A suited young man faces a worker across a wooden threshing frame in a straw-covered courtyard
Film review

1900

1976 · Directed by Bernardo Bertolucci · 5h 17m

In a sentenceFive hours in which the peasants are always right and always beautifully lit

Emilia, northern Italy. On 25 April 1945, the day of the liberation, peasants with shotguns hunt the estate foreman through the fields. The film then goes back to 1901, when two boys are born on the Berlinghieri land on the same day, the day the news comes that Verdi has died: Alfredo (Robert De Niro), grandson of the landowner Alfredo Berlinghieri the Elder (Burt Lancaster), and Olmo (Gérard Depardieu), bastard grandson of the peasant patriarch Leo Dalcò (Sterling Hayden). They grow up together, one in the villa and one in the farmhouse, catching frogs, daring each other under passing trains and learning where the line between them runs. Olmo comes home from the Great War a socialist. Alfredo inherits the estate and hires a foreman, Attila (Donald Sutherland), who has ideas of his own about keeping order.

Plays from YouTube when you press play; nothing loads from them until then.

Fi1m review

Bertolucci’s five-hour account of one Italian estate through the century is two films joined at an interval. The first, a golden summer of two boys and a farm, is close to wonderful; the second turns its people into speeches and keeps them there.

The Conformist and Last Tango in Paris bought Bernardo Bertolucci five hours and an international cast. 1900 tells the story of the twentieth century in Italy through one estate in Emilia and two boys born on it the same day, one to own it and one to work it. It runs 317 minutes, built to be shown in two parts. The first is among the best things Bertolucci made. The second is the same people delivering a lesson we had already learned.

Vittorio Storaro shoots the first half as one long summer. The wheat is the colour of the actors’ skin, the farmyard is lit through dust, and the peasants eat at a table so long the camera has to travel it. Gianni Quaranta and Maria Paola Maino give the Berlinghieri villa dim shuttered rooms, and the Dalcò farmhouse one big kitchen where everyone sleeps, argues and is born. Gitt Magrini puts the peasants in white linen washed to grey and the landowners in black wool they cannot be comfortable in. Ennio Morricone’s main theme, strings with an accordion underneath, returns at every gathering and never wore out.

The childhood scenes moved us more than we expected. Olmo lies down between the rails and lets a train pass over him because Alfredo will not; Alfredo follows him into every place he is forbidden. Sterling Hayden’s Leo Dalcò is weathered and nearly silent, and every scene he is in bends towards him. Burt Lancaster’s old padrone shouts, no one jumps, and Lancaster lets us watch him notice. Stefania Sandrelli’s Anita, the schoolteacher Olmo marries, lies down in a road with the other women in front of mounted soldiers, and the horses stop.

Then it is winter, and Donald Sutherland arrives. Storaro turns the picture grey and brown, fog in the poplars and frost in the yard, and the change is right. What happens in front of it is not. Attila Mellanchini, the foreman who becomes the local fascist, is a grinning brute with no inner life, and Laura Betti’s Regina, Alfredo’s cousin, eggs him on with the same lack of shading. The script, by Bertolucci, his brother Giuseppe Bertolucci and the editor Franco Arcalli, has decided that fascists are monsters and peasants are saints, and has nothing further to find out. There is a sequence involving Attila and a cat that we watched appalled, and its point had been made an hour before.

Robert De Niro has the hardest job. Alfredo is a man things happen to; he inherits, he marries, he lets Attila run the estate because stopping him would mean a decision. De Niro plays that faithfully, and for three hours he is the least interesting person in the frame. Depardieu is all appetite, laughing, eating and shouldering into rooms. Dominique Sanda’s Ada, who marries into the villa and drinks, is the one figure in the second half who seems to have a private life. She suffers most from the dubbing. The cast spoke several languages, and the version most of us will see puts other voices over their mouths, so the second half’s many scenes of talk land a beat late on every face.

Arcalli cuts the first half as if he had all the time in the world, and he did. He cuts the second the same way, and here it reads as reluctance to lose anything. The 1945 frame returns, and the peasants put their case against the padrone at length, and then again. By the fourth hour we were bored, and then cross about it, because the images were still fine and the people in them had stopped being people.

The Conformist (1970) got inside fascism through one frightened man and hardly a speech, and is the better film. 1900 treats history as a pageant with sides, and once you know which side you are on there is little to do but watch the light. Storaro makes that worth doing more often than not.

See the first half on the biggest screen you can find, as a film about two boys and a farm. Take a proper break. The second half is for those who want to know how it comes out and can bear being told twice.

Critical consensus AI synthesised

69
Positive
3
Mixed
5
Negative
0
Slant Magazine
17 February 2019 · ★★★½/4 · Jaime N. Christley
88

The critic sees the film as an audacious epic whose ambition may exceed its ability to stand as the greatest of all films. They praise Bertolucci’s ability to weave intimate spaces into a sweeping tapestry of class conflict and history.

Read the full review →
Empire
13 June 2006 · David Parkinson
75*

The critic calls it a flawed masterpiece, though the second half lacks dramatic drive. He praises the film’s scope, scale and ambition, while faulting Robert De Niro’s performance.

Read the full review →
Variety
31 December 1975 · Variety Staff
70*

The review presents the epic as an ambitious, elaborately constructed saga, though it notes that De Niro is overshadowed by his passive role. It singles out Sterling Hayden’s performance as the crowning effort of his long career.

Read the full review →
Los Angeles Times
1 February 1991 · KEVIN THOMAS
65*

Thomas regards the film as a monumental but flawed epic, with its English-language version’s artificiality contributing to stretches of tedium. He singles out Vittorio Storaro’s gorgeous visuals as an unalloyed triumph.

Read the full review →
RogerEbert.com
65*

The page was blocked, so the critic’s verdict cannot be verified. No specific praise or complaint is available from the page provided.

Read the full review →
The Hollywood Reporter
31 January 2007 · Doug Pratt
65*

Pratt finds the extended cut an ambitious, uneven near-masterpiece, with its first half especially magnificent. He praises Vittorio Storaro’s painterly cinematography but faults the later performances and a disturbing sequence that disrupts the film.

Read the full review →

Straight answers AI written, from our review

Is 1900 worth watching?
1900 is worth watching for anyone who can give five hours to Bertolucci's story of two boys born on the same Italian estate, and we scored it 70. The first half, a golden summer shot by Vittorio Storaro, is close to wonderful; the second turns its people into speeches. See the first half on the biggest screen you can, and take a proper break.
How long is 1900, and what is it rated?
1900 runs 5h 17m. It is a drama and history film.
Where can I watch 1900 in the Philippines?
1900 is not on any streaming or rental service in the Philippines at the moment. It is available in 5 other countries; change your country at the top of the page to see where. Availability is checked daily.
How violent or frightening is 1900, and is it suitable for children?
1900 carries a UK 18 certificate and is not suitable for children. It opens with peasants hunting a man through the fields with shotguns, and its second half includes fascist brutality, among it a sequence involving the foreman and a cat that we watched appalled. Teenagers and the squeamish should steer clear; adults should expect cruelty shown at length.
How does 1900 compare to Heaven's Gate?
1900 and Heaven's Gate tell the same class fight at the same ruinous length, Bertolucci's in an Italian estate and Cimino's in a Wyoming range war. Both are at their best in communal scenes and both drift in their storytelling, but Heaven's Gate stays moving to the end, while 1900 stops treating its people as people after the interval. Viewers who want the finer photography should take 1900; those who want to feel something throughout should take Cimino.
What should I watch after 1900?
After 1900, try The Tree of Wooden Clogs (1978, Fi1m 89): Olmi’s Lombard peasants, played by real farmers, without a speech in three hours. Then Heaven's Gate (1980, Fi1m 79): Cimino’s Wyoming range war: the same class fight, the same ruinous length, more dust; and Once Upon a Time in America (1984, Fi1m 81): De Niro and Morricone again across four decades, this time with Leone and gangsters.

Cast

If you liked this, try…

  1. The Leopard (1963) · not on Fi1m yetVisconti’s Sicilian aristocracy watching its own century end, at a ball that never seems to stop.

  2. The Tree of Wooden Clogs (1978, Fi1m 89)Olmi’s Lombard peasants, played by real farmers, without a speech in three hours.

  3. Heaven's Gate (1980, Fi1m 79)Cimino’s Wyoming range war: the same class fight, the same ruinous length, more dust.

  4. Sunshine (1999) · not on Fi1m yetSzabó follows one Hungarian family through the century with Ralph Fiennes playing three generations.

  5. Once Upon a Time in America (1984, Fi1m 81)De Niro and Morricone again across four decades, this time with Leone and gangsters.

1900 (1976) review: Bertolucci’s five-hour epic is half a great film (the Philippines) | Fi1m