Sometimes lightning doesn’t strike twice when reuniting the talents behind a cinematic work. Director Ridley Scott helmed the classic Gladiator, and actor Joaquin Phoenix appeared as the villain Commodus in the same movie. The production earned $452 million worldwide in 2000. ($811 million when adjusted for inflation). It garnered 12 Oscar nominations and won 5, including Best Picture. Now, Scott and Phoenix have reunited for Napoleon. It ain’t happening here, folks.
I was prepared to love this. The 86-year-old filmmaker is a legend, and his star is exceptionally talented as well. True enough, the battle scenes are indeed outstanding. Scott presents the thrill of those skirmishes so that you feel like you’re there witnessing the past. The most impressive spectacle appears midway when the French face off against the Russian and Austrian forces at The Battle of Austerlitz. Kudos for the technical skill on display.
Problems arise when armies aren’t fighting. Now, we must contend with the dialogue. The interactions are far less captivating. Credit screenwriter David Scarpa (2008’s The Day the Earth Stood Still) for the less-than-thrilling human conversations. In particular, the central marriage of Napoleon and Josephine (Vanessa Kirby) lacks passion. The performances aren’t bad per se, but their relationship is rather complicated, to put it charitably. Napoleon is a fiery leader on the battlefield but surprisingly ineffective behind closed doors. His enervated response to his wife’s infidelity is bewildering. I didn’t understand their unorthodox relationship, nor was I ever inspired to even give a care.
As an enlightening historical epic, Napoleon comes up… (ahem) …short. The narrative is muddled as the saga feels truncated from a longer, more coherent cut. Yet it still unfolds slowly over an emotionless and patience-testing 2 hours and 38 minutes. It isn’t all bad. Once the Duke of Wellington shows up to defeat the military leader at Waterloo, I enjoyed the sneering performance of Rupert Everett in that role. I saw a flicker of excitement generated by two thespians. Of course, as any history buff (or Abba fan) knows, Waterloo was the end of Napoleon’s career, so the movie was over just as it started to get good.
11-30-23
7 Responses
I agree. Battle scenes were pretty amazing. Too bad the rest of it was ho hum. 3 ⭐️
Well said. This ho-hum script destroyed Napoleon far more effectively than Waterloo ever did. 😂
Is there anybody in the world these days who goes to see a movie for the excellence of its battle scenes? If you’ve got it right, how could Ridley Scott have got it so wrong? SCREENWRITERS, where are you when we need you?
Ridley Scott gets it wrong almost as much as he gets it right. He has a talent for selecting bad scripts to direct.
I wonder if we will see a directors cut with the missing bits reinstated
Yes. Ridley Scott has said a four-hour director’s cut of Napoleon will stream on Apple TV+.
Perhaps they were just trying to tell the truth about Napoleon. Read Vincent Cronin’s book “Napoleon Bonaparte: An Intimate Biography”.