Tango01 | 21 Nov 2015 11:57 a.m. PST |
The battle scenes… humm… YouTube link What do you think? Amicalement Armand |
Quiles | 21 Nov 2015 12:16 p.m. PST |
|
IronDuke596 | 21 Nov 2015 12:21 p.m. PST |
Yes, indeed it looks great! |
KTravlos | 21 Nov 2015 1:23 p.m. PST |
The snippets do not look bad. We will see. |
doug redshirt | 21 Nov 2015 2:04 p.m. PST |
Actually a cavalry charge in multiple lines and in formation, wow. Also the artillery actually recoils when fired, that is a first. |
KTravlos | 21 Nov 2015 4:05 p.m. PST |
Doug, the cavalry looks good yes. Artillery recoiling was present in the Waterloo film (to a point, and I was surprised) and the Heroes and Villain's episode on Napoleon. Worth watching. YouTube link Guns start baling at the 3:40 mark |
wrgmr1 | 21 Nov 2015 4:09 p.m. PST |
Looks good. BBC is usually very good at historical pieces. |
waaslandwarrior | 22 Nov 2015 5:47 a.m. PST |
The uniforms also look like the should, I think. I must keep an eye on this! |
20thmaine | 22 Nov 2015 10:07 a.m. PST |
Not sure about that quick cut segment at ~36 seconds (man charging) Aaaarghh! (woman giving birth) Aaaarghh! (new born baby) Aaaarghh! Man doing something suggestive of auto-eroticism with a champagne bottle…. …hmm. I hope they don't play the "sexy Tolstoy" part up too much, as it isn't really there in the book. Does look impressive though. |
legatushedlius | 22 Nov 2015 2:48 p.m. PST |
The only negative I can think of is that it is only six (presumably) one hour episodes not the 21 we got in 1972. Looks fantastic, though! |
Tango01 | 22 Nov 2015 2:55 p.m. PST |
Glad you enjoyed it boys!. (smile) Amicalement Armand |
Gazzola | 23 Nov 2015 5:00 a.m. PST |
Tango01 In another topic on this series, some members criticised the Russian uniforms as being incorrect and I remarked on how clean they looked in most of the clips shown, considering they were on campaign and in battle. To me, from what little I've seen, I think the battles scenes will be very limited, which will be very disappointing, although I sincerely hope I am totally wrong on that point. But it is something Napoleonic, which is rare on TV these days, so it will be welcome viewing for that alone. But we must remember it is not a documentary or a story about war, but a story about people affected by war. |
vtsaogames | 23 Nov 2015 6:09 a.m. PST |
"Rose" from Downton Abbey as Natasha? I think of Audrey Hepburn. Oh well. |
Tango01 | 23 Nov 2015 10:34 a.m. PST |
My friend Gazzola… it seems that BEFORE the battle begin, all soldiers take care to look as their uniforms were on parade… then.. in middle of a battle… of course that change!… I have not many fait in this producction… cannot said why… (smile) Amicalement Armand |
Gazzola | 23 Nov 2015 4:27 p.m. PST |
Tango01 Yes, I understand that. But I imagine looking your best (and so clean in this case) in reality, would not be so easy after a period of hard campaigning, no matter how hard they tried. But it is a trivial matter and it is a drama, and I will certainly be watching it. Hopefully, we will all be surprised and enjoy it. |
Tango01 | 23 Nov 2015 10:45 p.m. PST |
Hope so too my friend! Amicalement Armand |
dantheman | 03 Jan 2016 2:35 p.m. PST |
They are advertising this on the History Channel in the U.S., has it played in the UK yet? It starts in mid January here. Any reviews? |
Maldini1966 | 03 Jan 2016 3:28 p.m. PST |
Just watched first episode . was pretty good . Uniforms looked Ok and Dano was a good Pierre .battle scenes were not bad either Cheers Losh |
steamingdave47 | 03 Jan 2016 3:29 p.m. PST |
Did the BBC employ a military adviser? They got the 1805 Russian uniforms wrong- kiwers for heaven's sake. Infantry not wearing correct inspection facings etc. Obviously trying to save a few quid by having same uniforms for the later 1812 battles. Just needed a quick Google search. link |
jammy four | 03 Jan 2016 5:14 p.m. PST |
on balance very enjoyable……. |
legatushedlius | 03 Jan 2016 6:12 p.m. PST |
They had a military adviser but it doesn't look like he was responsible for costumes. link |
Gunfreak | 05 Jan 2016 6:42 a.m. PST |
Did the BBC employ a military adviser? They got the 1805 Russian uniforms wrong- kiwers for heaven's sake. Infantry not wearing correct inspection facings etc. Obviously trying to save a few quid by having same uniforms for the later 1812 battles. Just needed a quick Google search.link Well most figure manifactures don't seem to know russians had diffrent uniforms for 1805 either. or don't care would be more apporiate to say. |
Gazzola | 17 Jan 2016 4:47 a.m. PST |
Just managed to view the first two episodes back to back. Straight away, I was a bit miffed at the start where the words '1805 Napoleon invaded Austria' fill the screen. I thought great, blame Napoleon as usual, don't mention the Allies had declared war, paid for by Britain and had invaded Bavaria and this was Napoleon's response. Still, it appears the author himself was supposed to have stated that War and Peace was not a novel or a history, so obviously it is a case of why let the truth get in the way of a good story. And War and Peace certainly is a good story in which we follow the conflicting relationships and love lives of some Russian aristocratic families, with a bit of war and duelling thrown in for good measure. But I do hope the 1812 battles scenes are better than those shown so far, which I felt were very disappointing. But at least it is Napoleonic and I guess we should be grateful since we have been starved from anything Napoleonic on TV since Sharpe. I've watched the repeats too many times and my youngest son bought me the Sharpe Collection. Anyway, back to War and Peace, apparently, there are 160 real people named in the book, not that I've checked. |
138SquadronRAF | 17 Jan 2016 10:12 a.m. PST |
I was a bit miffed at the start where the words '1805 Napoleon invaded Austria' fill the screen. Well you would be mate. While the heading it is technically correct in the sense that Napoleon moved troops into the hostile territory of Austria. In much they same way as there was an invasion of France (twice) in 1944 – afterall everyone seems to forgets Operation Dragoon. What would have been more accurate would have been: "Napoleon moves his "Army of the Ocean" stationed at the Camp of Boulogne and trained for 2 years in the wake of the Peace of Amiens intended for the invasion of England into Austrian territory." Sometimes brevity has advantages. Unless we have rolling opening credits a la "Star Wars." As to quality of the battle scenes, I suspect they'll sink to the level of Sharpe…. |
Gazzola | 17 Jan 2016 1:49 p.m. PST |
138SquadronRAF Yes, but we would still need …'into Austrian territory, after responding to the Allied invasions of both Bavaria and Italy.' Just a few words, was all that it needed and I could have then sat back, ignored other historical and military errors and enjoyed the story. Nothing wrong with Sharpe, apart from it getting slightly repetitive and having the worse ever drama/programme version of the Battle of Waterloo. |
Gazzola | 17 Jan 2016 3:37 p.m. PST |
I meant to add, did anyone recognise the actor Tom Burke, who plays Russian officer Fedya Dolokhov (the one Pierre's wife is having an affair with), as the same actor who played the young Napoleon at the French victory at Toulon 1793, in the TV series Heroes and Villains? |
tberry7403 | 18 Jan 2016 6:06 p.m. PST |
I still think Woody Allen did the best version "War and Peace". |
Gunfreak | 19 Jan 2016 12:06 p.m. PST |
Havn't seen episode two yet. But the small part of battle we do see in the first episode is allready better then sharpe. |
Gazzola | 20 Jan 2016 1:13 p.m. PST |
Gunfreak I don't know about that. In the Sharpe battles both sides did appear to be fighting and shooting at each other. In the War and Peace scenes, a lot of the troops on both sides seem to be running around totally ignoring each other, with a few crash bang explosions thrown in for effect. Still, we have the action scenes for 1812 to come yet, so here's hoping. |
Inkpaduta | 21 Jan 2016 6:31 p.m. PST |
I watched the first episode and liked it but the battle scenes are so-so. Mainly they have men in a field fighting man to man all around the field. No lines or sense of order. The artillery balls explode with tons of dirt and flame and men being thrown into the sky. |
dantheman | 23 Jan 2016 3:56 p.m. PST |
So which version od War and Peace is the best? Sounds like 1972 with Anthony Hopkins is preferable to this version. The battle scenes should be better in this age of cgi. |
Gazzola | 24 Jan 2016 5:21 a.m. PST |
dantheman I think the problem is that film makers feel lots of bangs and fire is the way to go, no matter what period of warfare the plot involves. They don't see a cannonball ploughing through formations as 'entertaining or dramatic' enough as lots of flames. It always seems to be a case of 'why let accuracy get in the way of a good effect'. However, saying that, we have not seen the 1812 action scenes yet, so you never know. Although we probably do know and just hope they will be better. Still, it is Napoleonic, so I suppose we shouldn't grumble too much. |
Gunfreak | 24 Jan 2016 5:31 a.m. PST |
Are we sure it's the cannonballs that blow up and not the howitzer shells? |
138SquadronRAF | 26 Jan 2016 10:53 a.m. PST |
Well it seems that Dominic Lieven was the historical adviser to the series; how that will effect the views of some of the "Idiot Tendency" here will be interesting to judge. Re the Uniforms; Prof. Lieven is quite well aware of the changes in uniform, so were the costuming department, so were the accountants. The accountants won. As an avid reader of the Torygraph, they had the following take on the historical accuracy: link My complaint, compared to the book and the 1970's BBC production is that it seems rushed. There is a subtlety to the book that seems lost in this production. |
Gunfreak | 01 Feb 2016 6:44 a.m. PST |
Last episode was extremly boring, teenage girl drama |
Theoden1 | 02 Feb 2016 10:25 a.m. PST |
Don't listen to all the whining. I've read the book twice and been a Napoleonic buff/gamer most of my life. I absolutely love it, it exceeded my expectations on every front. You could quibble with a few things but you're not going to see anything like this on TV. Enjoy it and don't miss the forest for the trees. |
Double G | 02 Feb 2016 6:19 p.m. PST |
Please don't screw up Borodino and the retreat from Moscow Please don't screw up Borodino and the retreat from Moscow Please don't screw up Borodino and the retreat from Moscow |
Maldini1966 | 03 Feb 2016 9:33 a.m. PST |
Theoden1. I agree! Cheers Losh |
Gunfreak | 03 Feb 2016 12:39 p.m. PST |
Well the cut down the battle of borodino to about 10 minutes. Not a single volley, just some cannon shot and mele in the redoubt. |
Trajanus | 03 Feb 2016 12:42 p.m. PST |
As to quality of the battle scenes, I suspect they'll sink to the level of Sharpe… Well that certainly hasn't happened. Borodino was great at the weekend and all the troops have looked pretty good to me in the non battle sequences too. No doubt one of our resident button counters can find some "unforgivable mistakes" but given they probably didn't have a Hollywood budget of several hundred million dollars I think the costumes over all and the military side of things have been excellent! Last episode was extremly boring, teenage girl drama Considering the book is about people and the war is the background that holds the story together that's hardly surprising. Fitting over 1400 pages into six hours and making a cohesive story out of it is no mean feat. I can't imagine there are too many teenage girls out there could even read it! |
Trajanus | 03 Feb 2016 12:50 p.m. PST |
Having just read the Torygraph link provided above: "What quite clearly is an oxymoron is that there would be a displaced aristocrat from the French ancient regime who would even consider wearing such an honour." In response to a character wrongly wearing the Legion d'Honeur I would suggest the author of the quote look up the word "oxymoron"! |
Gunfreak | 03 Feb 2016 1:01 p.m. PST |
Considering the book is about people and the war is the background that holds the story together that's hardly surprising. Spending 1/6th of a series on the girl troubles of a spoiled bratt girl. While cutting down borodino to bearly 10 minutes is unforgivable. |
Trajanus | 03 Feb 2016 2:25 p.m. PST |
|
Gazzola | 03 Feb 2016 3:43 p.m. PST |
The military scenes up to the battle of Borodino looked good, but the actual battle in my opinion was a big disappointment and in no way expressed the reality of the titanic struggle. And, although it has already been mentioned that there are errors in historical accuracy (which film/drama hasn't?) we must remember that it is but a drama based on a classic novel, not a documentary. And apart from that, the mass majority of viewers would not have blinked had Wellington turned up at the battle. On the positive side, I wonder if the clean uniforms indicates that another Napoleonic drama might be in the offing and the actors and props people etc had been ordered to take care of them. Wishful thinking, I suppose, but you never know. |
ubercommando | 03 Feb 2016 4:15 p.m. PST |
The battle scenes are there for the characters to get involved in, they are not the focus of the story. So Austerlitz and Borodino happen purely from Andrei's, Pierre's and Nikolai's perspectives. If you want sweeping panorama battles, then watch the Russian 1967 version. OK the good points about this version: 1. The cast. Dano is an excellent Pierre and James Norton and Lily James fit their parts well. Dare I say it but Dano is better in the role than Anthony Hopkins was and Hopkins was excellent. 2. The locations. Filming on location in Russia and Latvia help bring the sense of scope and landscape. 3. The look. You can clearly see where the budget went. it's a visual feast. The bad: 1. It's rushed. 6 1 hour episodes isn't enough. Episode 6 has to feature Pierre's assassination attempt on Napoleon, the retreat and him getting taken prisoner where he befriends Platon, Andrei's fate, Pierre and Natasha's fate and Nikolai's and Marya's budding relationship amongst other things. A lot has been taken out and this is where the 1972 version triumphs. Mind you, the Russian 1967 version is 6 hours long and then there's the 1956 version that clocks in at a measly 3 and a half hours! 2. It doesn't capture the feel of Russian culture. It's almost like Austen or Bronte with very English manners transposed on Russian characters. The writer has clearly taken the English costume drama template and made War and Peace fit it. 3. The music. Whilst I like the inclusion of Russian folk songs which the characters sing, the soundtrack is bland. The other versions all go for the big orchestra…the 1972 version uses Tchaikovsky! The stuff I'm alright with: 1. The battles. Like I said, the battle scenes are fine from a storytelling point of view. They serve as the backdrop for the character's actions. We don't need to see huge corps and divisions manoeuvring around or the minutiae of tactics. Go watch the 1967 version for that. One really good bit is the slow motion scene of Andrei in battle, getting bayoneted and collapsing. Watch the extras in the background; they're really going for it. 2. Some minor characters just aren't as good as in the 1972 version. Whilst I think Dano and James are better than Hopkins and Hood in their roles, Colin Baker is a better Anatole Kuragin and the Rostovs were better and more fleshed out as characters in the '72 version. But everyone is still OK in this version. |
Gunfreak | 04 Feb 2016 9:33 a.m. PST |
I don't agree about the lack of battle. It's called WAR and peace, not 6 hours of peace and 5 minutes of war. Hell it's not even called peace and war. The battle of borodino does not look like borodino. It could just have been a skirmsih between a few hundred troops. Nothing show this as the bloodiest battle in Europe up to WW1. This could have been "the skrimsish of the watering hole" Not "one of the blodiest and grand battles in history of warfare" Hell you don't even see a single cavalry unit. Mabye there wasn't amy cavalry there? Oh wait borodino had like 70 000 cavalry. Oh and those 1500 cannon, I guess 3 cannon will do. I know how big and epic Borodino was. Most people don't and they will not know after watching this series. Borodino was a battle of 3 cannon and 30 soldiers… |
ubercommando | 05 Feb 2016 5:47 a.m. PST |
Gunfreak, have you read the book? |
Gunfreak | 05 Feb 2016 6:12 a.m. PST |
No but then the series us not the book either just based on it, with new plot lines added. Also visual media is diffrent from writen. Much if what happens in the battles in the lotr films are greatly expanded on from the books. |
Ben Avery | 05 Feb 2016 10:58 a.m. PST |
And the LOTR films were all the worse for excessive CGI, shield-surfing elves, dwarf-tossing and a Scooby Doo ghost army. This is a BBC Sunday evening drama. If it's not Downton Abbey, then if must be regency England. Battles are a backdrop. The majority of the viewing public neither know nor care that Russian uniforms changed and as much as it was about cost, keeping the same ones also helps the non-wargamers keep track of who's who. If you want big battles, go and watch the 1967 version on Youtube and see what you can do with thousands of under-employed conscripts and the biggest film budget in the history of the Soviet Union and a point to prove about Russian arms(and even then some uniforms look a bit dodgy). Mind you, for more of a Russian feel I enjoyed Onegin and Anna Karenina. |
Gunfreak | 05 Feb 2016 2:27 p.m. PST |
I have the russian version and yes, while it's a very bad dvd, with half the dialog dubed, half not dubed often with out english subtitles so it's impossible to follow who is who… The battle does convey the desruction and death brough upon russia. the new bbc version does not. Borodino seems unimportant a footnote in history no diffrent from any skirmish between 30 guys. |