Watch Michael the Brave For Free

A Masterpiece!

This is a tender, generous movie that likes its characters and presents them as real people, full of flaws and strengths.

Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

I have heard about this movie by chance while my search took me to the direction of local movies made on Ottoman conflicts in the Balkans and Central Europe.It was interesting to see the take on historical plots of this era from other views on screenplay.This movie,ticking over 3 hours,tells the adventurous campaigns of the Wallachian prince who aspires all his life to unite all the historical Romanian principalities under one flag struggling against his powerful enemies full of grit,greed and cruelty who would do anything to destroy each other to stay on top of another.The movie starts with Mihai traveling to Istanbul to pay his tribute to the Sultan by borrowing money from a rich Venetian Merchant through the reputation of a noble Countess who just from the beginning admires and loves him.Mihai's only goal is to get to the Wallachian throne through the approval from the Ottoman palace at once eliminating his sneaky rival Alexandru The Evil and set out his plans to free the lands from the desperate yoke of the authority which approves his vassal status as the prince. The Sultan and the Grand Vizier Sinan Pasha are taken by full surprise and grow suspicious from his bold courage at the Ottoman palace displayed against them,nevertheless approve him.From then on Mihai wages his own war,defying Sultan's Messenger Selim (who later on becomes Pasha).Now I want to open a bracket here,because the character who is depicted as Mihai's childhood friend and a Muslim convert actually is a fiction character casted by director Sergiu Nicolaescu and did not exist in reality.Mihai later goes on even further this time,waging a campaign against the Ottomans and advancing as far as Adrianople where he awaited the promised help from the Papal State in Rome,which in reality never came.Mihai later encounters one of the most allegedly treacherous characters according to the movie,and his so called ''Christian ally'' Szekely noble Transylvanian prince Sigismund Bathory.Bathory,a jealous,mean and selfish personality, pledges him help against Turks at the Battle of Calugareni but never really sends it,constantly trying to undermine and eliminate him instead, having him sign a humiliating treaty by taking advantage of his dedication to the Christian cause.The rivalries even flame more as Mihai's fame of bravery spreads across Christian Europe.Neither Austrian emperor Rudolph nor his general G.Basta really has him any sympathy and they never really support him.The story line of the movie mostly runs smooth although there are certain scenes doubtful of historical accuracy.The part where Sigismund abdicates from the throne after his defeat at Keresztes is historically true,however the scene where he disguises as monk to meet Mihai at the battlefield and Mihai having him watch the battle winning over his own cousin Andrew in Şelimbar as a captive is dubious.It is also true that Andrew was beheaded after the battle by his own subordinates,however Sigismund watching his cousin being executed probably never happened in real either.The scene where Selim tells Mihai: ''I used your tactics from Calugareni to defeat Sigismund at Keresztes.'' is apparently out of context however the movie is aimed at local spectators and certain praises in favor of the protagonist are noticeable.Sigismund also seems to be demonized far from what he actually is,totally a treacherous villain full of greed and intrigues.The story line of the movie never talks about the fact that Mihai joined forces with Sigismund to beat Turks following the Battle of Calugareni.There is apparently one-sided history telling on some parts of the script.Mihai's love story with the Countess and his disputes with his wife princess Stanca,his tragic loss of his son Nicolai at the battle field are also emotional moments.His son in reality though,did not die at that battle but much later.The movie has great colorful scenes such as the lance duel between Mihai and Sigismund on their first encounter,as well as the waltz in Sigismund's palace during his wedding ceremony with Maria Cristina de Graz.From the Topkapi Palace in Istanbul to the Neajlov swamps at the Calugareni battlefield,from the epic entrance of Mihai to the palace in Alba Iulia to the Prague Cathedral and the beautiful Charles bridge, the movie delivers fantastic scene depictions of the events that took place,taking us with Mihai throughout his journey full of struggles.Whether fully historically accurate or not,the movie has some fantastic depictions of battle scenes with rich costumes,giving a breathtaking realistic experience of the battles in chronological order.Finally great casting delivered by local actors notably Amza Pellea as Mihai,and the music in the movie is pretty decent as well.Some deviations and exaggerations on the plot,but let's not forget this movie was produced in 70's Romania and for the purpose of praising national pride as well to some point.Overall this movie was by far the best among the local productions in Balkans and C.Europe I have seen with similar historical plots and background.

Most probably the best Romanian film ever. It reproduces the exact history of one the Romaian Country leader and great hero, that managed to unite for the first time in Romanian history the hole Romanian people, in the early 17th century. The movie is made by the famous Romanian film director Sergiu Nicolaescu in 1970. The movie has it all: political scene, great betrayals, family drama an above all great battle scene at huge scale. The film brings to the screen famous Romanian actor like: Sergiu Nicolaescu, Florin Piersic, Amza Pelea and others. Even if the film is made in the 1970 it is one of a kind and it worth seen. Enjoy

The historical facts: Mihai Viteazul was a Romanian ruler that reigned in the small principality of Wallachia between 1593 and 1601. In 1600 he bedazzled Europe by uniting Wallachia with Romanian-speaking Moldavia and Transylvania, for which he is hailed as Romania's national hero. It all sounds ferry tale-ish, but it isn't. Mihai was too ahead of his time. He had the guts to go to war with three empires (Turkish, Austrian and Polish) and found his death when he trusted one of them. But his accomplishment forged a landmark in Romanian history. The movie: First, it's the battle scenes. They don't come bigger than these and nobody can't take that away from Nicolaescu. He is THE master! Back then, when a movie of such girth was made in Romania, everybody got into it, from the head of state to the Army, so sky was the limit.I think the grandest scene of the movie is the one depicting the Turkish army in the marshes of Calugareni on August 13 1595. On that day, the all-mighty Ottoman Empire, in its heyday at that time, poured 120,000 soldiers into Wallachia to conquer it. Imagine filming that! Nicoleascu shot from a helicopter. It started from the back, with the scattered extras forming the rear guard and gradually progressing towards the front. The scale is huge and mind you, he actually used that amount of people, not the CGI tricks of "Gladiator". Just think of the props and coordinating those guys on a hot day of summer in the middle of a swamp.On the other side, as in every portrayal of a legendary figure, the hero hasn't the least of flaws: he is always brave (actually Mihai Viteazul means Michael the Brave), honest, nothing gets by him, always gives a moralizing speech before the battle yada yada. Man, didn't guys like Mihai or William Wallace ever had the slightest trace of egocentrism ? In that respect, there is another movie about Mihai Viteazul, called Buzduganul Cu Trei Peceti (The Mace With Three Seals), in which the hero actually has feelings, flaws and fears. Of course, it's directed by someone else.At times, the acting is childish, especially in face-offs, like badly rehearsed lines of a play. When it involves a third party, e.g. a soldier telling Mihai that one of his subordinates has just arrived, I can't help myself laughing at the poor timing of the actors. Oh, and it's always the same thing with Romanian scripts: no matter whether the character is a farmer or the Austrian Emperor, he always uses the same old precious and dusty lingo, something like saying "It gives me great pleasure to gaze upon your look" instead of plain "Oh I'm so happy to see you".All in all, I think 'Mihai Viteazul' is a good movie by most standards. It's the Romanian movie most seen outside its borders and a must-see within.

It was a great idea that HBO Romania had to broadcast "Mihai Viteazul" on the Romania's National Day, that is the 1st of December. "Mihai Viteazul" successfully combines battle scenes and political intrigues and to show as realistic as possible the life and times of the great Romanian ruler. I'm not going to describe the film itself, it has to be seen by your own eyes to get the right image about a significant part of the Romanian film industry. Instead, I am going to speak a little about the director's visions about making this movie.Right after HBO's playing the film on 1st December 2000, a Romanian broadcasting network invited director Sergiu Nicolaescu to make a comment on his masterpiece. Everybody must know this was the second motion picture made by Sergiu Nicolaescu for the silver screen. First, the film was meant to be a co-production with the USA, thus Nicolaescu managed to cast Richard Burton, Elizabeth Taylor, Orson Wells and other great actors at Hollywood. However, the Ministry of Culture under President Nicolae Ceausescu did not admit an American involvement in a production based on the glorious history of the Romanian people. So, director Nicolaescu and writer Titus Popovici had to renounce to the American partnership and made this film on their own, financed by the Romanian government. A small dispute started between Nicolaescu and Popovici regarding the actor to play the main character, Mihai Viteazul. A number of 128 Romanian actors were tested for this role and the probes were sent in America, so that some American producers to choose which one is the appropriate actor for the character. The result was Sergiu Nicolaescu and that was exactly what Titus Popovici had in mind. So they started shooting with Nicolaescu playing Mihai Viteazul. But, after a while, Sergiu Nicolaescu was not pleased with the role, he actually wanted to play Selim-Pasa and went to the Ministry saying he's not going to direct that movie anymore, unless he is allowed to do it in his manner. He got the approval, except, of course, any American involvement in it. He returned on the director's chair, but with Amza Pellea playing the main character. I have to admit he was right, because Amza Pellea was outstanding and Nicolaescu's "Selim-Pasa" was a better part, I think.All the battle scenes were filmed by only three cameras, without zoom effects (the Romanian film industry wasn't working with such equipments in the seventies), so all camera movements were created by physicals efforts.Battle scenes were filmed with the Army's support, for which the director thanks during the main titles.Historical facts are precise, that is Nicolaescu's guarantee. More than anything else, Sergiu Nicolaescu loves history, the Romanian history, and all important moments and dialogues in his historical movies are covered by documents from those periods.Nicolaescu says he was surprised to notice a TV sequence in Steven Spielberg's "E.T." showing images from his film "Mihai Viteazul". That's why he asked, when he had the opportunity, Steven Spielberg why he enclosed a sequence from his movie and not from another director's. And Spielberg replied he admired Nicolaescu's work, especially the battle scenes, which also inspired him for some of his future films.