[Maris Crane]

I love Ridley Scott and I have great interest in the French Revolution and Napoleon, BUT

IF THEY HAVE TO KILL A HORSE AT THE START OF THE FILM, LIKE ANOTHER POPULAR SERIES, I HAVE NEITHER TIME NOR INTEREST IN IT.

Ridley, you disappoint me. Even if what happened was true...it is just too barbaric to depict.

I know, I know...this is real life...grow up.

Some things I just cannot take.

[Repeal The 17th]

“...is just too barbaric to depict...”
-
Killing a horse is barbaric,
but killing thousands of humans is OK?
(war is hell)

[Dr. Sivana]

Some things I just cannot take.

Did you have a problem with "The Godfather", or "Blazing Saddles"?

[hanamizu]

Some things I just cannot take.

---

Then you will not want to see the movie “Come and See”. The scene where the cow dies; the cow really dies.

[wardaddy]

Did they actually kill the horse ?

That disappoints me too

[conejo99]

“IF THEY HAVE TO KILL A HORSE ...”
OK, at least you honestly state your point of view, thanks.
Now the rest of us can view your criticism accurately and adjust our opinion of your review appropriately.
Personally, I don’t think seeing an image of brutality will affect me much, but I might not take one of my more sensitive kids to see it.

[mmichaels1970]

Even if what happened was true...it is just too barbaric to depict.

I respect your opinion. I didn’t realize however how important it was in that period to kill horses until I recently visited Gettysburg. Horses were frequently a main target and thousands died and lay rotting in the fields. It took something like thirteen horses to move a cannon. If you stopped the horses you stopped the cannon from moving. Removal of horse corpses was as challenging as removing human ones.

In my opinion the representation of how many horses were killed has been drastically UNDERSTATED in historical depictions, and that you truly can’t accurately depict battles of the time without including these terrible but historical facts.

I haven’t seen the movie and likely won’t for a while. I certainly hope no animals were actually harmed during its production.

[.44 Special]

Is this correct? It is alright to depict the deaths of tens of thousands of humans in the various Napoleonic battles but not the death of one horse? Thousands and thousands of horses perished. It would be a farce to make a movie about Napoleon and not note the deaths, both human and animal, in which he played a significant role.

[Clutch Martin]

“IF THEY HAVE TO KILL A HORSE AT THE START OF THE FILM, LIKE ANOTHER POPULAR SERIES, I HAVE NEITHER TIME NOR INTEREST IN IT.”

If it makes you feel any better they didn’t really kill a horse...

[Ruy Dias de Bivar]

Then you will not like the 1966 Russian version of War and Peace, or the 1970 version of WATERLOO.

[libstripper]

Cruelty to dogs is just as much a movie killer for me. Indeed, I even dislike cruelty to snakes, given how much pure good the nonvenomous ones do.