Mihai Viteazul (1970)

Director:

Sergiu Nicolaescu

Writer:

Titus Popovici (writer)

Release Date:

23 July 1971 (East Germany)

Genre:

Action | Drama | History | War

Plot:

An epic fresco depicting the reign (1593-1601) of Mihai Pätrascu (better known as "Mihai Viteazul" / "Michael the Brave")...

Plot Keywords:

Horse | Violence | Mayhem | Headless Corpse | Patriot

Awards:

1 nomination

Cast

Amza Pellea	...	Mihai Viteazul
Ion Besoiu	...	Sigismund Báthory
Olga Tudorache	...	Mama lui Mihai Viteazul
Irina Gardescu	...	Contessina Rossana Viventini
György Kovács	...	Andrei Báthory
Sergiu Nicolaescu	...	Selim Pasa
Nicolae Secareanu	...	Sinan Pasa
Ilarion Ciobanu	...	Stroe Buzescu
Aurel Rogalschi	...	Rudolf II
Ioana Bulca	...	Doamna Stanca
Septimiu Sever	...	Radu Buzescu
Florin Piersic	...	Preda Buzescu
Klára Sebök	...	Maria Cristina de Graz (as Maria Clara Sebok)
Mircea Albulescu	...	Popa Stoica
Emmerich Schäffer	...	Generalul Basta

Also Known As:

Last Crusade
Michael the Brave
Michele il bravo (Italy)
Mihai Viteazul - Cälugäreni (Romania) (first part title)
Mihai Viteazul - Unirea (Romania) (second part title)
Ultima crociata, L' (Italy)

Runtime:

Germany:107 min | Germany:96 min

Country:

Romania | France | Italy

Language:

Romanian

Color:

Color

Aspect Ratio:

2.35 : 1

Sound Mix:

Mono

Certification:

West Germany:18 | Finland:K-16

Filming Locations:

2 Mai, Constanta, Romania

Company:

Romania Film

Can be interesting history for small people in the world?

The question in title is maybe a critical question when commenting on a historical movie. The director especially, sometimes wants to "tell" too much of his peoples history and the movie began too quickly. But I think this movie succeeded to mantain this frail equilibrium between historical information and artistic part.

Of course, comparing with Braveheart this movie isn't so realistic in images, has no such violence, but very real, battles, but it was filmed 27 years before and of course with some censorship involved. But it still is one of the great Romanian movies ever realised. The major critique, in my humble opinion, is a great king is a man too, and this aspect wasn't explored enough in this movie.

Maybe the myth was more important than the reality? But the performances were simply excellent and this critique can be minimised.