Ridley Scott's NAPOLEON makes the mistake of trying to tell the entire story of Napoleon Bonaparte's mammoth life and conquests in a single film, and even at 158 minutes, it just isn't long enough to properly do so.
The result is the movie feels like a list of Napoleon's Greatest Hits, with plenty of famous incidents that could have filled out a 158 minute running time all by themselves. You don't have to be a history major to watch Scott's NAPOLEON, but if your life revolves around trending topics this isn't the film for you.
The major problem I had with NAPOLEON was Joaquin Phoenix in the title role. Phoenix gives his usual off-kilter performance, and I just didn't buy him as Napoleon at all. (Some of Phoenix's acting choices caused chuckles among the audience at the screening I attended.) One of the main elements of the film is that Napoleon's drive and determination spring from his obsession with Josephine (Vanessa Kirby). Because of this, Josephine winds up being a stronger and more charismatic figure than Napoleon--something I don't think Ridley Scott meant to happen. (Vanessa Kirby is the best thing in this production.)
NAPOLEON is also hampered by some very ripe dialogue (which also got an audience reaction). The battle sequences and costumes are well done, and there's plenty of big screen spectacle....but for me the movie didn't show what made Napoleon such a titan upon the world stage.
Apparently there's a four-hour cut of this film that may be shown later on AppleTV, and that might fill in some of the gaps the theatrical version has. Judging from what I saw in the theater, Ridley Scott's NAPOLEON doesn't reach a David Lean-Stanley Kurbrick epic level--it's more like a Cecil B. DeMille show.
This film was my introduction to Napoleon as an historical figure and even I suspected it wasn’t a good film. There is a scene where young British midshipmen are listening respectfully to him as he is held captive but it doesn’t feel earned to me because we aren’t shown how effective Napoleon was as a ruler and administrator, and his military genius doesn’t get much more coverage; he refers to Tsar Alexander I copying his battle tactics, which means little when we don’t see most of his battles and have no clear idea of his favoured tactics. In fact, Napoleon doesn’t come off very well at all in the film, spending the majority of his scenes being awkward, emotional, or acting like the “Corsican brute” he is described as, such as having his way with Josephine under the dining room table while growling like a dog. Not that there’s anything wrong with making a character come across as unlikeable but they need some complexity to make them engaging!
ReplyDeleteHave you seen the 2002 miniseries of the same name where Napoleon is portrayed by Christian Clavier? Not saying it doesn't have its problems but it is a perfect demonstration of why this man’s life needs an entire TV series to do it justice.
No, I haven't.
ReplyDeleteBy the way, one of the books I'm currently reading is "The Napoleonic Wars: A Global History" by Alexander Mikaberidze.