1900: Freaking Epic...But Worth the 5 Hours?

Okay, so I finally tackled "1900" (Bertolucci, obvi). Holy moly, that was a commitment lol. Like, I know it's a classic, and the cinematography is STUNNING, especially those wide shots of the Italian countryside. Seriously, postcard material. But five hours is FIVE HOURS, people. Anyway, the whole thing with Olmo and Alfredo, the two best buddies from totally different worlds – seriously powerful stuff. You really feel the tension as they grow up and end up on opposite sides of the class war thing. I gotta say, Robert De Niro is just...De Niro, nailing the conflicted landowner vibe. And Gerard Depardieu? So good as the peasant kid turned...well, whatever Olmo becomes. But man, some of the stuff got REAL heavy, you know? Like, the whole Attila character (Donald Sutherland! Creepy AF!!!) doing some seriously messed-up stuff. I honestly had to fast forward through a few bits. It really paints a picture of the brutality and the raw power dynamics back then. It's definitely a visually impressive film, and the performances are top-notch. I'm just not sure if it needed to be quite so long, ya know? Like, there were parts where I felt it could have been trimmed down and still packed the same punch. But hey, maybe I'm just impatient, lol. Anyone else seen it? What did you guys think? Did you feel the length was justified, or was it a bit...much? Let me know! Maybe I missed something, and I'm willing to rewatch (eventually... after a long nap).