I should preface this short post by saying that having taught Napoleon, Napoleonic France and Napoleonic Europe to 18 year old students for over a quarter of a century, I was under no illusion of the impossibility of representing his life and times in two and a half hours. With that in mind I found the film rather amusing. Any comedy that makes me laugh out loud can't be bad. Who can resist the line, "destiny has brought me this lamb chop," or the great man's comic death slide at the end.
I also enjoyed the relationship with Josephine (played by Vanessa Kirby, who was the stand out actor in the movie), and wished the film was better focused on this. In this respect, the film tried to do too much and ended being neither one thing nor the other.
The chronology was "creative" and provided no real context for anything really. I was quite impressed with the uniforms. Plus, the battles were a bit of a spectacle which I enjoyed for both their historical invention and relative brevity.
Joaquin Phoenix's portrayal was so laughable it became, for me, an unintentional comic masterpiece. His talent was wasted.
Should I have been disappointed by the battles? No. What mattered was it told who won and lost. The film was not made for wargamers in mind. It was for a wider, less historically literate audience. If this production makes someone want to find out more, then that's great. They will realise what a fantastic, wide-ranging, complex and fascinating figure Napoleon was, and what an interesting period this was in European history.
Were my historical sensibilities offended by the film? Yes. Of course.
Did I enjoy it? Yes. It was about a relationship, and was funny... albeit unintentionally.
Will I ever watch it again? Never!
Thanks for the review, Richard! You definitely put a different spin on this movie than others before you. I bet when given lemons, you make lemonade and are quite thankful for the considerate gift.
ReplyDeleteNow, point and counterpoint debate with Lee might be interesting.
Thank you Jonathan. I await Lee's response.
DeleteI thought River Phoenix was actually quite good, but it was what he had to work with in terms of the script and the storyline that let him down. There were just too many ridiculous episodes to make it enjoyable for me.
ReplyDeleteLawrence, River Phoenix, had he not died young, would likely be at least as old as Joachim Phoenix. :-) Anyway, as you already know, I'd concur with Richard's opinion.
DeleteI would agree Lawrence, but Joaquin Phoenix must also take credit or responsibility for his performance.
DeleteAh yes, getting my Phoenixes mixed up there.
DeleteI enjoyed the film and found it atmospheric , think the battle scenes would have been better 'off screen' .
ReplyDeleteI think that you may be right about the battle scenes.
DeleteGood to hear your take on the film Richard. To me it sounds like one of those films that's so bad you actually end up enjoying it, for all the wrong reasons! In the interview I saw, old Ridley Scott's aim was the relationship between the two, with some battles thrown in for good measure. It seems he failed on both fronts!
ReplyDeleteMaybe I'm getting a pedant in my old age, but you need to nail the broad historical aspects in any film, and then build upon that with the story you want to tell. Getting the 'facts' wrong is inexcusable in my book.
Will I watch it? Maybe if it ever comes to the small screen and I'm bedridden and with nothing else to do, but it might make my blood pressure reach dangerous levels! Who knows, maybe the 4 hour version that is mooted for Apple TV will make amends for what is in the current version...
I agree with you Steve. Scott should have got the history right. It is clearly interesting enough to want to make a film in the first place, so why mess with it.
DeleteI'm still undecided if I watch it or not, I want to, but I know its not going to be want I want it to be. I might wait for the extended version, but will that be another 2 hours of torture time???
ReplyDeleteDo you really think another 2 hours will make it better?
DeleteHaving today received another motoring fine from the council where I attended the mess that was Napoleon I find your review interesting while feeling badly done to for being not only mugged by Ridley Scott but also by Gateshead council.. I assume the post was firmly with your tongue in your cheek because Im pretty certain Ridley Scott didn't create this film for laughs. I must admit when Napoleon fell off his perch at the end of the film I did have an image of the old cartoons where the message , 'thats all folks' would flash up. But honestly what exactly was there to enjoy? Phoenix making horsey sounds and pawing the floor as he made it known he wanted to rut with Josephene? Phoenix leading not one but two cavalry charges when in reality he was well known as being a very poor horse rider and left the implementation of his plans to his officers. Was it the laughable trenches that appeared at Waterloo, where the French officers shouted 'over the top lads' as they ran up the hill towards the English dug into another hillside. I could go on infinitum. The best bit for me? Miles Jupp playing King? King Francis of Austria, at least he is a professional comedian and very funny, this film was not, it was an absolute disgrace.
ReplyDeleteThank you for your excellent comment. I'm glad the location of my tongue is not in doubt.
DeleteI went expecting nothing, and got nothing. So, I enjoyed what there was.
Thanks for your review, Richard. Your teaching background on the subject holds a lot of weight. I've seen similar reviews, and was sort of expected. I thought Phoenix looked too old for the role, except for the last days. I hope to see the battle scenes on YouTube. 😀
ReplyDeleteYou're welcome Dean. It's a good idea to save your money and find them there.
DeleteI read your title and thought "that's unusual" but I see now that it's not a serious comment Richard! For all its faults, I did not mind "Napoleon" and I have certainly seen worse films, but I doubt I would bother watching it again!
ReplyDeleteOn this we are in agreement Keith.
DeleteGreat review - I applaud your willingness to be a bit different from other wargaming reviewers! You have at the very least given us a different angle on it.. And made some good points - there may be some young viewers who will be starting a lifelong interest having seen the film. I'm giving it a miss though, on a very transactional level I don't really want to give my time and money to Ridley Scott, especially after his responses to historical criticism! Knowing when to retire before you lose the plot completely is a key skill, Mr Scott..
ReplyDeleteYour point is well put David.
DeleteWell that's odd, I could have sworn I'd seen my comment published already? Anyway I enjoyed it as a film but had to put my historical head to one side, I liked the design and costumes and thought it could have easily been called Josephine and Napoleon, my wife enjoyed it, she has no interest in military history, as she asked why Napoleon was on top of the column in Trafalgar Square, my expectations were also low which helped!
ReplyDeleteBest Iain
It is true that we had to leave our intellectual integrity outside of the cinema. Loved the comment about your wife.
DeleteGood take Richard. I agree with Svjek. The battle scenes might have been better handled off screen, like those old low budget BBC plays. One thing that I thought could have added to it, bearing in mind the centrality of the relationship with Josephine and his earlier scene with the sword, would have been to show Eugene being given the crown of Italy.
ReplyDeleteThat's a good point to highlight the relationship with Josephine's children. I often thought that Eugene's story might make a decent film.
Delete