Just to point out a few things that I made a mistake on or to clarify. I mistakenly said Dr, Zivago but I meant to say War and Peace, so my apologies there. I make reference to Lions led by Donkeys which was popularised during the Crimean war to describe the British, but as the phrase has become widely known it is often used for British troops of other time periods upto and including WW1, I am not saying it was created during this Napoleonic period. Also as mentioned, Marshall Soult said of the British during the Peninsular Campaign that they were Bad soldiers because they did not know how to retreat. With those points aside, I hope you enjoyed and will give the movie a watch. Thanks again all.
Can't count the times I've seen this film. I first saw it on my 12th birthday, which is on June 18th - I was unaware of the significance at the time - and have been obsessed with it ever since. It's an unsurpassed masterpiece of cinema imo.
I have gone back to this film many times through my life and I made sure my son watched it when he was young.... he is now 30. We still quote lines from this film and I also think its a masterpiece. Thanks for posting.
He also starred in Sidney Lumet's Fail Safe (1964). Great flick. Unfortunately came out immediately after Dr. Strangelove after which no one (at the time) could take it ad seriously as it should have been.
I watched this as a 15 yo when it came out, and have probably rewatched it 3-4 times. While fuzzy on some points of accuracy, the movie portrays the feel of that time period fantastically. Rod Steiger evokes the drive and determination of Napoleon so well, and Christopher Plummer, while a bit too snarky in some scenes, gives us a portrait of Wellington as the cool, calculating, decisive general that he was. It's probably time for me to give this pic another viewing. Thanks for the review, Will.
I wholeheartedly concur with your opinion of Steiger's performance. In my not-at-all-humble opinion, the best best large- or small- screen depiction of Bonaparte ever, without exception. Re: Plummer's "snarkiness", it's not overdone at all. Wellington was well-known throughout the British Army -- and British society as a whole -- for his acid tongue and sarcastic nature....
I didn't express myself clearly about Plummer's version of Wellington. The scene where Wellington tells the bugler to stop trumpeting then he follows up immediately with "You'll hurt yourself," has always rubbed me the wrong way exactly because Wellington was dry and caustic. The slight swerve into comedy relief just grates on me. Cheers!
I would have been 6 when I saw Waterloo in the Cinema. I was already hooked on Napoleonic Warfare thanks to Airfix, and thanks to my brother and his friends playing Table Top Wargames. It was a given that I would adore the film. I didn't. The first hour was a tough watch for a young child. However, when the battle starts... Bliss. Amazing, Fantastic, Incredible. I still watch the film from time to time. (Far off Background soldiers wore paper uniforms and were armed with solid wood and cardboard weapons. The majority of the Soviet troops were of lowly peasant stock, who had never seen a plastic bag containing their kit before. The logistics of the film are fascinating).
I worked as an usher at the Royal Premier of this film in Leicester Square, London. On duty in the cloakroom. While the film was showing the girls tried on the fur coats and the guys the bearskin helmets the guardsmen had left with us. At the end of the film the public were kept in the auditorium while the Queen and Duke left. We formed a 'guard of honour' for them to walk between.
I liked one scene when Napoleon asks if they have enough time and Ney looks at the height of the sun. In those days watches were rare and you judge the time by the height of the sun.
This is where my passion for Napoleonic wargaming started. First watched it with Dad when it first appeared on UK TV in the late 70s (and countless times since) - bought the Airfix 1/72 figs the next day. Still have them - still wargaming with them too
First saw this film 54 years ago, I was 10 years old, it instantly became my favourite film. All these years later it remains so. The Direction, soundtrack, script, photography, are sublime, the acting authentic and convincing beyond fault, Christopher Plummer is the most charismatic and commanding Wellington I have seen, Rod Steiger simply is Napoleon, he dominates this movie, a truly great portrayal.
Saw this in Blackpool with my best friend his younger brother and my brother when I was 12 years of age. I've seen it numerous times since. One of the best war films ever made. The charge of the Scots Greys was one of the best scenes in the movie. I always tried to recreate this with my Airfix soldiers. Pure magic.
My late father took me to see this in the West End when it was first released for my 0th birthday and I have never forgotten the experience! I do wish that I still had the booklet that came with our tickets, it tied the scenes in the film to the actual locations in the battle. Attention to detail that we don't see any more.
Beyond all doubt this was Rod Steiger's greatest performance in a lifetime of great performances. If you ever get the chance, watch it the way I did, with a new print, on a fifty-foot screen.
Not Sergey Bondarchuk's first Napoleonic era film! If you enjoy Waterloo, I must must must entreat you to watch his monumental version of War and Peace, made around 5 years before Waterloo, with a similar vast scale. The three main battle scenes (Hollabrun/Schon-Graben, Austerlitz and Borodino are outstanding. Some thoughtful soul has edited a shortened version of the Battle of Borodino, for anyone interested. The full battle in the film runs to about 45-50 minutes, but the editor has cut all the W&P--specific action concerning Pierre and Prince Andrei. All the "highlights" of the battle are featured, including the carnage at the Bagration "fleches" , the death of Bagration and the massed heavy cavalry charge. Those familiar with "Waterloo" will recognise Sergey Bondarchuk's style, especially in the scene where the French heavy cavalry charge the Russian infantry squares, and the the end of the battle where Napoleon rides across the stricken field. ruclips.net/video/fsBRaAdzWrY/видео.html
Totally agree....... Watched the W&P series, just as Waterloo (1970) many times !!! Still my favourites regarding the Napoleonic era. Just as many other great old movies, such as Ben Hur (1959), King of Kings (1961), The Ten Commandments (1956), and David and Bathsheba (1951). Certainly not the modern trash & remakes of today !!! *1 CORINTHIANS 15:1-4 [kjv]* !!!
War and Peace is a better film than Waterloo as there is much more depth to the story. It’s ironic that Bondarchuk was Ukrainian and that Waterloo was itself filmed in western Ukraine.
The phrase "lions led by donkeys" originated in classical antiquity, but was popularized in the 20th century to describe the relationship between British soldiers and their commanders during World War I. This phrase was never used to describe British Generals in the Napoleonic era
Interesting, thanks for sharing. Its interesting how phrases often get repeated so often that they end up all over. Thanks for watching and the correction.
I was 17 years old when I saw this film for the first time in 1970 at the cinema. I am a history buff and it is my favourite subject. I thought this film was absolutely amazing and fairly true to what actually happened. Some thought Steiger's performance as Napoleon was over acted but I thought both he and Christopher Plummer were excellent in the lead roles. As you say, no CGI which made the action scenes so realistic and the cavalry charges were brilliant. I also like the fact the film covered the lead up to the battle and not just the day of the battle itself.
This movie made my heart beat for the french when I saw it as a young boy. This said by a German Prussian ... isn't it the highest praise? Today of course i have to say i think, it should be represented how low the percentage of actual English and how many allied troops where there and of course the under recognition of the Prussian Role...we (if you may forgive me to say so) won that day...the English were finished.
"This man is a Lion! His courage gave me Europe!" (Napoleon about Ney in 1807 after the battle of Friedland). "He behave like a madman! He lost my cavalry! He lost France!!!" (Napoleon about Ney after Waterloo).
One of the best war movies of all time. It is right up there with Zulu and Cross of Iron. Rod Steiger should have won an Oscar for his performance. The subject matter was not popular with U.S. audiences because the U.S. was not involved, which indeed hurt the film. The film was cut up by the studio which causes a situation where Blucher and the Prussians just appear on the field of battle with no lead up.
I have seen the movie several times and in my lifetime, been lucky enough to exercise British cavalry horses. I have also handled a couple of duelling pistols, now owned by a friend, that were once owned by the original owner, Lord Uxbridge, played by Terence Alexander in this movie.
Great movie. Saw this when it came out with my parents. A real attempt to hit a lot of historical points and certainly uses quotes as reported. There is some whacky 70's film making going on in this one and Rod Steger always struck me as a strange choice for Napoleon, but he was fine. Love the movie.
The scale and scope is amazing, nothing matches this. I had this on pirate vhs video copied from Blockbuster and was the only video I refused to record over
Thanks, nice review. Important to note that Waterloo’s director was Soviet Ukrainian/Russian Sergei Bondarchuk, who three years earlier had directed the epic Russian film of War and Peace, a 7 hour film often shown as a series of 4. The most expensive film made in the Soviet Union. As well as Austerlitz and other battles in the early part, one whole hour and one instalment of the film was devoted to the major Battle of Borodino, about the same as Waterloo (which is about 2hrs 10 min, not 30). Bondarchuk also used about 13,000 extras, mostly from the Soviet Army as later in Waterloo. The Borodino battle scenes were more powerful and impressive than in Waterloo in my memory, but the acting and dialogue in the battle perhaps more arresting in Waterloo. The battle scenes in Waterloo were filmed in Western Ukraine. The film was a co-production between Dino de Laurentis’s company and Soviet Mosfilm studios. I’d agree with those who consider War and Peace the grandest epic film ever made. Well worth a watch. Certainly the longest epic film - about 3 Star Wars episodes!, but no CGI and better storylines and dialogue.
Steiger probably caught Napoleon better than any other non-French actor (despite the fact that Napoleon's "Frenchness" was marginally questionable.) I will grant Napoleon the dignity of his deeply held belief of his French soul. But he started out as a Corsican...and if the Corsican's hadn't rejected him early in his career, he probably would have accepted that. Plummer did well by Wellington but he was helped by the massive amount of documentation of the Iron Duke's life, abilities and quotes. All in all, the movie makes you believe you're on that battlefield and watching reality. There are historical flaws...but they weren't anything that destroyed the believability. Some of the British junior officers were actually killed at Quatre Bras, but that doesn't take away the fact that the British lost a horrific number of junior officers during those days. Their gallantry and sacrifice as well as that of the French were unquestionable. You want to be there. As for the setting of the battle, I doubt anyone could have staged a historic battle better than they did in this film. Compared to the absurd things we see in films today that purport to be "historical" they performed miracles.
It's an excellent film - I had a "magazine" about the film when I was doing the period at school,, and it really helped. I have also been to the battlefield. But for anyone who likes "Waterloo" can I also recommend the film "Gettysburg", which is even longer (like two DVDs!) but is just as good, with thousands of extras, and meticulous accuracy.
Any Army who can choose the ground usually wins. Napoleon knew he had to defeat Wellington and Wellington stood on the strongest position. Is it myth or truth that Wellington chose Waterloo as his battlefield months prior?. If so, it was very cleverly done.
Wellington observed the ground around the crossroads at Mont St Jean the year before, but the fact that the battle happened there was a result of Napoleon's strategy and the failure to destroy the Prussians entirely at Ligny. If everything went to Napoleon's plan, he could've focused is whole army on Wellington, and therefore Wellington wouldn't risk a battle. He only did due to the promise of support from Blucher.
@@historygateyt Agreed. Wellington knew that neither his army nor Blucher's could defeat the French. The best of the British army had been sent off to fight the United States in the War of 1812, so the British army was not particularly experienced either. The French had better cavalry than their opponents and better and better trained artillery, and a lot more of it. And they were veterans to a man. Wellington therefore knew that the two would have to unite their armies to defeat the French. Napoleon surprised both of them by striking directly at the hinge between the two, forcing them to fight at Quatre Bras and Ligny. As a result, Wellington had to improvise the strategy, because both he and Blucher had been expecting Napoleon to come racing up the highway from Mons. What mattered was Brussels. If the French defeated the Anglo-Prussians and captured Brussels, the entire Netherlands would desert the alliance, and Napoleon could then concentrate the entire army to confront the Austrians.At the time, the Austrians under rather weak leadership were being stopped by a mere 15,000 French in Lorraine. As for Ligny, effectively the Prussians had been destroyed. They had lost more than 30,000 casualties, and three of their army corps of the four had been reduced to mere skeletons. Only the commitment by Wellington to fight got Gneisenau (Blucher was unconscious at the time) to pull the army together after the disaster. Wellington also had taken a pounding on June 16. He had suffered more than 5,000 casualties among his irreplaceable 30,000 British soldiers.
There was supposedly a rough cut of the film that ran around 4 hours. I believe it included much more of the Battle of Ligny and Blucher. Note: Scott's "Napoleon" is rubbish.
When I saw this film for the first time some 20 years ago, I desperately hoped that Marshal Grouchy with his 30000 men would arrive to the battlefield, and the French won the battle (despite we all perfectly know the history). And I still hope every time watching this brilliant movie... Such is the power of the true masterpiece ❤
@@bigbattleslittleworlds That was against Grouchy's orders. His orders on June 17th were to pursue and defeat the Prussians. He did so, beating half their army at Wavre on June 18.
I love this film, watched it many, many times. It is what got me into Napoleonics. I even bought Ugo Perricoli's book so that I could paint my Airfix sets properly. It is in no way perfect and some of the shots are repeated, especially the aerial shots of the cavalry attacking British squares. It also has all the Allied troops as British and perpetuates the toffs and rogues trope. NB Lions led by donkeys was possibly from the Crimean War, not the Hundred Days, and was definitely used by Marx to describe the British Army in the late 1800s. The British officer class were not perfect, but neither were they donkeys. They were better than most, worse than some. Also, it always irked me that the charge of the Heavies is portrayed as only the Scots Guard. They were the minority of the cavalry that destroyed D'Erlon's corps. Just to start a beef ... a combined arms approach would not have defeated the Allies at 4pm and Ney is wrongly accused of messing up. Napoleon could have stopped Ney at any time, he was not ill, he was overconfident. Remember, almost half of the Dutch troops did not fight and sat on Napoleon's left. D'Erlon's corp was in tatters after such an attack, and Reille's bogged down and being ground down on the left. La Haye Sante was still occupied and the Young Guard were being ground down at Plancenoit. With the Prussians on his right and rear attacking at 4pm would have left him wide open. As it was, when the Guard did attack at 6:30pm it was stopped in its tracks and routed. Napoleon was not a fool, even at Waterloo.
A couple of things. If things went badly, the Dutch were guarding Wellington's line of retreat to the northwest to Ostend. That was his supply depot and port of supply. Second, the attack of the Guard was guaranteed to be a disaster. It numbered no more than 4-5,000. Wellington had assembled the remains of three divisions, some 15,000 men plus most of the British horse artillery batteries to stop them. By the time of the assault of the Guard, the battle had already been lost. The Prussians were crushing the French right flank.
It’s most often attributed to an exchange between General Ludendorff and his chief of staff Carl Hoffmann, but it’s now generally accepted that Alan Clark invented this.
I agree with your statement regarding actors who are too young to play the historic parts they have been cast as. But then there have been movies where almost all the major players in the real battle are portrayed by actors who are far too old to fit in the parts. "The Longest Day," did well by the lower ranks, but the Generals, especially the Americans are played by actors who are absurdly out of frame. Wayne was 56 when he played the part of a Colonel who was half is age. His commanding officer was played by Robert Ryan as General Gavin, and was at least 20+ years older than the real general. I can understand it...most of Hollywood's big stars wanted desperately to be in that film. But I think they missed the mark to make a really good historical depiction by the decision to cast stars based on their ticket draws. (I remember General Vandervoort was fairly incensed by seeing himself portrayed by a man twice his age.)
That is a very good point about the older actors as well. But I guess that's the pill we have to accept from Hollywood if they are going to make a movie then history and accurate portrayal unfortunately often take a second seat. Thanks again for your points.
Thanks for the video. Great movie I have enjoyed watching from childhood all the way to adulthood and even recently. They will never make movies like this again sadly. If you have never been to the Waterloo battlefield you might be surprised that it is rather small even for the time period. When I first saw it I was surprised as it was the physical size of a medieval or ancients battlefield- set piece. That 150k troops fought on it is amazing. Well preserved but still almost all owned by private owners sadly. Le Belle Alliance farm house is a closed night club. Terrible. While certainly not perfect, here in the US most important battlefields for wars fought within the US are preserved to one degree or another or at least interpreted. I wish Europe had this set up. Anyway, does this video portend a Waterloo game series like the 1862 Valley or Waterloo associated painting tutorials??
I cant agree enough about battlefield preservation. We are also bad in the Uk as well, unfortunately. I am hopefull that I will be visiting next year with my wife although she is not yet aware that we will be taking a detour to see Waterloo and Normandy.lol. You might possibly be correct in regards to the next campaign but it may not be the 100 days.
I was there this summer and walked a circuit of it (about 8 miles) a couple of years ago. It's mostly farm land, and that's the way it was. It is a shame about La Belle Alliance, I believe part of it is a bathroom showroom now! However, Hougoumont is being preserved and Mont St Jean Farm is now a museum/tourist attraction with great views up the slope. There's a great deal still to see. The worst abuse of the battlefield is that damn mound. The big difference between Europe and the US is that, if we preserved all our battlefields, there would be nowhere to live and no food grown. The damn things are everywhere.
How is battlefield preservation like in France and Germany, is it good anywhere apart from the USA? I can't imagine what it must be like for Eastern military history
Here goes the typical American answering for Europe 😀. I lived there for a few years and, as a huge military history buff, I tried to get to as many battlefields as I could. I prefer 18-19th century but did of course hit WW1 and WW2 sites. There seems to be no organized preservation efforts on the national levels- at least in Weatern Europe. The UK does try with growing success. Albeit it small. Many fields have no obvious interpretation while other do have monuments scattered about but not in a dedicated park per se. there are also private museums often on or near battlefields but their hours of operation are often spotty and they often lack resources. IMHO, Waterloo is the closest thing to a U.S. National Battlefield Park but there in Belgium it is again private and does not encompass most of the field. I will say the field does remain much as it was in 1815 thankfully. Quarter Bras is outright depressing and Ligne has only a small- mostly closed- museum. Same with Wavre. As for Eastern Europe. Less familiar but even less efforts often. Ironically the Russians did preserve some of Borodino but I was saddened to see almost nothing is preserved at the 1809 campaigns near Vienna.
Oh Normandy is indeed fantastic but also mostly private. I forgot to mention what some Europeans told me on this issue. They claimed that preserving battlefields like the US would be considered glorifying war. I’ll leave that to you all. We obviously view it differently here.
Overall, "Waterloo" was an outstanding cinematic effort. The only scene they could have, and or should have deleted, was the ballroom scene, it was needless. I guess the producers had to put in something for the ladies. Rod Steiger and Christopher Plummer were both excellent in their roles, even Jack Hawkins as a British General was very good, until he got shot. The sweeping shots of the full battlefield, with the armies in place were, in a word, EPIC.
@@Blackfoxparadox The ballroom scene is actually historically accurate. Wellington only heard about the French advance at the big party in Brussels held by the Duchess of Richmond. As for mud, there was a torrential downpour on the afternoon of June 17th. Everyone was soaked through and covered in mud. The rain was so bad that some of the cavalry on both sides slept under their horses.
I think the ballroom scene is justified as it’s part of the historical narrative. The bit I hate is when one of the soldiers loses it, leaves the square and starts wailing stuff like “Why do we have to kill each other?”. I felt like shouting from the auditorium “‘cos you’re a soldier and you’re in a battle stupid! It’s not all sports and waterskiing whatever the recruiting office said”.
@@MarkLawden I agree with you. No soldier of the time would have said such inane things. They were soldiers and based on the previous record, under Wellington's command they expected to beat the French. For all of them, soldiering had been their livelihood for poor people for more than three decades.
christopher plummer was a great Wellington, he didn't even need a prosthetic nose! He portrayed Wellington as a very cool (calm) commander. Wellington was like a fictional hero, (always at the hotspot throughout the battle); he was a very good general even though It wasn't his best army .
Thanks for an excellent review of a brilliant film. I saw it in 1971 on its initial release and have watched it many times since. I now have the dvd, so can watch it whenever I like! Why are your images of the film so clear? At the time of its release in 1971, there was a souvenir programme, a booklet (by Paul Davies) and novel by Frederick Smith. All should be available online. Have you visited the battlefield? I have three times and it is fantastic. Where are the maps from? I would also recommend the BBC 1972 adaptation of War and Peace. I have it on dvd and is far superior to the 2016 version.😢
You are very welcome and thanks for watching. Im not actually sure why they are so clear, I did play around with the contrast so that may have something to do with it. I haven't visited the battlefield, although i do hope to in the next year when I head back to Europe. You are lucky to have been 3 times, did you see Quatre bras, Ligney and Wavre? I agree the 2016 version was mediocre at best the bbc version was superior, back when the bbc knew how to do a series honour. lol
Hello! I purchased your rules and I am enjoying them, but it seems that the scenario images are not formatted well: The maps for the scenarios seem to be cut off.
If you head back to KOFI I have just sent you a new copy where the error is sorted. Thanks again for supporting the channel and for raising this to me. If you have any other thoughts, please let me know.
I love this film as the actors do try to behave like people from the early 19th century. Despite its many historical inaccuracies I think the 1968 film The Charge of the Light Brigade also achieves this. Present day actors often seem unable to get convincingly into character in any role that lies outside their own lived experience.
I watched it on holiday in Jersey...then back home in Cardiff and Caerphilly...i have the DVD snd VHS...the foot soldiers were young men.. Google Waterloo Teeth 😢
Marshal Soult actually said this quote at The Battle Of Albuhera during The Peninsular War here’s what he said There’s no beating these troops in spite of their generals I had always thought they were bad soldiers and now I am sure of it I had turned their right pierced their centre and everywhere victory was mine but they did not know how to run
Exactly so. Half the army had a 10-mile march to get to the battlefield. The artillery was extremely difficult to deploy because of the deep mud. It was literally impossible for him to hae started the battle before noon because much of the army would have been missing.
The Epic Soviet series "War and Peace" had the biggest of all time with thousands of Soviet Army! Not only did they react to Prince Bargrations epic rear guard action after Austerlitz, but the Battle of Borodino, made in 1967, was Directed by Sregey Bondarchuk. Waterloo 1970 was ok, but I lost faith in it when teh explosions started to look like Napalm!
❤Waterloo was also directed by Bondarchuk! Using similar mounted Red Army troops he’d featured in W and P. And filmed in Soviet Ukraine. I agree his Borodino was more powerful overall. It was actually supposed to be one 7 hour movie not a series, but usually broken up into 4 for obvious reasons.
Napoleon wasn't ever going to destroy Wellington's army. It was deployed in such a way that it could retire down the road to Brussels and the best British regiments were in reserve back there (missing the battle) to act as rearguard if needed. Wellington did this because, he wasn't sure that Blucher's Prussian army would intervene.
And Scots. That what poor people did when they have no income: they join the army. Scotland and Ireland were both very easy sources of soldier recruits.
@@normanstewart7130 The former regular army of Hannover. Good soldiers but far too few. Again, part of England's tradition of fighting France to the very last German available. England had been using German mercenaries for well over a century prior to Waterloo. It fought the American Revolution using as many Germans as it could find.
@@colinhunt4057 Indeed. So Wellington's army was not "composed of Irish recruits", which is a myth that has developed. On the BBC website we find: "It is estimated that about 9,000 Irishmen fought with the Duke of Wellington's army. Most of them were in locally raised regiments such as the 27th Inniskillings and the 5th Royal Inniskilling Dragoon Guards and the 18th Kings Irish Hussars."
Interesting, I think I might be biased based upon watching it as a kid with Dad and just loving the epic scale of the movie. But a very interesting point.
It is good to show these movies. As we move toward World War 3, it makes for great psychological messaging. I wish I would have never read Gustave LeBon and Edward Bernay's writings.
@@bigbattleslittleworlds Gustave Le Bon is a famous French writer of the post-Napoleonic era, the author of great books "Psichology of the Crowd" and "Psichology of the Revolution". Sincerely suggest to read!
I agree, our officers were Lions also and showed the same courage as the men under their command and, as a result suffered huge losses by exposing themselves to enemy fire etc. That is just a saying popularised during the Crimean War and over the years has been used to describe British forces around the world and in different periods.
Lions led by donkeys?? Wtf? This film shows british officers at their finest. Which officer was portrayed as a donkey? Actually watch the film, you might learn something. .
You should have listened to the commentator. He was referring to another battle, not Waterloo. Also, it wasn't his personal comment, he was reflecting on what one of the French marshals allegedly said.
@Andy-ub3ub I have seen the film many times, but you don't seem to get it.The saying 'lions led by donkeys' has never been referred to the battle of Waterloo by anyone.
That 7hr movie is not Dr Zhivago but War and Peace (война и мир) by Sergey Bondarchuk, the same director that directed this film. The cavalry charge to the square was obviously recycled from the War and Peace. Do your homework, dude
Yeah Napoleon never did stay long enough in Spain to fight Wellingtons army he left to deal with other matters and he left Marshal soult sousha and Ney to it at least for a little bit Ney was sent to Central Europe as well as soult till he went back
Great movie but many of the extras were scarcrows. But great art compared to latest Napoleon which is a comedy. Speaking of smaller than imagined, ever been to Pearl Harbor?
As I get older I realise now just how brainwashed we are as children, I was so proud of much I learned as a child of my country's past standing up and defeating 'old Bony' and the likes, I realise now just how biased and back to front it all is. Napoleon was an everyman who stood up against the oldest enemy of the people, the rich and powerful. His country had overturned the status quo and stood up and overthrew the privileged and powerful bleeding the country dry. Of course all the other powerful nations of Europe could not allow this idea to spread to their own countries Britain, Austria, Russia, Prussia etc all having interconnected royal families all countries guilty of bleeding their people dry while living the high life and making out Napoleon to be the 'Monster' We only have to look around us at the corruption and total bias the rich have over the people of the world to see what an ugly mess we are forced to live in where the corrupt and wealthy avoid prosecution over their crimes while the majority are penalised and imprisoned for not even half the same offences. Though this is a great film I found my blood boiling the other day while watching the scene where Christopher Plummer as Wellington was in discussion with his wife referring to the soldiers as 'criminals and cutthroats' a mentality the likes of Wellington and his ilk still harbour to the general population of the UK to this very day, the very Idea that 'common people' are there to die for the benefit of such as Wellington and his lot has and always will be a very real attitude. His wife even alludes to the fact that even the 'Monster' Napoleon would not display such arrogance in his view of his own soldiers and Wellington's very deliberate and deeply embedded response to this is that 'Napoleon is not a Gentleman' Only the arrogance of the likes of people of Wellingtons background could even attempt to justify such views. It is the same mentalities that were on full display during the 40's when Churchill would lead Britain while the country at large would be told to 'Make do and Mend' Churchill of course would not go without his three course dinners and Brandy and cigars As an Englishman in my 50's I can say without any doubt in my mind with what I have seen happen in my own lifetime to my country and the disgraceful behaviour that has always been common place in Britain due to the Wellingtons of this world I would have been fighting for the French. Napoleon was a true hero and is one of the reasons his name is legendary to this day while few remember Wellington in anywhere near the same regard.
I recently read a book that was structured around the diary of a cavalry officer during the earlier Peninsula war. He expressed your views about Napoleon and mused on which side he should be on.
Wellingtons wife isn’t in the film. I presume you mean where discussing with Virginia McKenna who played the Duchess of Richmond. Whilst much is made of Wellington and his comments about scum of he earth, his men seemed to have great affection for him. Much of that probably because they knew he would look out for them as much as could in terms of food, shelter etc, quite often complaining that had to retreat due to lack of supplies etc. also knowing that would face superior numbers aimed via defensive battles, to keep his casualties low. They may have been the scum of the earth, but they were his scum of the earth. Whilst certainly may not have thought much of Napoleon on the social scale Wellington certainly respected napoleons ability, far more so then napoleon did of Wellington. And whilst napoleon may have started out as a common man then wasn’t above becoming emperor and attempting to start hereditary rule for his family. He also was dismissive of Wellington referring to him as a sepoy general, with the feeling being that Indian experience was no real test. Even in the British army afterwards then European stationed officers looked down upon officiers having served in the Indian Army. This also was also the height of class divide where to be an officer then had bought commission so had to have wealth. Wellington having been the 6th son pretty much had no real expectation of having made up the social ladder as he did so also probably had a certain defensiveness regarding his own background. At the time he is talking to the wife of the 4th Duke of Richmond who in her own right was the daughter of the 4th Duke of Gordon so would most likely be seen as inferior himself as whilst a Duke himself was the 1st Duke of Wellington so on the social ladder below. Whilst indeed there were soldiers risen from the ranks then they were not that common.
@@michaelmcnally2331 I certainly do not claim to be well informed on this period of history and really only have an interest in Napoleon to be honest. Although I have probably watched this film a dozen times I confess I have always believed this was the case, and now you have pointed this out feel this scene is a little ambiguous for those not really up on the history here. Regardless the Idea of 'Class' exists purely for the benefit of the wealthy and is something that has deeply irritated me all of my life. Napoleon may have fallen foul of the same hypocrisy as that of the rest of them, but it was very much what he stood for and represented that the coalitions could not abide, regardless of how he saw himself, he would never be one of them, and was made out to be the ogre of the piece. As for being an officer the very same hypocrisy exists to this very day and has never changed from 1815 to 2024, nor will it. I have always found it particularly ironic that Nelson one of the greatest Heroes in British history who it could be argued was held in even greater regard than Wellington, was a commoner and was only able to be elevated to the lofty heights of admiral because it was possible at the time for such men to rise in the navy. Not that it is the case today of course, as the same blind prejudice exists throughout all aspects of the 'British' system Being a student of history and having interests in many different eras I have always been fascinated at how time is littered with nations that have continuously kicked themselves in the balls because of their own stupid politics and pathetic mentalities. From Athens crippling herself, destroying the likes of Socrates and bringing low Alkidiades (her best hope of victory during the Peloponnesian war), to the pathetic carrying on of the cowards back in Carthage that would rather cripple their greatest son Hannibal, fighting what would become the most dangerous nation in antiquity, because they were too concerned with the Barca family becoming too powerful, which led to the very destruction of the entire nation. Considering the 'Common folk' outnumber the privileged a million to one, I often wonder what incredible individuals have been denied their place in history or at least at the top of their fields due to this ridiculous attitude and bias.
@@michaelmcnally2331 The statement of "scum of the earth" came from the retreat from Burgos in late 1812. As a result of very bad work by quartermasters, the supply of the British army completely broke down. The army virtually disintegrated for a few weeks, looting, robbing, raping and drinking at the expense of the Spanish peasantry. It was some time before Wellington and his provosts could restore order. Well, provosts and quite a few hangings for 'plundering'. The campaign in Spain in 1812 was a very complex and confused struggle. So it's not surprising that the British were unprepared for the huge scale of their success at the Battlle of Salamanca. It was the very first time that a French army had been so completely shattered as that disaster at the hands of Wellington or anyone else. Among other things, it was so crushing that it persuading Tsar Alexander I to defy Napoleon in the invasion of Russia that year. Napoleon captured Moscow, but Russia fought on.
@@ramuner2816Ney was utterly fearless, but i think his charge lost them the battle, five horses shot from under him and he still kept fighting, gave the order for his own execution. total chad.
@@bigbattleslittleworlds Napoleon should take Davout to Waterloo assigning him the command of the right wing of the army in Ligny instead of Grouchy, that's for sure. I believe, in such case the outcome of the Waterloo battle would be completely different. It was Grouchy, who spoiled everything by pursuing Prussians and absent in Waterloo with his 30000 men - definitely not Ney, who was unjustly blamed for the lost battle.
Just to point out a few things that I made a mistake on or to clarify.
I mistakenly said Dr, Zivago but I meant to say War and Peace, so my apologies there.
I make reference to Lions led by Donkeys which was popularised during the Crimean war to describe the British, but as the phrase has become widely known it is often used for British troops of other time periods upto and including WW1, I am not saying it was created during this Napoleonic period.
Also as mentioned, Marshall Soult said of the British during the Peninsular Campaign that they were Bad soldiers because they did not know how to retreat.
With those points aside, I hope you enjoyed and will give the movie a watch. Thanks again all.
Can't count the times I've seen this film. I first saw it on my 12th birthday, which is on June 18th - I was unaware of the significance at the time - and have been obsessed with it ever since. It's an unsurpassed masterpiece of cinema imo.
What a great day for a birthday, Im surprised you don't have a tradition to watch it yearly lol. Thanks for watching.
Yes I thought I was thirteen when I saw this in Halifax but I guess 11 or 12 was possible. I think it made it to halifax in 1971 or 1972.
Absolutely one of the best films ever and the best portrayal of Napoleon
I have gone back to this film many times through my life and I made sure my son watched it when he was young.... he is now 30. We still quote lines from this film and I also think its a masterpiece. Thanks for posting.
There will never be a movie made on this scale ever again. It will forever stand alone as an unrivalled movie.
it was on the TV only the other day... I had to pull myself from watching it again for the 100th time....
I just love the fact that Dan o herlihy who played marshal Ney looked exactly like the real marshal Ney
He played the part so well.
He also starred in Sidney Lumet's Fail Safe (1964). Great flick. Unfortunately came out immediately after Dr. Strangelove after which no one (at the time) could take it ad seriously as it should have been.
Rod Steiger was a genius actor. He not only played him, he WAS really Napoleon because he have studied the personality of the man.
I watched this as a 15 yo when it came out, and have probably rewatched it 3-4 times. While fuzzy on some points of accuracy, the movie portrays the feel of that time period fantastically. Rod Steiger evokes the drive and determination of Napoleon so well, and Christopher Plummer, while a bit too snarky in some scenes, gives us a portrait of Wellington as the cool, calculating, decisive general that he was. It's probably time for me to give this pic another viewing. Thanks for the review, Will.
No problem at all, and I definitely agree that its time to watch again. I agree that Rod Steiger nailed Napoleon.
I wholeheartedly concur with your opinion of Steiger's performance. In my not-at-all-humble opinion, the best best large- or small- screen depiction of Bonaparte ever, without exception.
Re: Plummer's "snarkiness", it's not overdone at all. Wellington was well-known throughout the British Army -- and British society as a whole -- for his acid tongue and sarcastic nature....
I didn't express myself clearly about Plummer's version of Wellington. The scene where Wellington tells the bugler to stop trumpeting then he follows up immediately with "You'll hurt yourself," has always rubbed me the wrong way exactly because Wellington was dry and caustic. The slight swerve into comedy relief just grates on me.
Cheers!
I would have been 6 when I saw Waterloo in the Cinema. I was already hooked on Napoleonic Warfare thanks to Airfix, and thanks to my brother and his friends playing Table Top Wargames. It was a given that I would adore the film.
I didn't.
The first hour was a tough watch for a young child. However, when the battle starts... Bliss.
Amazing, Fantastic, Incredible. I still watch the film from time to time.
(Far off Background soldiers wore paper uniforms and were armed with solid wood and cardboard weapons. The majority of the Soviet troops were of lowly peasant stock, who had never seen a plastic bag containing their kit before. The logistics of the film are fascinating).
To see the film as some of us did as kids, on wide screen, made it all the more spectacular.
I love this movie. I bought 2 copies on CD!
Nicely done.
watch the film yesterday still a masterpiece
It really is fantastic. Thanks for watching and commenting.
Why oh why has the full five hour Movie never become available I watch this movie at least twice a year and it never gets old for me
fantastic film
I worked as an usher at the Royal Premier of this film in Leicester Square, London. On duty in the cloakroom. While the film was showing the girls tried on the fur coats and the guys the bearskin helmets the guardsmen had left with us. At the end of the film the public were kept in the auditorium while the Queen and Duke left. We formed a 'guard of honour' for them to walk between.
That is very cool and what an amazing experience.
One of my favorites as well. Saw as a kid and watched several times since.
i have this on dvd, its one of the very best war films.
I liked one scene when Napoleon asks if they have enough time and Ney looks at the height of the sun. In those days watches were rare and you judge the time by the height of the sun.
This is where my passion for Napoleonic wargaming started. First watched it with Dad when it first appeared on UK TV in the late 70s (and countless times since) - bought the Airfix 1/72 figs the next day. Still have them - still wargaming with them too
Same here but for me it was probably mid 90's.
Great video and an amazing movie. thanks for the vid.
First saw this film 54 years ago, I was 10 years old, it instantly became my favourite film. All these years later it remains so. The Direction, soundtrack, script, photography, are sublime, the acting authentic and convincing beyond fault, Christopher Plummer is the most charismatic and commanding Wellington I have seen, Rod Steiger simply is Napoleon, he dominates this movie, a truly great portrayal.
Saw this in Blackpool with my best friend his younger brother and my brother when I was 12 years of age. I've seen it numerous times since. One of the best war films ever made.
The charge of the Scots Greys was one of the best scenes in the movie. I always tried to recreate this with my Airfix soldiers. Pure magic.
My late father took me to see this in the West End when it was first released for my 0th birthday and I have never forgotten the experience! I do wish that I still had the booklet that came with our tickets, it tied the scenes in the film to the actual locations in the battle. Attention to detail that we don't see any more.
That would have been great.
I remember my grandad buying this when i was little and its stuck with me ever since
I have seen this movie many, many times since I was a kid. I saw it in the theatre with my father when it first came out.
I would love to see it on the big screen.
Rod Steiger becomes Napoleon in the way that George C Scott becomes Patton...
He had just had been awarded an Academy Award for the film In the heat of the night . So he was at the top of his career .
Beyond all doubt this was Rod Steiger's greatest performance in a lifetime of great performances. If you ever get the chance, watch it the way I did, with a new print, on a fifty-foot screen.
Thats my dream, but no idea how to do it.
My favourite film since watching it when I was about Ten years old, started my love for the era which coincided with Sharpe TV series ❤
Not Sergey Bondarchuk's first Napoleonic era film! If you enjoy Waterloo, I must must must entreat you to watch his monumental version of War and Peace, made around 5 years before Waterloo, with a similar vast scale. The three main battle scenes (Hollabrun/Schon-Graben, Austerlitz and Borodino are outstanding. Some thoughtful soul has edited a shortened version of the Battle of Borodino, for anyone interested. The full battle in the film runs to about 45-50 minutes, but the editor has cut all the W&P--specific action concerning Pierre and Prince Andrei. All the "highlights" of the battle are featured, including the carnage at the Bagration "fleches" , the death of Bagration and the massed heavy cavalry charge. Those familiar with "Waterloo" will recognise Sergey Bondarchuk's style, especially in the scene where the French heavy cavalry charge the Russian infantry squares, and the the end of the battle where Napoleon rides across the stricken field. ruclips.net/video/fsBRaAdzWrY/видео.html
Totally agree....... Watched the W&P series, just as Waterloo (1970) many times !!!
Still my favourites regarding the Napoleonic era. Just as many other great old movies, such as Ben Hur (1959), King of Kings (1961), The Ten Commandments (1956), and David and Bathsheba (1951). Certainly not the modern trash & remakes of today !!! *1 CORINTHIANS 15:1-4 [kjv]* !!!
W&P Is fantastic.
War and Peace is a better film than Waterloo as there is much more depth to the story. It’s ironic that Bondarchuk was Ukrainian and that Waterloo was itself filmed in western Ukraine.
Epic Movie ❤
The phrase "lions led by donkeys" originated in classical antiquity, but was popularized in the 20th century to describe the relationship between British soldiers and their commanders during World War I. This phrase was never used to describe British Generals in the Napoleonic era
Interesting, thanks for sharing. Its interesting how phrases often get repeated so often that they end up all over. Thanks for watching and the correction.
Used in france for wwi and wwii. It is even the tittle of a book. It is supposed to have been said by germans.....
I was 17 years old when I saw this film for the first time in 1970 at the cinema. I am a history buff and it is my favourite subject. I thought this film was absolutely amazing and fairly true to what actually happened. Some thought Steiger's performance as Napoleon was over acted but I thought both he and Christopher Plummer were excellent in the lead roles. As you say, no CGI which made the action scenes so realistic and the cavalry charges were brilliant. I also like the fact the film covered the lead up to the battle and not just the day of the battle itself.
Waterloo is an absolute masterpiece, the return from Elba has never been as epic and as emotional as in this.
This movie made my heart beat for the french when I saw it as a young boy. This said by a German Prussian ... isn't it the highest praise? Today of course i have to say i think, it should be represented how low the percentage of actual English and how many allied troops where there and of course the under recognition of the Prussian Role...we (if you may forgive me to say so) won that day...the English were finished.
"This man is a Lion! His courage gave me Europe!" (Napoleon about Ney in 1807 after the battle of Friedland).
"He behave like a madman! He lost my cavalry! He lost France!!!" (Napoleon about Ney after Waterloo).
"The only thing worst then a battlefield after victory is one after defeat."
Wellington
One of the best war movies of all time. It is right up there with Zulu and Cross of Iron. Rod Steiger should have won an Oscar for his performance. The subject matter was not popular with U.S. audiences because the U.S. was not involved, which indeed hurt the film. The film was cut up by the studio which causes a situation where Blucher and the Prussians just appear on the field of battle with no lead up.
Agreed.
I have seen the movie several times and in my lifetime, been lucky enough to exercise British cavalry horses. I have also handled a couple of duelling pistols, now owned by a friend, that were once owned by the original owner, Lord Uxbridge, played by Terence Alexander in this movie.
I was in The Life Guards. Were you in the British Army? What reg?
Rod Steiger was one the greatest American actors!
The other one I miss is Phillip Seymour Hoffman.
Great movie. Saw this when it came out with my parents. A real attempt to hit a lot of historical points and certainly uses quotes as reported. There is some whacky 70's film making going on in this one and Rod Steger always struck me as a strange choice for Napoleon, but he was fine. Love the movie.
The scale and scope is amazing, nothing matches this. I had this on pirate vhs video copied from Blockbuster and was the only video I refused to record over
Thanks, nice review. Important to note that Waterloo’s director was Soviet Ukrainian/Russian Sergei Bondarchuk, who three years earlier had directed the epic Russian film of War and Peace, a 7 hour film often shown as a series of 4. The most expensive film made in the Soviet Union.
As well as Austerlitz and other battles in the early part, one whole hour and one instalment of the film was devoted to the major Battle of Borodino, about the same as Waterloo (which is about 2hrs 10 min, not 30). Bondarchuk also used about 13,000 extras, mostly from the Soviet Army as later in Waterloo. The Borodino battle scenes were more powerful and impressive than in Waterloo in my memory, but the acting and dialogue in the battle perhaps more arresting in Waterloo. The battle scenes in Waterloo were filmed in Western Ukraine. The film was a co-production between Dino de Laurentis’s company and Soviet Mosfilm studios.
I’d agree with those who consider War and Peace the grandest epic film ever made. Well worth a watch. Certainly the longest epic film - about 3 Star Wars episodes!, but no CGI and better storylines and dialogue.
Steiger probably caught Napoleon better than any other non-French actor (despite the fact that Napoleon's "Frenchness" was marginally questionable.) I will grant Napoleon the dignity of his deeply held belief of his French soul. But he started out as a Corsican...and if the Corsican's hadn't rejected him early in his career, he probably would have accepted that. Plummer did well by Wellington but he was helped by the massive amount of documentation of the Iron Duke's life, abilities and quotes. All in all, the movie makes you believe you're on that battlefield and watching reality. There are historical flaws...but they weren't anything that destroyed the believability. Some of the British junior officers were actually killed at Quatre Bras, but that doesn't take away the fact that the British lost a horrific number of junior officers during those days. Their gallantry and sacrifice as well as that of the French were unquestionable. You want to be there. As for the setting of the battle, I doubt anyone could have staged a historic battle better than they did in this film. Compared to the absurd things we see in films today that purport to be "historical" they performed miracles.
"The Prussians are in the woods", my favourite line from any film.
I remember seeing this for the first time and being overwhelmed by the ariel shots of the maneuvers.
It's an excellent film - I had a "magazine" about the film when I was doing the period at school,, and it really helped. I have also been to the battlefield.
But for anyone who likes "Waterloo" can I also recommend the film "Gettysburg", which is even longer (like two DVDs!) but is just as good, with thousands of extras, and meticulous accuracy.
I love Gettysburg.
Any Army who can choose the ground usually wins. Napoleon knew he had to defeat Wellington and Wellington stood on the strongest position. Is it myth or truth that Wellington chose Waterloo as his battlefield months prior?. If so, it was very cleverly done.
Agreed.
Wellington observed the ground around the crossroads at Mont St Jean the year before, but the fact that the battle happened there was a result of Napoleon's strategy and the failure to destroy the Prussians entirely at Ligny. If everything went to Napoleon's plan, he could've focused is whole army on Wellington, and therefore Wellington wouldn't risk a battle. He only did due to the promise of support from Blucher.
@@historygateyt Agreed. Wellington knew that neither his army nor Blucher's could defeat the French. The best of the British army had been sent off to fight the United States in the War of 1812, so the British army was not particularly experienced either. The French had better cavalry than their opponents and better and better trained artillery, and a lot more of it. And they were veterans to a man.
Wellington therefore knew that the two would have to unite their armies to defeat the French. Napoleon surprised both of them by striking directly at the hinge between the two, forcing them to fight at Quatre Bras and Ligny. As a result, Wellington had to improvise the strategy, because both he and Blucher had been expecting Napoleon to come racing up the highway from Mons.
What mattered was Brussels. If the French defeated the Anglo-Prussians and captured Brussels, the entire Netherlands would desert the alliance, and Napoleon could then concentrate the entire army to confront the Austrians.At the time, the Austrians under rather weak leadership were being stopped by a mere 15,000 French in Lorraine.
As for Ligny, effectively the Prussians had been destroyed. They had lost more than 30,000 casualties, and three of their army corps of the four had been reduced to mere skeletons. Only the commitment by Wellington to fight got Gneisenau (Blucher was unconscious at the time) to pull the army together after the disaster. Wellington also had taken a pounding on June 16. He had suffered more than 5,000 casualties among his irreplaceable 30,000 British soldiers.
There was supposedly a rough cut of the film that ran around 4 hours. I believe it included much more of the Battle of Ligny and Blucher. Note: Scott's "Napoleon" is rubbish.
Shame it was never released. That would have been amazing.
When I saw this film for the first time some 20 years ago, I desperately hoped that Marshal Grouchy with his 30000 men would arrive to the battlefield, and the French won the battle (despite we all perfectly know the history).
And I still hope every time watching this brilliant movie... Such is the power of the true masterpiece ❤
I know what you mean.
@@bigbattleslittleworlds That was against Grouchy's orders. His orders on June 17th were to pursue and defeat the Prussians. He did so, beating half their army at Wavre on June 18.
I love this film, watched it many, many times. It is what got me into Napoleonics. I even bought Ugo Perricoli's book so that I could paint my Airfix sets properly.
It is in no way perfect and some of the shots are repeated, especially the aerial shots of the cavalry attacking British squares. It also has all the Allied troops as British and perpetuates the toffs and rogues trope. NB Lions led by donkeys was possibly from the Crimean War, not the Hundred Days, and was definitely used by Marx to describe the British Army in the late 1800s. The British officer class were not perfect, but neither were they donkeys. They were better than most, worse than some.
Also, it always irked me that the charge of the Heavies is portrayed as only the Scots Guard. They were the minority of the cavalry that destroyed D'Erlon's corps.
Just to start a beef ... a combined arms approach would not have defeated the Allies at 4pm and Ney is wrongly accused of messing up. Napoleon could have stopped Ney at any time, he was not ill, he was overconfident. Remember, almost half of the Dutch troops did not fight and sat on Napoleon's left. D'Erlon's corp was in tatters after such an attack, and Reille's bogged down and being ground down on the left. La Haye Sante was still occupied and the Young Guard were being ground down at Plancenoit. With the Prussians on his right and rear attacking at 4pm would have left him wide open. As it was, when the Guard did attack at 6:30pm it was stopped in its tracks and routed. Napoleon was not a fool, even at Waterloo.
A couple of things. If things went badly, the Dutch were guarding Wellington's line of retreat to the northwest to Ostend. That was his supply depot and port of supply. Second, the attack of the Guard was guaranteed to be a disaster. It numbered no more than 4-5,000. Wellington had assembled the remains of three divisions, some 15,000 men plus most of the British horse artillery batteries to stop them. By the time of the assault of the Guard, the battle had already been lost. The Prussians were crushing the French right flank.
The phrase "lions led by donkeys" wasnt used referring to British troops until the Crimean War.
It’s most often attributed to an exchange between General Ludendorff and his chief of staff Carl Hoffmann, but it’s now generally accepted that Alan Clark invented this.
I agree with your statement regarding actors who are too young to play the historic parts they have been cast as. But then there have been movies where almost all the major players in the real battle are portrayed by actors who are far too old to fit in the parts. "The Longest Day," did well by the lower ranks, but the Generals, especially the Americans are played by actors who are absurdly out of frame. Wayne was 56 when he played the part of a Colonel who was half is age. His commanding officer was played by Robert Ryan as General Gavin, and was at least 20+ years older than the real general. I can understand it...most of Hollywood's big stars wanted desperately to be in that film. But I think they missed the mark to make a really good historical depiction by the decision to cast stars based on their ticket draws. (I remember General Vandervoort was fairly incensed by seeing himself portrayed by a man twice his age.)
That is a very good point about the older actors as well. But I guess that's the pill we have to accept from Hollywood if they are going to make a movie then history and accurate portrayal unfortunately often take a second seat. Thanks again for your points.
Bit rough around the edges but love it
Thanks for the video. Great movie I have enjoyed watching from childhood all the way to adulthood and even recently. They will never make movies like this again sadly. If you have never been to the Waterloo battlefield you might be surprised that it is rather small even for the time period. When I first saw it I was surprised as it was the physical size of a medieval or ancients battlefield- set piece. That 150k troops fought on it is amazing. Well preserved but still almost all owned by private owners sadly. Le Belle Alliance farm house is a closed night club. Terrible. While certainly not perfect, here in the US most important battlefields for wars fought within the US are preserved to one degree or another or at least interpreted. I wish Europe had this set up. Anyway, does this video portend a Waterloo game series like the 1862 Valley or Waterloo associated painting tutorials??
I cant agree enough about battlefield preservation. We are also bad in the Uk as well, unfortunately. I am hopefull that I will be visiting next year with my wife although she is not yet aware that we will be taking a detour to see Waterloo and Normandy.lol. You might possibly be correct in regards to the next campaign but it may not be the 100 days.
I was there this summer and walked a circuit of it (about 8 miles) a couple of years ago. It's mostly farm land, and that's the way it was. It is a shame about La Belle Alliance, I believe part of it is a bathroom showroom now! However, Hougoumont is being preserved and Mont St Jean Farm is now a museum/tourist attraction with great views up the slope. There's a great deal still to see.
The worst abuse of the battlefield is that damn mound.
The big difference between Europe and the US is that, if we preserved all our battlefields, there would be nowhere to live and no food grown. The damn things are everywhere.
How is battlefield preservation like in France and Germany, is it good anywhere apart from the USA? I can't imagine what it must be like for Eastern military history
Here goes the typical American answering for Europe 😀. I lived there for a few years and, as a huge military history buff, I tried to get to as many battlefields as I could. I prefer 18-19th century but did of course hit WW1 and WW2 sites. There seems to be no organized preservation efforts on the national levels- at least in Weatern Europe. The UK does try with growing success. Albeit it small. Many fields have no obvious interpretation while other do have monuments scattered about but not in a dedicated park per se. there are also private museums often on or near battlefields but their hours of operation are often spotty and they often lack resources. IMHO, Waterloo is the closest thing to a U.S. National Battlefield Park but there in Belgium it is again private and does not encompass most of the field. I will say the field does remain much as it was in 1815 thankfully. Quarter Bras is outright depressing and Ligne has only a small- mostly closed- museum. Same with Wavre. As for Eastern Europe. Less familiar but even less efforts often. Ironically the Russians did preserve some of Borodino but I was saddened to see almost nothing is preserved at the 1809 campaigns near Vienna.
Oh Normandy is indeed fantastic but also mostly private. I forgot to mention what some Europeans told me on this issue. They claimed that preserving battlefields like the US would be considered glorifying war. I’ll leave that to you all. We obviously view it differently here.
Overall, "Waterloo" was an outstanding cinematic effort. The only scene they could have, and or should have deleted, was the ballroom scene, it was needless. I guess the producers had to put in something for the ladies. Rod Steiger and Christopher Plummer were both excellent in their roles, even Jack Hawkins as a British General was very good, until he got shot. The sweeping shots of the full battlefield, with the armies in place were, in a word, EPIC.
I think it adds context
, the british dancing in the dry
, the french trudging through mud. Shows how the french had the odds stacked against them
@@Blackfoxparadox The ballroom scene is actually historically accurate. Wellington only heard about the French advance at the big party in Brussels held by the Duchess of Richmond. As for mud, there was a torrential downpour on the afternoon of June 17th. Everyone was soaked through and covered in mud. The rain was so bad that some of the cavalry on both sides slept under their horses.
I think the ballroom scene is justified as it’s part of the historical narrative. The bit I hate is when one of the soldiers loses it, leaves the square and starts wailing stuff like “Why do we have to kill each other?”. I felt like shouting from the auditorium “‘cos you’re a soldier and you’re in a battle stupid! It’s not all sports and waterskiing whatever the recruiting office said”.
@@MarkLawden I agree with you. No soldier of the time would have said such inane things. They were soldiers and based on the previous record, under Wellington's command they expected to beat the French. For all of them, soldiering had been their livelihood for poor people for more than three decades.
christopher plummer was a great Wellington, he didn't even need a prosthetic nose! He portrayed Wellington as a very cool (calm) commander. Wellington was like a fictional hero, (always at the hotspot throughout the battle); he was a very good general even though It wasn't his best army .
Thanks for an excellent review of a brilliant film. I saw it in 1971 on its initial release and have watched it many times since. I now have the dvd, so can watch it whenever I like! Why are your images of the film so clear? At the time of its release in 1971, there was a souvenir programme, a booklet (by Paul Davies) and novel by Frederick Smith. All should be available online. Have you visited the battlefield? I have three times and it is fantastic. Where are the maps from? I would also recommend the BBC 1972 adaptation of War and Peace. I have it on dvd and is far superior to the 2016 version.😢
You are very welcome and thanks for watching. Im not actually sure why they are so clear, I did play around with the contrast so that may have something to do with it. I haven't visited the battlefield, although i do hope to in the next year when I head back to Europe. You are lucky to have been 3 times, did you see Quatre bras, Ligney and Wavre? I agree the 2016 version was mediocre at best the bbc version was superior, back when the bbc knew how to do a series honour. lol
Hello! I purchased your rules and I am enjoying them, but it seems that the scenario images are not formatted well: The maps for the scenarios seem to be cut off.
Hey, Thanks for making a purchase, I will have a look into that and then send you a new version that works. Which set did you get?
If you head back to KOFI I have just sent you a new copy where the error is sorted. Thanks again for supporting the channel and for raising this to me. If you have any other thoughts, please let me know.
The last stand of the Old Guard at Waterloo did not end with British Artillery a few yards away.
The best use of the Russian Army imaginable.
I love this film as the actors do try to behave like people from the early 19th century. Despite its many historical inaccuracies I think the 1968 film The Charge of the Light Brigade also achieves this. Present day actors often seem unable to get convincingly into character in any role that lies outside their own lived experience.
I watched it on holiday in Jersey...then back home in Cardiff and Caerphilly...i have the DVD snd VHS...the foot soldiers were young men..
Google Waterloo Teeth 😢
It was Soult after the Battle of Albuhera who said something like the British Infantry didn't know how to run!
That sounds about right.
Great Movie. Now these days I watch it on the Anniversary of the battle outside on the Deck on 120 inch screen. The director's cut. On RUclips
Great idea.
the Film should of be been fours long but due to UK and USA audience having short attention span it cut down to 2 and half hours
I would love that, showing Ligney and Quatre Bras would have been awesome.
Always preferred the French infantry uniforms to the British uniforms
They were very impressive for sure. Especially the earlier ones.
Wish they made movies like this now,,,but one thing, Wellington did not beat him,,,,Richard Sharpe did.
That is very true. lol. After shooting The Prince of Orange.lol
Marshal Soult actually said this quote at The Battle Of Albuhera during The Peninsular War here’s what he said There’s no beating these troops in spite of their generals I had always thought they were bad soldiers and now I am sure of it I had turned their right pierced their centre and everywhere victory was mine but they did not know how to run
Fantastic quote, thanks for sharing it in full. Thanks for watching.
During the "Shaving" scene a British, soldier leaning on a cannon, lights up a Cigarette.
My grandmother told me "don't let anybody tell you different; Napoleon was black."
but due to weather Napoleon was not ready to at 9am the last french troops did not arrive on the battlefield till around 10.30 11am
Exactly so. Half the army had a 10-mile march to get to the battlefield. The artillery was extremely difficult to deploy because of the deep mud. It was literally impossible for him to hae started the battle before noon because much of the army would have been missing.
The Epic Soviet series "War and Peace" had the biggest of all time with thousands of Soviet Army! Not only did they react to Prince Bargrations epic rear guard action after Austerlitz, but the Battle of Borodino, made in 1967, was Directed by Sregey Bondarchuk. Waterloo 1970 was ok, but I lost faith in it when teh explosions started to look like Napalm!
❤Waterloo was also directed by Bondarchuk! Using similar mounted Red Army troops he’d featured in W and P. And filmed in Soviet Ukraine. I agree his Borodino was more powerful overall. It was actually supposed to be one 7 hour movie not a series, but usually broken up into 4 for obvious reasons.
Napoleon wasn't ever going to destroy Wellington's army. It was deployed in such a way that it could retire down the road to Brussels and the best British regiments were in reserve back there (missing the battle) to act as rearguard if needed. Wellington did this because, he wasn't sure that Blucher's Prussian army would intervene.
Napoleon & Wellington were born on the same year 1769
The English infantry was composed of Irish recruits
And Scots. That what poor people did when they have no income: they join the army. Scotland and Ireland were both very easy sources of soldier recruits.
What about the KGL?
@@normanstewart7130 The former regular army of Hannover. Good soldiers but far too few. Again, part of England's tradition of fighting France to the very last German available. England had been using German mercenaries for well over a century prior to Waterloo. It fought the American Revolution using as many Germans as it could find.
@@colinhunt4057 Indeed. So Wellington's army was not "composed of Irish recruits", which is a myth that has developed. On the BBC website we find: "It is estimated that about 9,000 Irishmen fought with the Duke of Wellington's army.
Most of them were in locally raised regiments such as the 27th Inniskillings and the 5th Royal Inniskilling Dragoon Guards and the 18th Kings Irish Hussars."
Ironically, most reviews--prior to Ridley's flick--gave it two stars out of four. Funny how subsequent movies make look better.
Interesting, I think I might be biased based upon watching it as a kid with Dad and just loving the epic scale of the movie. But a very interesting point.
It is good to show these movies. As we move toward World War 3, it makes for great psychological messaging. I wish I would have never read Gustave LeBon and Edward Bernay's writings.
What are their writings about.
@@bigbattleslittleworlds Gustave Le Bon is a famous French writer of the post-Napoleonic era, the author of great books "Psichology of the Crowd" and "Psichology of the Revolution". Sincerely suggest to read!
“That’s not necessary, that’s not necessary it’s the Prussians… but as long as you and I AND the army are concerned… their on the moon”
Lions led by Donkeys? I doubt if Arthur Wellesley was part of species Equus Asinus 😀😀
Given the significant Russian contribution to the film, the largely positive view of Napoleon is surprising.
For your information, the British soldiers were lions but they were not lead by donkeys.
I agree, our officers were Lions also and showed the same courage as the men under their command and, as a result suffered huge losses by exposing themselves to enemy fire etc. That is just a saying popularised during the Crimean War and over the years has been used to describe British forces around the world and in different periods.
Lions led by donkeys??
Wtf? This film shows british officers at their finest.
Which officer was portrayed as a donkey?
Actually watch the film, you might learn something.
.
You should have listened to the commentator. He was referring to another battle, not Waterloo. Also, it wasn't his personal comment, he was reflecting on what one of the French marshals allegedly said.
@@ynysvon dont talk nonsense.
Watch the film.
@Andy-ub3ub
I have seen the film many times, but you don't seem to get it.The saying 'lions led by donkeys' has never been referred to the battle of Waterloo by anyone.
The quote as I said was not from Waterloo but was a description used to describe the British military. Thanks for watching.
@@ynysvon Thanks for watching and you are correct.
That 7hr movie is not Dr Zhivago but War and Peace (война и мир) by Sergey Bondarchuk, the same director that directed this film. The cavalry charge to the square was obviously recycled from the War and Peace. Do your homework, dude
Still waiting to see what the hidden gems are, this was just a walk through of the battle, build up and outcome..
Yeah Napoleon never did stay long enough in Spain to fight Wellingtons army he left to deal with other matters and he left Marshal soult sousha and Ney to it at least for a little bit Ney was sent to Central Europe as well as soult till he went back
Great movie but many of the extras were scarcrows. But great art compared to latest Napoleon which is a comedy. Speaking of smaller than imagined, ever been to Pearl Harbor?
I would love to visit but not yet.
Rod Steiger & Christopher Plummer SHUT UP AND WATCH. By the way, Plummer was the best Klingon EVER
As I get older I realise now just how brainwashed we are as children, I was so proud of much I learned as a child of my country's past standing up and defeating 'old Bony' and the likes, I realise now just how biased and back to front it all is.
Napoleon was an everyman who stood up against the oldest enemy of the people, the rich and powerful. His country had overturned the status quo and stood up and overthrew the privileged and powerful bleeding the country dry.
Of course all the other powerful nations of Europe could not allow this idea to spread to their own countries Britain, Austria, Russia, Prussia etc all having interconnected royal families all countries guilty of bleeding their people dry while living the high life and making out Napoleon to be the 'Monster'
We only have to look around us at the corruption and total bias the rich have over the people of the world to see what an ugly mess we are forced to live in where the corrupt and wealthy avoid prosecution over their crimes while the majority are penalised and imprisoned for not even half the same offences.
Though this is a great film I found my blood boiling the other day while watching the scene where Christopher Plummer as Wellington was in discussion with his wife referring to the soldiers as 'criminals and cutthroats' a mentality the likes of Wellington and his ilk still harbour to the general population of the UK to this very day, the very Idea that 'common people' are there to die for the benefit of such as Wellington and his lot has and always will be a very real attitude.
His wife even alludes to the fact that even the 'Monster' Napoleon would not display such arrogance in his view of his own soldiers and Wellington's very deliberate and deeply embedded response to this is that 'Napoleon is not a Gentleman'
Only the arrogance of the likes of people of Wellingtons background could even attempt to justify such views. It is the same mentalities that were on full display during the 40's when Churchill would lead Britain while the country at large would be told to 'Make do and Mend' Churchill of course would not go without his three course dinners and Brandy and cigars
As an Englishman in my 50's I can say without any doubt in my mind with what I have seen happen in my own lifetime to my country and the disgraceful behaviour that has always been common place in Britain due to the Wellingtons of this world I would have been fighting for the French.
Napoleon was a true hero and is one of the reasons his name is legendary to this day while few remember Wellington in anywhere near the same regard.
I recently read a book that was structured around the diary of a cavalry officer during the earlier Peninsula war. He expressed your views about Napoleon and mused on which side he should be on.
@@TheSheriff339 Oh ok thanks for that, that's very interesting 👍
Wellingtons wife isn’t in the film. I presume you mean where discussing with Virginia McKenna who played the Duchess of Richmond.
Whilst much is made of Wellington and his comments about scum of he earth, his men seemed to have great affection for him. Much of that probably because they knew he would look out for them as much as could in terms of food, shelter etc, quite often complaining that had to retreat due to lack of supplies etc. also knowing that would face superior numbers aimed via defensive battles, to keep his casualties low. They may have been the scum of the earth, but they were his scum of the earth.
Whilst certainly may not have thought much of Napoleon on the social scale Wellington certainly respected napoleons ability, far more so then napoleon did of Wellington.
And whilst napoleon may have started out as a common man then wasn’t above becoming emperor and attempting to start hereditary rule for his family.
He also was dismissive of Wellington referring to him as a sepoy general, with the feeling being that Indian experience was no real test.
Even in the British army afterwards then European stationed officers looked down upon officiers having served in the Indian Army.
This also was also the height of class divide where to be an officer then had bought commission so had to have wealth. Wellington having been the 6th son pretty much had no real expectation of having made up the social ladder as he did so also probably had a certain defensiveness regarding his own background. At the time he is talking to the wife of the 4th Duke of Richmond who in her own right was the daughter of the 4th Duke of Gordon so would most likely be seen as inferior himself as whilst a Duke himself was the 1st Duke of Wellington so on the social ladder below. Whilst indeed there were soldiers risen from the ranks then they were not that common.
@@michaelmcnally2331
I certainly do not claim to be well informed on this period of history and really only have an interest in Napoleon to be honest.
Although I have probably watched this film a dozen times I confess I have always believed this was the case, and now you have pointed this out feel this scene is a little ambiguous for those not really up on the history here.
Regardless the Idea of 'Class' exists purely for the benefit of the wealthy and is something that has deeply irritated me all of my life.
Napoleon may have fallen foul of the same hypocrisy as that of the rest of them, but it was very much what he stood for and represented that the coalitions could not abide, regardless of how he saw himself, he would never be one of them, and was made out to be the ogre of the piece.
As for being an officer the very same hypocrisy exists to this very day and has never changed from 1815 to 2024, nor will it.
I have always found it particularly ironic that Nelson one of the greatest Heroes in British history who it could be argued was held in even greater regard than Wellington, was a commoner and was only able to be elevated to the lofty heights of admiral because it was possible at the time for such men to rise in the navy.
Not that it is the case today of course, as the same blind prejudice exists throughout all aspects of the 'British' system
Being a student of history and having interests in many different eras I have always been fascinated at how time is littered with nations that have continuously kicked themselves in the balls because of their own stupid politics and pathetic mentalities.
From Athens crippling herself, destroying the likes of Socrates and bringing low Alkidiades (her best hope of victory during the Peloponnesian war), to the pathetic carrying on of the cowards back in Carthage that would rather cripple their greatest son Hannibal, fighting what would become the most dangerous nation in antiquity, because they were too concerned with the Barca family becoming too powerful, which led to the very destruction of the entire nation.
Considering the 'Common folk' outnumber the privileged a million to one, I often wonder what incredible individuals have been denied their place in history or at least at the top of their fields due to this ridiculous attitude and bias.
@@michaelmcnally2331 The statement of "scum of the earth" came from the retreat from Burgos in late 1812. As a result of very bad work by quartermasters, the supply of the British army completely broke down. The army virtually disintegrated for a few weeks, looting, robbing, raping and drinking at the expense of the Spanish peasantry. It was some time before Wellington and his provosts could restore order. Well, provosts and quite a few hangings for 'plundering'.
The campaign in Spain in 1812 was a very complex and confused struggle. So it's not surprising that the British were unprepared for the huge scale of their success at the Battlle of Salamanca. It was the very first time that a French army had been so completely shattered as that disaster at the hands of Wellington or anyone else. Among other things, it was so crushing that it persuading Tsar Alexander I to defy Napoleon in the invasion of Russia that year. Napoleon captured Moscow, but Russia fought on.
Comment
Thanks for watching and the comment, it does help with the algorithm.
Your being kind to Ney launching several fruitless unsupported cavalry charges.
If only Napoleon had put his best Marshall Davout in command instead of Ney.
@timlewellen6325 Nonsence.
@@ramuner2816 read a book.
@@ramuner2816Ney was utterly fearless, but i think his charge lost them the battle, five horses shot from under him and he still kept fighting, gave the order for his own execution. total chad.
Agreed he should have taken Davout with him, and possibly allowed Murat back to lead his cavalry again.
@@bigbattleslittleworlds Napoleon should take Davout to Waterloo assigning him the command of the right wing of the army in Ligny instead of Grouchy, that's for sure. I believe, in such case the outcome of the Waterloo battle would be completely different.
It was Grouchy, who spoiled everything by pursuing Prussians and absent in Waterloo with his 30000 men - definitely not Ney, who was unjustly blamed for the lost battle.