For all the hype it got I was expecting a lot more!

Excellent, a Must See

This is a must-see and one of the best documentaries - and films - of this year.

A movie that not only functions as a solid scarefest but a razor-sharp satire.

Frankly, I have watched only two short extracts of Part 1 as I could not bear to watch the whole part. In the 1st extract I was surprised to see that Natasha Rostova was a blue-eyed blonde, below medium height (according to the book, Natasha was a tall brunette). And Pierre Bezukhov was a thin man! (a 'massive', overweight man - according to the book). In the 2nd extract (I guess, it was the end of Part 1), I was shocked to see Bolkonsky and Rostova waltzing to the music which was composed by A.Khachaturian in 1940's (i.e. about 150 years after the events described in the book!!!). I doubt if the movie-makers ever read the book. The movie may be alright only for the American audience :-)

I have to say that I watched this movie because of my love for Russian history and for Tolstoy. I was entertained yet, disappointed as well.This series is based on the classic epic novel by Tolstoy and is a massive undertaking for any film company and this is a pretty good adaption. It tells the love story of several young aristocrats set against Napoleon's invasion of Russia in approximately 1812. There are a few war scenes, not many, but enough to know what is going on. While filmed in St Petersburg we don't get to see much of it due to it's limited budget I imagine. The focus is on the main protagonists and their relationships.My main problem was with the casting of some of the leads. This was truly a multi European cast of actors coming from all over Europe, including Italy, Germany, Russia, Poland, with some Brits thrown in as well.First of all, Clemence Poesy as Natasha wasn't believable to me. A young lady from an aristocratic family raised in the French style would carry herself much differently. Here she seems childish, bratty, and not especially beautiful, which she isn't in the book, but still she must show something that would attract as much passion as we are suppose to believe she does here. She certainly doesn't come close to the elegance and beauty of a young Audrey Hepburn in the 50's version.The characters of Andrej and Pierre (Alessio Boni and Alexander Beyer) seem very unemotional and stiff, especially Boni who doesn't seem at all passionate. This may be due to the fact that while they spoke English in it-you could tell from reading their lips-their voices were dubbed by British people more than likely due to their heavy Italian and German accents, Bonni being Italian and Beyer German. I have seen Boni before and he is a fine actor when allowed to speak for himself.The rest of the cast is good, with some fine older character actors included; Malcolm McDowell and Brenda Blethyn are marvelous. All of the actors are well known in their respective countries and some have made American or British movies before so they are recognizable to me. I loved the Russian general, Kutuzov, played so well by Dmitri Isayev, a fine character actor.The screen play seems written with the thought that the film will be dubbed and subtitles shown in many countries (I watched the Spanish subtitled version). The sentences are kept short to allow time for the viewers to read the captions; I find this very annoying. Not all the actors are dubbed; some actor's voices were used, accents and all. I love the story of War and Peace, so I watched the entire thing anyway and suggest you do the same if it is a favorite of yours. So far, I haven't seen a version I really love so I will have to make do with what we have so far. I prefer this version to the badly cast American version of the 1950's. Only Hepburn did a fairly good job in that film, possibly because she was born into a European aristrocaratic family and knew how a young woman would act. It did have a better screen play, in my opinion.To dub or notto dub? I prefer subtitles, added after the fact. Amricans, in general, do not like dubbing which is probably the reason it was never released here in the States, but many European countries use it a lot, although I hear that is changing.

Condensed classic of epic proportions and sensual sensory splendors! This Italian T.V. mini series is studded with an international cast of brilliant players and enough extras to fill the Cinecitta Rome set five times over. One of the fascinating things about this marvelously accessible version of the story is that it is in English. Don't let the Russian Box fool you. An extra added bonus it that the film was shot in Russia so you get the added pleasure of seeing some incredible architecture of the period and the stunning Russian countryside (And a little of Lithuania.) There is in the huge cast some real stand out performances. Brenda Blethyn is wonderful as always, and as Prince Andre's father Malcolm McDowell is chilling and arresting in his approach to the part.In the lead female role we have the lovely Cemence Posey, who is near perfect in a role so associated in the West with Audrey Hepburn. There have been complaints that she is a blond in a traditionally dark haired part, but that seems trivial to me in comparison to her performance. In the romantic lead of Prince Andre is the wonderful Italian star, Alessio Boni. He brings to the role a deliciously tragic gravitas that is so important to the story. He is a brilliant actor who needs more exposure on this side of the world. Just check out his work in 'The Best Of Youth' and 'Don't Tell'.Also the incredibly beautiful Violante Placido plays the wicked Helene with relish and great style. Not since Polly Walker in 'Rome' has there been such a delicious wicked woman on the screen. She was a delight to watch and I found myself missing her when she was not on screen.Benjamin Sadler, who was so brilliant in Augustus is on had to lend his considerable slithery charm and great presence to the role of Dolokov. Why is this actor not a huge star yet? Yes there are many other worthy performances to see and savor in this lush and enthralling film, too many to go any further with here. Rather, take the chance and get this film and let the magic of Tolstoy's timeless story take you into a world that is gone with the wind.Yes it is not as huge and epic as the 1968 Russian classic but it is none the less even at times more wonderful! The disk is splendid with clear beautiful image and great sound. As I said the film is in Enlish with an international cast. It is obvious they are all speaking in English and if any are dubbed that is Not obvious. Very well done in the sound department. And the score by Jan A.P. Kaczmarek is lush and soaring. Most particularly stunning at the end of act two as Natasha descends the grand staircase with the viper Anitole Kuragin,Ken Dunken on her heals.

I just saw the first part and I agree with the other commentator, it is very disappointing. He mentions the Audrey Hepburn version. I would like to mention that as French was the language of the Russian aristocracy, 2/3 of the book was written in French with Russian translation added in the footnotes, funny I think... Therefore, I would like to praise again the Bondartchouk version, I would say it is the ultimate version and nothing can come even close to it: for me, who read the book in the original Russian, this is the true interpretation of what Tolstoy would have wanted. And you ask why ? Because Sergey Bondartchouk followed the book line after line, and included all the most minute details. It was thoroughly researched and everything was absolutely perfect, the dresses, the carriages, the furniture, the sets, etc. If you have not seen, do try to get it, it is a great work of art.In this mini series, most of the details are wrong, but the worst mistake is in the cast : here, Sonia is brunette and Natasha is blonde, in the book it is the reverse, this point is essential. A blonde Natasha is unheard of. I would like to refer your readers to the good old book : Ivanhoe. At one point, Sir Walter Scott, through De Bois Guilbert, makes a comparison between blonde women and brunettes, and he says that women with dark hair have more zest, are more lively, have some inner fire, it is not a sic quotation but I remembered this remark because I thought it was quite to the point. So Natasha, who is the pinnacle of life, if not life itself, cannot be a bland pale blonde, not that I would hurt blonds, but this Natasha lacks some sparks, some shine in her eyes. The rest of course is not important anymore.Sorry, it is not up to par.N.B.: I feel I must add a few lines to explain that the point I have made at Natasha being a blonde instead of a brunette as expressly required by Tolstoy, is not a futile headstrong idea of mine but is quite well based : In Tolstoy's masterpiece, the young Countess Natasha is the epitome of absolute purity and youth, kindness, truthfulness,loyalty to friends, she is like a breath of fresh spring air, so he makes her a blue-eyed brunette. Her blond cousin Sonia is about her age, but she is more of a blur, and though she has many good qualities,she lacks this sparkle spring-like personality which is exemplified by Natasha.At the end of the spectrum, the utmost evil woman is, as required by the author, the EXTREMELY BEAUTIFUL BLOND Helene Kuragin, whose family is ruined and poor as a mice, and who manages to grasp the Count Bezukhov, not for love, or so she plays it, but of course for his immense fortune, which should help save hers. She is a real bi---, she is nasty, even before the marriage she gets a lover and gets her naive husband "des cornes" so big that the horns of a full grown-up male deer should seem small compared to what she makes her husband wear. But as there is Justice, she dies of her own infidelities....In any case, if you have this evil Helen as a blond, how can you visualize a blond Natasha as being in a completely different category ? If the Director etc would have given to their Natasha blue lens and a brown or black wig, they might have done the trick, but they did not ask me, did they !!!!! So now I hope IDMB readers will fully understand my point of view.