NAPOLEON (2023) seemed to have everything–Ridley Scott directing, a solid cast, beautiful cinematography. Unfortunately, the movie also seemed to bite off way more than it could chew, even with a nearly three-hour runtime, and what it did contain it squandered on Napoleon and Josephine’s relationship and a depiction of Napoleon that made him seem even more opaque than before I watched it.
The movie starts with the terrible days of the French Revolution, where we see Napoleon, a young artillery officer, prove his mastery of tactics in multiple campaigns. Over time, he ascends to complete control of the French government, crowning himself emperor and conquering most of Europe until the bitter Russian campaign put him on a path to decline and exile.
What I liked: The cinematography, costumes, and sets were stunning. This is a gorgeous movie. The actors gave it their all.
What I didn’t: The movie bites off more than it can chew by covering Napoleon’s entire career, resulting in everything feeling oversimplified and dumbed down. Napoleon is portrayed as weirdly needy and erratic, missing many of the traits that made the real Napoleon so charismatic and destined for greatness. His relationship with Josephine is a big part of the movie, and Vanessa Kirby is great, but I couldn’t figure out if she loved or hated him or honestly why she was even in the movie, as it added nothing. A lot of effort is given to make Napoleon look cool on the battlefield, having him personally direct every unit by direct order, and then leading cavalry charges, which never happened. The result often feels rushed and silly, especially to those who love history.
If you want to see a really well done portrayal of Napoleon, try to score WATERLOO (1970). Rod Steiger is amazing in the role, uncertain and confident in starts, passionate and charismatic, beloved by his army, wily but prone to outbursts, a man who through sheer force and desire bends reality to his will. In a stark contrast, you get to see the great Christopher Plummer as the Duke of Wellington, haughty and aristocratic but a grudging admirer and student of Napoleon’s tactics. And the battle! The practical effects with thousands of real extras is just incredible. You see the battle come to life, unlike Scott’s NAPOLEON, where the battles all look very small and ignorant of the era’s tactics.
Greg at Little Wars TV, a YouTube wargaming channel, made a video where he attempted to “fix” NAPOLEON. His recommendations were spot on. Instead of covering Napoleon’s entire career, Scott might have done better to start with the retreat through the Russian winter, the political machinations that followed, and then end with the Battle of Nations, which he lost and resulted in him being exiled to Elba. To include a female lead and a love story, he could have focused on the relationship with Marie-Louise, the Archduchess of Austria, who apparently was quite kind and tried to help broker a peace. He also might have included Marshal Ney, Napoleon’s bravest general, loyal but increasingly disillusioned. This would have given the movie the focus it needed.
Overall, I wish I’d liked this one more. Despite all my criticisms, I didn’t hate it. Not at all. There’s some brilliant filmmaking here. It just wasn’t a good script in my view, and as a result, this was not a great watch for me, despite my hopes that I’d love it.
Leave a Reply