"Voyna i mir III: 1812 god" sounds like a pretty complicated title with the words and number if you do not speak Russian, but actually it does not stand for something complicated at all. Of course, here we have another installment of the movie adaptation of Leo Tolstoy's "War and Peace". And 1812 stands for the year in which the movie is set. This is the third of four chapters and it is a bit unusual that it is not named after a character, but then again, it also makes sense I suppose because the war action is the only thing that we see from beginning to end. The only character they could have gone for is Pierre Bezukhov, but he has the fourth chapter named after him and I have not seen that one, but I suppose that he is featured prominently in there. If you knew that by the way, you also knew that he would survive this third film, which is a bit of a pity. I mean the spoiler and not that he survived because this suspense is one of not too many interesting things in here. Nothing that will have you on the edge of your seat, but I take what I can get with this movie. At slightly over 80 minutes this is the shortest installment from the quadrology that is even linked to an Oscar win. This triumph is maybe one reason why the outcome here is not forgotten yet. Also it is a color film, which is not to be taken for granted for 1967, so this is easily over half a century old. And I think the color aspect also really helps the film in terms of sets and costumes because this is really the epitome of a period piece overall. This installment not so much as some of the others because here we do not get fancy dresses from the girls, i.e. female characters, but we do get military uniforms from the guys mostly. And not just from the Russians, but also from the French because these two are the ones going against each other from beginning to end really. This film is all war, zero peace in contrast to the previous installment where the only aggression was maybe in the main characters' minds and linked to jealousy and desire. One thing coming to my attention here is that the French and Russian flag look very similar in terms of the colors, only one is vertical and the other horizontal, but then again the Soviet flag is of course entirely different. I watched the second chapter last weekend and at the end we saw a brief bridge already to the ation in this penultimate third chapter that it will be all about war. And it is. It may be the shortest of them all, but maybe it was the most challenging to made because of the sound of war, the gunfire effects, the many, many extras etc.

The man who was in charge here is of course Sergey Bondarchuk. He is the director and one of the writers who adapted Tolstoy's material for the screen. Plus he is also a key actor in here and has a lot of screen time. In the seccond chapter, he was not featured too prominently, but this one here is a lot about his character. How he perceives war, how he is honored to fight for his country, even if admittedly he is more walking around than firing shots really and a bit of an observer. Admittedly this was the bestg choice because he does not look like a tough soldier at all, more like a nobleman or an intellectual. And I am not sure if it was the way he was written or if it was the performance that made him slightly memorable for me. or at least not as forgettable as everything and everybody else. Maybe it also just had to do that I remember the character from the second chapter and his love confession at the very end. So it seems that he gets more and more screen time with every film. Haven't seen the first, but like I said in this third installment he has much more than in the second and in the fourth that I will probably watch next weekend he is the one at the very core of the story and no war to take attention away from him. He has only one scene with natasha Rostova here in this third part, mostly because the actress herself (or Natasha I should say) does not play a big role here whatsoever. We only find out in said scene that she is singing and maybe pursues a career in this field. We are also only there basically because Pierre is and we follow him through the movie. War is depicted as something really bloody in here, but also as heroic in a way. That's how the soldiers and military generals talk about it. As you can see from my rating, I did not enjoy the watch too much unfortunately, but I am not too surprised. The second chapter already did very little for me overall except in terms of Natasha's looks and I am generally not big on war films, so this one here was a bit doomed from the start. At least in my case. I still feel no need to give out a recommendation really because 99.9% of people coming here have seen the second chapter before considering watching this one and you can decide for yourself if you wanna keep going. Still, like I said, this third chapter here is very different compared to the second, especially in terms of the story. This puts the "war" in "War and Peace" really. What else? Oh yes, a few snippets in addition: There are voice-over parts on several occasions coming from Bondarchuk himself, i.e. his character, so only very vaguely a narrator. And Napoleon is in this film too, but only very briefly as we see him lead the sweet life even on the field of war while his soldiers are killed most brutally. He also speaks French there, but is such a brief inclusion that it is not even listed here on imdb. Same for two or three sentences of German that are also part of this film. At the core, it is of course all in Russian, so if you speak Russian, then you will maybe have a better time seeing this one as you don't need any subtitles. Finally, as for the violence: It is there and we see people falling to the ground on many occasions and they are killed of course. However, it is not too graphic or bloody, so younger audiences can also check this one out, although I feel that most of them will be bored like myself or even more bored than myself. I am still ready to give the final chapter a chance and hope the quadrology can go out on a high note. As for this film we have here, it's sadly a thumbs-down for me. I prefer more recent period pieces. Oh yes, let me finally add one more thing: I have not read Tolstoy's career-defining work, so my review is entirely about the movie and I cannnot make any references about parallels and differences between the base material and this adaptation here. But then again I firmly believe that this should never be the case anyway that you must be required to have read a book in order to watch and understand the movie. It isn't here either. Don't think I would have liked this film (more) if I had read the book before. Or at least not much more. That's all now. See you next week.

Taken on its own, part 3 of this insanely long 4-part epic may be the ultimate war movie. Without watching the first two parts, a viewer's emotional engagement to individual characters may be lessened, but there is still so much this 80-something film manages to say.

The dread of waiting for the battle to start, the scope of violence, the tedium and anxiety of waiting to be ordered into combat, and the horrors one is forced to confront in the aftermath are all so excellently conveyed.

On top of that, I lost track of how many shots I was seeing on screen that I couldn't believe I was seeing. I fear battle scenes in future war movies I watch may never live up to this one. It looks so messy and spontaneous, yet it's so excellently and clearly captured, and it's beyond me how this even exists.

War and Peace Leo Tolstoy' best work-and it's also my favorite tome. After poring over the weighty tome, I couldn't help trying to review it by the way of movie. However, after watching American and BBC' s mode, I suppose this movie should be the best one which lives up to even Tolstoy himself ' expectation (if he could watch it). Admitted America' s War and Peace is pretty grand, but it is less amazing comparing with its Soviet Union's counterpart which took 5 years to finish production and cost over $560 million.... No pain no gain: This movie still won Oscar during the cold War because its amazing production could devastate the political wall mounting between the two super powers. Again, Russian director and actors made use of their best understanding of their domestic classic and created a piece of art work, a masterpiece in front of our audience. There I have to say that it is the power of loyalty to art instead of to business. Only in this way, this movie could be made;only in his way, Shawshank could be classic.... All right, let's back to the point:why do I say this movie must be a masterpiece: First, I have to admit that the cast of the movie is perfect: Admitted the actors performing Andrei, Pierre and Helen are no longer young, but they do have the same or similar bearing comparing with these characters in the tometome:The actor performing Pierre is the director of the movie. He is quite similar to Pierre himself as he is overweight, idealistic, kind, and is sometimes embarrassed simultaneously. Mr. Bondarchuk also acts as a round peg in a square hole in this movie, which is especially Pierre' s trait. Moreover, Tikhonov acts a superficially remote and abstinent while innately patriotic good young man-Andrei. He must be the perfect actor in performing Andre. Anatolia Ktorov is also perfect in performing an impatient and strict old-styled aristocrat. What does a truly Russian old-fashioned aristocrat look like? He shouldn't be the rude Russian farmer in American War and Peace movie. Rather, he should be thin and has an aquiline nose;he should be strict with his kids and be stubborn ;he should be smart and prospective when he observes the current national situation.... All in all, he should be aristocratic. A lot of people tend to compare Hepburn with Lyudmila Saveleva, who performs Natasha in this movie. I have to say that Saveleva is perfect in showing another same Natasha.The reason why I think so is not only her competitive beautiful appearance, but also her enthusiastic and sometimes still a little childish behaviors-she is only a debutante who is not bond with any mundane rules and regulations;she only her intuition and acts as a free bird.... All in all, that's what Lyudmila has shown in front of us, which is rear to be seen from other actresses.... Secondly, this movie well shows the Russian Spirit. What does it mean? Russian Spirit? Something abstract and ethereal? Yes, it's really hard to explain what a nation' spirit means or looks like. However, through the movie, we can see some snippets giving us a hint: When the people from other countries are confined into the house on snowy chill days, Rostov' family instead hang out but sleighs and have a great time. In the war place, Russian soldiers are faced with death in the same way of gambling-even they lose they won't spit their fate;death and hurt is like something happens every day. In this way, we can imagine how bold and unconstrained the Russian are. Third, the episodes delineating wars are really grand. Imagine:the Soviet Union prepared 695 ancient canons and 587 contemporary canons for the wars. They also ran off 16600 grenades and 20900 pairs of clothes. They even established a contemporary fake big Moscow to show the fires Moscow. All in all, it's an epic.... Finally, Tolstoy's conception of history is shown totally in this movie, too: He doubted it is heroes who create the history. Rather, he thought the heroes ideas couldn't penetrate into the lower classes and couldn't change the war. So that's why though Kutuzov is self-knowing while Napoleon is not, they all can't act as they one who stop the history but they have to act. Instead the soldiers fighting hard and exhausted horses are truly heroes through the history.... So that's what I want to say about this movie. I really wanna know guys what you are waiting for? Just sit down and watch this series patiently. Only in this so called ''should be condensed'' way,a classic weighty tome can be showed perfectly. Only these patient and sagacious men can grasp the opportunity to appreciate this artistry, this feast of aesthetics....