University of Virginia Library

Human Drama

And there the trouble lies. We
expect of an epic-sized picture
more than just great visual effects.
We look for sweeping human drama
to complement the photography,
the sort of scope we get in a "Ben
Hur" or a "Doctor Zhivago." We
want something for the mind as
well as the eye. The "story" behind
"Waterloo" is almost comically
unsophisticated and insipid. Making
a great moment of history into a
movie opens fascinating vistas of
speculation for a scriptwriter: What
did Napoleon say when he woke up
on the morning of battle?; What
were Wellington's first words when
victory was secure? But the verbal
imagination of "Waterloo" is sadly
unequal to the moment; the drama
flounders when it should soar.
Dialogue is flat and punchless much
of the time, and a difficult-to-follow
soundtrack makes the
dramatic dimension that much
worse. A hurried pace hustles us
through all-important scenes that
should build up an historical
context; scenes announce, for
example, "Here is Napoleon,
planning his offensive," but don't
register any more than the bald
statement. Subtitles would have
done as well as these excuses for
dramatic preparation.

Given only skeletal creatures to
portray, the actors cannot present
fleshed-out characterizations. Rod
Steiger will not be remembered —
hopefully — for his Napoleon. The
part is a caricature, and Steiger is
unable to give it depth — perhaps
no one could. Christopher Plummer
did better with a less awkward role.
Wellington is conceived as an
aristocratic hero with an
inexhaustible fund of charm and
wit — a beauty to oppose the
Napoleonic beast. Plummer ably
captures the swashbuckling spirit of
a bygone cinematic age and helps us

forget that the "real Wellington" is
as far away as the history books.