The Charge of the Light Brigade (Widescreen)

They should have negative star ratings for movies like this.

If the British were such baffoons as this pictures makes them out to be, how did they have such an empire. Man, the rest of the world must have been filled with idiots.


Poor anti-war movie   March 15, 2004
L. Wetsel (Alexandria, Virginia USA)
2 out of 3 found this review helpful

I am trying to decide if I am going to throw this DVD away. I watched the whole movie. It was the toughest sit through since "Mosquito Coast" with Harrison Ford. I do not mind watching a movie that is making the case that war is bad...war is bad, even though sometimes it is necessary. However, the movie itself jumped all over the place. As another review said, the relationships were poorly built. At first the animated portions of the film were interesting in an artsy way, but they kept coming back and were over used. The battle/war itself should have been more focused upon. The Crimean War was badly fought and this could have been a much better movie if it had shown the poor quality of generalship on both sides instead of just showing the character of the British and French generals.


Into the valley of death they rode ...   March 10, 2004
Professor Joseph L. McCauley (Austria+Texas)
1 out of 2 found this review helpful

I first saw this version after seeing the 1936 film (both, ca. 1968) . Both are extremely good. In truth, I cannot remember which one was better. But this film did not disappoint me, that much, I recall.


Full of promise that it never quite filled.   February 21, 2004
Victoria Tarrani (Betwixt FL and CA, USA)
1 out of 2 found this review helpful

The historical situations in building the light Calvary troop was well done, and it was easy to see the differences between the wealthy and everyone else; it was impressive that the common man did indeed become members of an elite force. Alas, the force was doomed to fail because of the very structure of rich and poor, expectations and experience.

How strange it was to see a well-educated and seasoned officer treated poorly because he had been in India. He knew horses and men and how to bond them into a single fighting unit. He knew the strategy of winning a war. Yet, in battle, the generals watched the enemy steal the British guns and allowed it to happen because they could not believe a "gentleman" would do this. No one would listen, or look at the obvious theft as a threat.

Each of the segues could have been political cartoons of the time used in some of the animations, I don't know. However, I found these segues laughable and irritating. The romantic triangle sub plot was not developed, but when the "other man" was killed, I was surprised.

I wanted to experience the historical battle, but came away feeling that they certainly needed Patton in that war. The most telling statement of the war was something like: "The day an Englishman knows more about war and uses it would be shameful, it would be like murder."

At least it isn't "The Piano," we said as we watched it, but decided in the end that the joke was on those of use who actually sat through it.

Victoria Tarrani


Cartoons in a war movie? Please!   January 30, 2004
Dave (Tennessee United States)
0 out of 2 found this review helpful

This movie is very good and the battle scenes are dramatic, just not long enough. The main flaw of the film is the ridiculous animations that drastically take away the power & value that this movie should have had to audiences. And although Capt. Nolan was a dashing and brave officer, his role was very limited in reality. Overall the film is very authentic in capturing the era of the Crimean War. Trevor Howard is great; he acts like he was made for this role. A lot of the dialogue at the end is what the real officers actually said. I wish the battle at the end could've shown in more detail how the light brigade fought against the vastly superior Russian cavalry and actually drove off many of them before being forced to retreat. This is far more accurate than the Errol Flynn versian although many prefer that over this versian. I admit Flynn was much better than David Hemmings's stale performance, but for history stick with this film.