1900 (Special Collector's Edition) |  | Director: Bernardo Bertolucci
Actors: Robert De Niro, Gérard Depardieu, Bernardo Bertolucci, Vittorio Storaro, Dominique Sanda
Studio: Paramount
Category: DVD
List Price: $19.99
Buy New: $12.09
as of 3/18/2010 13:05 EDT details
You Save: $7.90 (40%)
New (11) Used (9) from $8.45
Seller: ebid500
Rating:  75 reviews
Sales Rank: 10050
Format: Color, DVD, Widescreen, NTSC
Languages: English (Original Language), French (Original Language), English (Subtitled), English (Published), Italian (Published), French (Published)
Rating: Unrated
Region: 1
Aspect Ratio: 1.66:1
Number Of Discs: 2
Running Time: 315 Minutes
Shipping Weight (lbs): 0.3
Dimensions (in): 7.4 x 5.4 x 0.6
MPN: 088044
UPC: 097360880441
EAN: 0097360880441
ASIN: B000IHYXGM
Theatrical Release Date: November 4, 1977
Release Date: December 5, 2006
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
| |
| Similar Items:
| |
| Editorial Reviews:
Product Description
Epic story of two families in Italy traces both the rise of fascism and the conflict between the sons of the families, both born on January 1, 1900.
Genre: Feature Film-Drama
Rating: UN
Release Date: 5-DEC-2006
Media Type: DVD
Amazon.com essential video
1900 is one of Bernardo Bertolucci's adventures in epic filmmaking that never found the reception he had hoped for. Originally more than six hours long, it was chopped down to four hours for its U.S. release and as a result looked, well, choppy. Eventually, he restored it to five hours--but one wonders at all the effort on behalf of this alternately muddled and stunning story. The film, with a decidedly socialist agenda, examines two lives that begin the same year in rural Italy: the weak-willed son of the aristocracy (Robert De Niro) and the hardy, courageous son of peasants (Gerard Depardieu). They grow up as best friends on the same estate, until class differences pull them apart and then the era's fascist politics divide them for good. Despite strong performances by both leads, as well as Sterling Hayden, Donald Sutherland, Dominique Sanda, and Burt Lancaster, this one is strictly for Bertolucci's most avid fans. --Marshall Fine
|
| Customer Reviews:
Showing reviews 1-5 of 75
Profoundly flawed,strikingly beautiful January 2, 2010
Ted Byrd
I have only to turn my memory back to another epic movie I recently watched - the Japanese film, 'The Human Condition' - for a standard of reference by which to gauge Bertolucci's '1900'. 'The Human Condition' was also a film which exposed the evils of fascism, in this case the Japanese imperialistic version. It graphically depicted the exploitation of classes and races of people considered inferior by the ruling Japanese class.
'The Human Condition', in my judgment, is an unequivocal masterpiece. Consistency of perspective of the director; consistency, yet flexibility to grow and evolve in the character of the protagonist; a realistic and balanced depiction of each group or ideological faction; a central character whose experiences and point of view ties all the elements of the film together, and who generates interest and empathy in the viewer; unflinching portrayal of evil; and exceptionally beautiful cinematography - All these elements which made the Japanese film great were diminished or lacking in '1900', except for the exceptionally beautiful visual aspect of the film.
One might argue that there was also unflinching depiction of evil in '1900' in the role of Donald Sutherland as an inhuman, sadistic, fascist monster. Given the fact of the atrocities committed in the name of fascism, there can be little doubt that such monsters existed. But here Bertolucci is looking at the case of a freak, and this removes that whole element of the film from the realm of universal humanity, and personifies the entirety of all fascists through a symbol which actually represents an exaggerated and special case. In essence, this black and white, all-or-nothing tribute to communism versus fascism is over-simplified, presenting only alternatives of demonic fascists or righteous peasant communists. By contrast, 'The Human Condition' was more honest, as it revealed the possibility for evil in all humanity, especially when faced with a severe struggle for self-preservation.
To me, the biggest weakness of the film was the lack of a strongly portrayed protagonist to give coherence to such a lengthy epic. The scheme of having dual protagonists, one peasant and one rich landowner, might have worked well except for two reasons. First, Robert de Niro, as the wealthy scion, seemed so detached and essentially uninvolved in the story that he contributed basically nothing in the way of dramatic tension or interest. His understated acting method works well in many of his gritty American film roles, but seemed completely alien given the milieu of '1900'. Secondly, Gerard Depardieu, who positively exudes charisma and suggests intense emotional involvement simply in the way he carries himself, never seemed to get the dialog or directorial emphasis which might have properly utilized his talents.
There are many individual scenes or small sequences in the movie which are well-done and highly effective. Sterling Hayden was especially impressive as the earthy, stalwart patriarch of the peasant clan. Burt Lancaster was also quite good in an unusual role as the paternalistic but corrupt Padrone, the old master who was a reprobate, but nonetheless had an understanding with his workers.
But aside from the characters of those two old patriarchs of the separate classes, the behavior of the other major characters seemed riddled with spurious episodes which somehow didn't seem quite appropriate to the circumstances or germane to the main thrust of the film. One instance of that was the inane and purposeless pretense of Ada(Dominique Sanda) to be blind when first meeting Alfredo(Robert de Niro). Perhaps in trying to achieve allegorical or symbolic overtones in the actions of the characters, the director strained a bit too much and stretched credibility.
I can't deny the film held my interest through it's more than five hours. I felt sympathy for the peasants, and can understand how people in their situation might be driven to embrace communism. However, I never suspended disbelief enough to even temporarily accept the total righteousness of solidarity of any class of people, peasants or otherwise. When the peasants have their day of victory, the depiction of their celebration comes quite close to being a picture of a mob out of control. We see a subordination of humanism to slogans and the desire for vengeance. I also can't deny that when certain despicable thugs got their come-uppance, I felt a cathartic relief. This is not a feeling I particularly enjoy, and this is a reason I avoid movies of the revenge genre.
After the release of tension which came near the end, the movie limped to an ambiguous, somewhat farcical conclusion. This was an unforgettably beautiful film with many interesting parts, but its greatest value to me was to stimulate my critical faculties to make clear to myself which aspects of the film I felt were worthy of appreciation, and which were not. This movie has very explicit sex scenes, which Bertolucci considered as being realistic and innocent, but you might not.
Heavy-handed polemic, but still stunning cinema. September 14, 2009
Sugunan (SINGAPORE, 11, NOVENA RISE SINGAPORE)
I went into this not knowing what to expect (it was listed in "1001 MOVIES YOU MUST SEE BEFORE YOU DIE"), but I was pleasantly surprised I could sit through a five-hour movie without falling asleep. This is the kind of movie film-makers have largely stopped making nowadays. Before the time of frenetic editing, manic jump-cuts, and short attention spans, Bertollucci (like his compatriot Sergio Leonie in ONCE UPON A TIME IN AMERICA), knew the art of "taking one's time" to tell a story, but being able to do so in a thoroughly absorbing fashion. Some might call it slow and ponderous; I prefer to use the words "stately" and "sedate". It is this sense of pacing that I liked most about the movie; you just sit back for the long haul, relax, and allow yourself to be drawn into it. I didn't find the characters particularly engaging. But if movies are as much about images, then 1900 has more than enough to merit repeated viewing, aided by its stunning cinematography (now here's one movie I'd love to see on the hi-def blu-ray format). I loved its loving, evocative depictions of the Italian countryside. The whole tenor of the film is a little too tendentious for my taste, its political stance too unsubtle. At times it descends into a risible form of socialist operatic kitsch. But if you can look beyond these annoying elements, you will actually enjoy the film as I did.
 Classic? Yes! Masterpiece? No! February 2, 2009
VoiceOver (Netherlands)
0 out of 1 found this review helpful
This Bertolucci classic is often considered to be his masterpiece next to "The Last Emperor". Unfortunately I disagree on both counts especially from a point of view how either movie stood the test of time. "1900" comes across as quite dated and it's got nothing to do with the fact it was made so long ago, which is proven by looking at what I consider to be the true masterpiece of Bertolucci "The Conformist" which was made even earlier than "1900".
"1900" tells a story concerning Italy's history during the first half (mostly) of the 20th century. It is a story of political violence and class struggle, which perhaps is one of the elements that make the movie dated, but naturally it was a crucial aspect to the period that the movie is set in, a part of daily life as natural as breathing.
The two main protagonists are of course from opposite social classes, landowner vs. farm laborer, Robert de Niro (Alfredo) vs. Gerard Depardieu (Olmo). The two share a close friendship dating back to early childhood, but their class differences will always play a part, especially since the rise of fascism which finds the two young men at either side of the fence of oppressor (i.e. collaborator) vs. resistance fighter which brings tensions between them to a head. Although recompense is unavoidable after the war, their friendship survives.
"1900" is a long epic and brings the colors and scents of the Italian soil to its audience through its story divided over the four seasons of nature and life, beautifully photographed. The political aspect was very prominent on Bertolucci's mind when he made the movie, even hoping the movie would prompt a new revolutionary spirit to be awakened in the viewers all over the world. Looking at the movie with some historical distance, one cannot help but feel that the workers' communist slogans cannot be swallowed at face value, causing the movie to lose some of its relevance.
What is left is a movie about friendship with many highs and lows, which, stripped from all ideological rhetoric, is the one thing that counts and survives.
The acting in the movie, except the horrific character played by Donald Sutherland, is very bland, but this is mainly due to the script, which very much simplifies the two friends and with very little depth, even though the events that occur are very dramatic. This is one of the strange aspects of the movie: The plot is dramatic, epic, visually the movie is a first rate work of art, but the characters have been put together with very rough clay and not likely to move the audience. It's a movie certainly worthy of admiration, but it's lacking in human compassion, probably stemming from fears to become overly sentimental, but Bertolucci never seems to strike the right balance.
In general this seems to be a problem with most of his movies, that the characters living in them seem so 'made up', not flesh and blood, as if the artist never quite understood that a healthy distance to his subjects indeed may be healthy, but he still needs to imbue them with the breath of life to have them escape from the two-dimensional reality on the silver screen, so they can continue their journey in the hearts of the audience.
"1900" certainly is a beautiful and fascinating movie, but it lacks both emotional as well as historical relevance to compare it favorably to a movie like "La Meglio Gioventu" (transl. The Best of Youth) even though both movies together give a nice overview of Italian history of the 20th century, as they quite complement one another. The difference is that in "1900" ideology is the main driving force, making the human drama secondary by creating two rather socialist textbook puppets with little life of their own while in "The Best of Youth" it's the human individual drama that's central as the director of that movie realized that by looking at the individual you can better feel and picture the whole and in that sense the latter movie to me is far superior.
 Very Interesting Movie January 3, 2009
Bruce J. Simpson (Wilkes Barre, PA United States)
Where does one start? First, it's incredible to see all the stars in this movie when they were young and first starting out. I mean one scene shows Robert DeNiro naked and in bed with Gerard Depardieu and a hooker. They actually show the hooker handling the guys equipment. DeNiro couldn't have been more than 20 when this was filmed. Nudity is not an objection for me although the child nudity was uncomfortable to watch. I was more than uncomfortable with the actual killings of animals shown in all its gory detail as well as hog butchering in all its phases from start to finish. Gross.
Anyway, the great things about this move are first the actors, second the time period, and place. Italy from 1900 to 1945. If you already didn't know the history of Italy, this movie will give you one small piece of life during that period...through the eyes of the rich and the poor. While the movie is very long....the time moves quickly and you forget how long you've been watching it. If you are sensitive to violence, you will have a hard time with this movie. The murder of a little boy is a bit too graphic both before his killing with his sexual molestation and during his actual death. Donald Southerland was incredible in this movie.
I suppose these are also the reasons that I never knew of this movie before reading about it here on Amazon.com This movie would never be shown in its entirety in America.
Movie greats December 27, 2008
artladyaa (Florida)
0 out of 2 found this review helpful
This was a gift for my son-in-law for Christmas. He was surprised to receive it as my daughter went into his wish list on Amazon to select it for me to give to him.
Showing reviews 1-5 of 75
|
|
|
