So wild that something so epic and well made is just available for free on RU-vid. Mosfilm just keeps posting all their greatest stuff, with english subtitles to boot, it's awesome.
The dark side of this moon is that in USSR we didn't give a shit about copyright XD, and since all of the soviet classics were basically a state property, now it is all in a public domain.
Even King Vidor's stinker War and Peace was better. Herbert Lom as Napoleon was that film's only stroke of genius but at least it had one unlike Scott's. My dad is still gutted.
@@kaykutcher2103 When I watched Ridley Scott's Napoleon I just said that was it? It's disappointing, it lacked grandeur during battles and WTF there are no trenches at Waterloo
One of the greatest films of all time. A true masterpiece. Was lucky to see all parts of it in theater in 2019 following its restoration and was floored at how it looked and sounded. Just amazing.
Thank you. Despite being Russian I've never before stumbled upon even a domestic review of War and Peace production story, so it's quite interesting to see it from the external perspective. I'd say you did very well with the research, collecting and editing all the footage. The only "cringey" moment for me was with those comments about soldiers and air force not being reimbursed for their part in the movie - I found them to be completely out of place and quite pointless in the essence. As you've stressed yourself on multiple occasions, their involvement was facilitated by the government. And it means just that, all the military servicemen involved in WnP production were on duty, and thus all the costs, materiel, logistics (and wages, where applicable) were covered by the Ministry of Defense. And I seriously doubt there were any hard feelings between MoD and Mosfilm about that. Better imagine how incredible it must have felt for someone to be conscripted to serve those two long boring years in the army, but to find themselves in the middle of a full-scale historical battle reconstruction/reenactment effort. Naturally, that came with certain hardships, but what a unique experience and memories for life to be told to grandchildren!
This is interesting. I imagine their must have been 'domestic' reviews of the film, the state being so essential to the production. Some of the behind the scenes footage I originally saw was I think, Russian but touched on just a fraction of this epic effort as outlined by Void Volken.
Солдатам и гражданской массовке платили одинаково. 3 рубля за съёмочный день. 5 рублей за роль со словами. "Ура!" - тоже считалось словом. Советский солдат получал в те времена жалованье 5 руб./мес.
Coppola and Ridley Scott notoriously go the extra mile on production design. Bondarchuk went an extra hundred miles. "How many items from Soviet museums do you want, Mr Bondarchuk." "All of them."
He went the extra 100 miles and yet made it seem light a graceful forward step. One does not feel one is looking at a film but rather entering the novel and Life itself.
@@johnkrieger185 Ah, stimulating provocation - and the ongoing contest of reaction and response. You've set the cat among the pigeons. I think an absence of authorial style is necessary in a film, or any film of War and Peace - it would only get in the way. And one must recognize certain signature marks of a Russian film, soviet or otherwise that is endemic to the history of Russian film. The use of freeze frame close ups highlight social instances of great moment. Eisenstein deployed them. They are 'intended' to be obvious and I think the viewer can live with them.
@@johnkrieger185 Unless the projector once broke down and jammed, I don't think I ever saw an Eisenstein freeze frame. I mis spoke in suggesting I did. Sorry, particularly to Eisenstein. I was going to say something about 'dynamic' frame use and one or two of the famous methods of montage and which obviously have nothing to do with Bondarchuk's static effect of freeze frame, together with the narrator's summation of Borodino. An interjection not unlike Tolstoy's in the novel.
Kurosawa's, *_Dersu Uzala_* is also on there, an amazing film set in Russia in the early 1900s: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-sFaL03SKEzE.html
Thank you for committing the daunting amount of research to cover this topic. My questions about the film’s seemingly impossible existence were not only answered, but even exceeded my perceptions of the lengths gone through to achieve it.
I remember as a teenager being completely overwhelmed by this truly epic movie when it was first shown here in Australia. Only recently was I able to see it in its original uncut format again and am convinced it is the greatest movie ever made.
Dear commonwealth viewer, from a parallel universe I can only echo your memory and sentiment. For me its was a viewing on a cold, winter afternoon with my parents all those years ago and not unlike some scenes in the film.
Some sources seem to suggest that a portion of the film might be lost forever. I have no idea as there's so much conflicting details surrounding this amazing movie.
@@HermaphroGynandro This is interesting and yes, a little uncertain. Although I'm under the impression that I've seen the film in full I'm perhaps a bit muddled.
@@sgt_lensky Think so. And maybe he just wasn’t that crazy back in the day. He made great movies, the last was Gladiator even if it wasn’t historically accurate at all. Wish he had some lessons from Bondarchuk
He didn't flourish under Stalin. He was removed from his position when Stalin saw the second part of "Ivan the Terrible" and he was forced into teaching.
@@johnkrieger185 He did. He made of the greatest movies ever made in 20-40s. Members of the party disliked his portrayal of Ivan the Terrible and his army in the second episode. They were offended by it so second episode was in the shelves for 10 years. But don't forget that he was still big figure under Stalin. Even after production of Ivan the Terrible he recieved few medals. Where did you get information that he was forced in to teaching? He was a publicist. He was a big figure in soviet cinema. Still. He was the head of the Cinema Sector of the Institute of Art History of the USSR Academy of Sciences. Doesn't looks like he was removed from somewhere by Stalin. Enisenstein was interested in cinema and how techologies can change it, how colorful movies can change everything. He wrote many articles about cinema. And by the way, Eisenstein worked many years on his second movie to try to release him, corrected some things for the party. I highly doubt he liked cencorship, but he still had many things he liked.
Как дети малые. Ведь сохранились протоколы беседы Эйзенштейна со Сталиным по поводу второй части "Ивана Грозного". Эйзенштейну дали время на переделку фильма. А он возьми, да умри! Вон Бондарчук, без всякого Берии после съёмок "Войны и мира" инфаркт схватил!
History of making War and Peace reminds the production of Lord of the Rings in best way possible. I mean both directors prepare heavily, recieved tons of letters from fans, both made movies based on very loved books with huge fan audience and both tried to stay true to the original material as possible.
Nothing I love better than seeing a small channel make a shit hot video like channels with millions of subs can’t.. never heard of this beast of a film but I’m definitely gonna watch it after this video 😅 top mate.
*Sergei Bondarchuks wasn't only an epic film directorector but a talented actor as well, practically the most international soviet actor ever, he could be considered the soviet Orson Wells and as a matter of fact, they even coincided in the movie Battle of Neretva (1969)🧐*
Of Bondarchuk, director ' and ' actor. I find him completely satisfying as Pierre. I've seen a photo of Wells with Bondarchuk, the two men looking as distinguished and solid as statues. Indeed I've seen a photo of Bondarchuk being presented to the late Queen. Yet I must examine the ' Battle of Neretva '. Thank you for this information.
this movie would easily cost a billion dollars or more if made today. The epic scale of the production is far and beyond what any studio would ever even remotely attempt today.
Thank you for this video...this is the most epic and grandiose movie project ever (after LOTR perhaps, that is a whole different level). An informative, interesting and professional video! 🙌👏
Read the book. Pevear/Volkonsky trans. The Soviet movie is pretty good but somehow misses main power probably because you can’t turn certain books into movies, such as “Great Gatsby”.
Amazing film which i watched in one sitting on a wet winters day. I think i spoke Russian for days after due to the subtitles lol A great documentary / review, totally made me appreciate the film even more. Maybe another viewing is due now i have this information in my head. Nostrovia my friend ! Great channel and very well appreciated.
Something funny about the fall of Berlin is that the western press criticized the movie for showing only one side of the war ( soviet side) Meanwhile the west made hundreds of ww2 movies showing only one side of the war lol Also stalin was against cult of personality he has many speeches where he said that Later when he died stories about him were exaggerated by new soviet leadership
Hi from Russia. In our schools we supposed to read War and peace but... It's kinda boring. I've read till part of Austerlitz battle and that was single part of the book which I liked very much. And I was astonished by footage that you presented, it's not even close to images that my imagination created while I was reading War and peace, so I will definitely watch this movie. Thank you for video. It's unfair that you have no too much subscriptions, that's why I give one from myself.
Bondarchuk was such a method actor that he was clinically dead (possibly twice) during production which inspired him to create the scene for "afterlife" of fallen soldiers.
Awesome work, this is your longest video yet right? It goes to show the staggering amount of work this epic saga required. I also noticed you have quite a few video about 90s scifi anime. I would check those out later when I got the time.
Yes, this is currently the longest video I have ever made. Concerning videos I have done on 90s anime, I recommend checking out my video on Ghost in the Shell as it's similar to these 'Insane production behind' videos.
I really admire your work and would very much like to see this/these film(s). I'd love to see more of your videos focusing on epics - may I suggest Cleopatra (1963), The Fall of the Roman Empire (1965?) and other such epics of the era. Many thanks. Subscribed.
Thanks, while I enjoy making videos on epics there are other topics I would like to cover as well, so I try to reasonably space them out. Cleopatra is on my list but I still need a couple of things before proceeding with that video. The Fall of the Roman Empire is unlikely as I don't even own a copy of the film and its been out of print for years with little prospects of coming back in print, same goes for El Cid.
Superb documentary, Sir, well done. Saw the film in one go 4-5 times back in the day before the Internet, and the longest version was definitely longer than 7 hours. One showing was at a Soviet something-or-other, where there was a bust of Karl Marx in the room where the film was shown. All the showings began in the early afternoon, included dinner, and ended at midnight. Needless to say, it is stupendous. How much better would all the films based on novels and historical events be if directors were as respectful of the original text as Bondarchuk. 'Artistic licence' has become synonymous with distortion and misrepresentation.
The import note is that it wasn't just personal Stalin's wish to include something or cut something about himself. He hated when people idolized him even since 20s when he became hero for Tsaritsyno defence and people voted for renaming the city in Stalingrad. And there are many cases where he didn't like that. It was the whole leadership. The problem was they loved to kiss Stalin's a*s. It's not something that isn't presented anywhere else, but it was definetely more present at that time in USSR. But Stalin himself loved interfere in movies production simply because he was some kind of history nerd and he didn't like the portrayal of some historical characters he appreaciated if they were shown in a bad way. And overall he thought about moviles messages. It's not like he wanted to glorify himself.
Thank you for this elaborate dive into this film behind the scenes history. I have two points to make though: Just because Bondarchyuk was originally from Ukraine, it doesn’t mean he wasn’t already an accomplished and well respected actor/director. After all he was
Забавно, не думал что кто то на западе смотрел этот фильм. Лично для меня он стал отличной возможностью увидеть все то что происходило в романе. В том масштаб который и вообразить сложно. Жаль что его сын никудышный режиссёр
I wonder if any Russian filmmakers will try to make a major motion picture surrounding the making of this version of War and Peace. It definitely has potential.
I saw this film when it was released in the U.S. (at the DeMille Theater in NYC). It was 7 hours, with a two or three hour intermission between parts, so much time between that we had enough time to go to dinner at a restaurant and stroll around the city. I was around 9 years old and it was a celebrated event. Certain scenes still stand out to me to this day, like the duel between Pierre and Anatoly in the snow, the opening party scene and, of course, those impressive battles. The one thing that bothered me was the actor who played Napoleon looked nothing like Napoleon. I have not seen the film since, but I would love to watch it again.
Please avoid delving into soviet history. Your knowledge of it is quite limited to the western propaganda version of it. If anything Stalin was the godfather of great soviet cinema. His "censoring" was the best thing that could happen to soviet cinema as unlike the average political leader he had a quite unique understanding of art which frankly was a happy coincidence, but a fact nonetheless. His interaction with the soviet culture and fine arts elites had a profound positive effect on the latter. The great materpieces produced after Stalin's death would not be possible if not for Stalin inspired development and growth of obviously funded and guided by the state programs to create foundations of soviet art. The dumb telltales about how Stalin's rule was a dark tyranny and after his death freedom plunged from heavens onto the soviet artists is nothing but propaganda. The artists of the 60s were a product of the cradle of soviet art created under Lenin and Stalin, of course with strong influence and guidance from the old russian arts elite rooted in the Russian Empire. Not something western propaganda would ever dare to tell you. Chrustschev on the other hand was a total arts philistine. The man had no ear for music, no eye for art and nor knowledge nor education to understand it. A rude peasant. Another happy coincidence though was he did not interfere too much with evolvement of culture and arts.
@@Itoyokofan Oh, it didn't. That is a misconception. EVERY country, EVERY system creates a system of nepotism. It is a natural fact of life. It does hinder on one hand, but on the other it creates pressure to the artists they desperately need to be creative. Extreme liberalism in art always spawns bland, undesirable mediocrity. Just as nepotism does, Also Breshnev's time and the time after has produced amazing works of art. Despite all the nepotism and the state controlled systmem of support that would not allow this and that. I don't see how all that nepotism was such a huge factor.
It is sad how one has to have some special sensitivity and care to really appreciate the immensity of these things, otherwise they would go unnoticed. I was once showing my girlfriend not this, but the final battle scene from the Kubrick film Spartacus (less epic than this in scale but I assume everyone here would agree is quite comparable). She is very young and has never been too much into movies. Upon seeing that she still remained quite unimpressed I had to tell her: “Look, all those you see are real people, all of them, thousands of them, all dressed for the time period, all, until the very last of them, all trained to do those movements in perfect synchrony, all carrying weapons (false), all on a real field, in a way that you can see them moving like menacing geometric masses, just imagine the costs and the time and the effort.” Only then did she seem to take interest in it. Otherwise it would have very probably been a mere “meh”.
Not to butt in but I think I too have seen something of this footage of Russians queuing as well and a theatre packed with excited faces as the cast of the film are officially introduced at the beginning of production. It was part of the DVD extras to the non blue ray DVD box set. Bondarchuk looks every inch the avuncular director and not unlike Peter the Great. He had a daunting task ahead.
I'm surprised you made no mention of Eisenstein, who already showed that the USSR could produce stunning epics, or Tarkovsky, who continued that tradition.
25:04 Not all fake....it was normal in those days to use also real dead horses for those scenes. They even killed several horses for the production of "Waterloo" a few years later.....
Sry, but 34:00 is just not true. Stalin had already supported the Russian Orthodox Church during the Second World War and no repressions were carried out against it, after beginn of the war. With the help of the church, funds were collected for a new armoured brigade, which shows the solidarity of the Orthodox with the system.
تتسم الافللام الروسية بالواقعية بعيدا عن البهرجة الامريكية ,فلم السلم والحرب انتج من قبل الولايات المتحدة الامريكية وكذلك قام الاتحاد السوفيتي بأنتاج هذا الفلم وكانت النتيجة لصالح فلم الاتحاد السوفيتي لضخامة الانتاج والمحافضة على روح العصر وقد فاز الفلم بجائزة لينين ةقد نقل معركة موسيكو بواقعيبة عالية لم يصل اليها الفلم الامريكي
It's 2024, and I am blown away by a 1966 film. The realism of the film cannot be compared to anything CGI today. The drone shot was there even before the invention of a drone.
The apogee of movies made about historical events. Today’s producers/directors are simply amateurs by comparison they haven’t got a clue how to make a believable sense of period. The dialogue is laughable, modern characters in fancy dress. 😂😂
“This Goliath of a film was made to show the world that the Soviets could make a film on par, if not better than anything the west could hope to produce.” It didn’t prove anything like that but it was still a good movie.
@@MarMar-nq9ii That's like saying that Naziism and Communism are opposites. Actually, they are both authoritarian and totalitarian and both ended up in seemingly unending war to advance their ideologies. If Putin is not as bad as Stalin, it's only because he can't get away with it in the 21st century. He started out in the KGB and would have been a follower of Stalin if he had been born earlier.
What is the basis for such a statement? Your own rejection of someone else's work? The origin of the author? In our time, creativity can be judged about the origin of its creator
And look at the draging of icons in the film and the same now by putlers clergimen around the drenches and make parallels about moscovites mental capabilities during the centuries. 🤮🥴😖
