Well...not the official sequal, but in concept. It is shorter, almost as if Bondarchuk wanted to show what happend after the end of War and Peace (and that he wanted to show that the Napoleon story was far from over)
shareNo, it is not the sequel, literally or in concept. Two different films, one Russian, the other Italian. Bondarchuck was a director for hire on Waterloo, chosen because he knew how to stage massive battle scenes. Nothing more.
shareKind of... I think Waterloo is the condensed version almost... made for the west perhaps. W&P is better, but Waterloo still packs a punch and has some excellent actors in it.
---
It's not "sci-fi", it's SF!
[deleted]
The battle scenes themselves in Waterloo were somewhat better. I know they wanted to convey the chaos of war of with War and Peace, but the cinematography was so overdone and forced I felt I was watching the world's first shakeycam footage. The only point of 1812 and its loud, obnoxious music is how horrible war is. I was hungry for some strategy and a closer look at the variety of different units used in that period, which I didn't get. Like, at all. And what where the decisive elements again that swayed the battles one way or the other? Couldn't tell from watching it.
I'm guessing the director was also a ticket to the soviet Army, which was of great use to this and Waterloo.