, you'll probably be bored to tears by it. If you want as good a recreation of a famous battle as you can probably get, this movie's for you.
- How long is Waterloo?Powered by Alexa
Details
Box office
- Budget
- $25,000,000 (estimated)
- Runtime2 hours 3 minutes
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 2.35 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content