"War and Peace: Andrew Prince Andrew (1965)" Movie Review Essay & Film Analysis

As usual in films Bondarchuk, even if the film becomes frankly boring statement seems to place, country, the work of the operator and editor -dovolno hrenovenkoy..vso still great actors on itself pull the entire film. So it was with They fought for their country, about the same happened here. The mere posing -dekoratsii, costumes, picture Okay. The plot, loosely, on the whole interesting. Feed itself very nudnovato. Interesting thought Tolstoy, which he puts into the heads of the characters themselves-such a simple truth, but it looks like it is still a very deliberate and boring. Scale shooting action scenes seriously, but the quality ... corporate identity Bondarchuk. I've realized more in They fought for their country, he does not like the war sharply and strongly suggests that war is a mess, a mess, 'mixed horses, people ..', was also here in War and Peace. But damn! How can a shame! Many extras, such shooting and no one normally removed battle scene, I even gave up.
regards actors. Tikhonov in his standard eternal serious manner. But Bondarchuk once again I almost shocked. Great game! A completely new way! Not a bit of similarity with him a hero of They Fought for Their Country (where he played as great!)
In general, for the overall development and may be useful for, well, to say that I supposedly had seen war and mir..a in fact. - it is not necessary. Nothing new or hidden I have not seen yet. Quite a simple truth. Subjectively, it is necessary to have a 6-ku slapped, but somehow .. Bondarchuk, Tikhonov, Tolstoy finally -ruka does not rise.
7 of 10

How to cite this essay: