'Napoleon' Review

Ridley Scott takes on history's most famous Corsican with an epic scope and a dash of confusion

“Destiny has brought me this lamb chop”

There is little left to be said about Napoleon Bonaparte that has not already been said. Napoleon remains arguably one of the most titanic figures in world history, and will forever be studied across most content areas: few individuals in the history of the world have had such a rich and illustrious life. As a history-obsessed middle school student, I was drawn to this enigmatic character, and have continued to read about him when I can. So needless to say, when I heard Ridley Scott was attempting a Napoleon biopic, I was cautiously optimistic. 

Going back as far as 1927, filmmakers have been trying and never succeeding at adapting Napoleon’s life to the screen. Kubrick even famously had planned and scripted his own Napoleon epic, which Spielberg is now going to attempt as an HBO series. Kubrick ultimately abandoned the project, and from then on Napoleon has been reduced to a “short man” punchline in modern cinema. Scott’s flawed but awe-inspiring spectacle is one to behold and is a breath of fresh air in a market desperate for something even remotely different. 

It is worth noting that there is in fact a 4 hour cut of this film that will be released sometime in December. I will absolutely be viewing this edition, as this extended cut probably solves many issues I have with the film. While I wish they would release it in the old roadshow style in theaters, I understand that I am in the minority for this. The group of six friends I went with all enjoyed the film, but all agreed they wanted to see the longer cut of this film. For me, there were several plot lines that did not really lead anywhere, or fizzled out all together. There were also several opportunities for fantastic arcs that were not approached, such as his relationship with Eugene Beauharnais, who was his adopted son through Josephine who became one of his most accomplished generals, only to remain neutral at Waterloo. Eugene is shown only once as a child, and never again. Another issue with the film is how not all of the story beats are felt nor conveyed as effectively as they could have been. Napoleon was a master tactician that forced the world to change their tactics, and this is not quite felt. The Battle of Leipzig, which was one of Napoleon’s largest defeats, and one of the first out on the major world stage, showed everyone that the god emperor could bleed. It is arguably the second most important battle in Bonaparte’s career, and it goes completely unaddressed. We merely see him marching back from Russia, then abdicating; between which in history there is a 2 year gap filled with major battles. This kind of jumping is ultimately the largest issue for me, and the constant relating of all things back to Josephine seems slightly dishonest, suggesting that the reason he left Egypt was for her and not related to the political turmoil in Paris. It is a mix of this jumping and the film’s somewhat aimless focus on what it wants to say about Napoleon. Was he a war criminal? Was he just a patriot who adored conflict and loved the fight? Was he motivated by his love of Josephine? Did he do all for fame and glory? Or was it all for the roar of the crowd? All of these questions are raised, but never fully answered. Perhaps this was intentional. 

With all that being said, despite the fact that it seems Joaquin Phoenix took some time to grow into the role, by the end he had me fully convinced. Judging by the life he led, Napoleon was most likely an odd person. Almost no person can claim to have done even half the things he accomplished in a decade or even in an entire lifetime. It takes a different type of person to do these kinds of things. While the humor that is in this film is odd, it ultimately lands and fits into the notion that the truth is often funnier than fiction. Vanessa Kirby is phenomenal as Josephine, and dominates many of her scenes. Napoleon was never sluggish for me, and the strongest part of film is is definitely its shot composition and battle sequences, particularly the latter. I could have watched an entire 4 hour film of just those sequences, especially the battle of Auserlitz. While not necessarily the most historically accurate, it is a bone-chilling sequence that has to be one of the best sequences from any film I’ve seen in the past year, scored to an eerie “Kyrie Eleison” as countless men meet their demise at the brilliance of a tactical magician. Other battle sequences being shown meet the intensity we have grown accustomed to from Ridley, minus some historical inaccuracies (Napoleon did not shoot the pyramids with cannons). The craftsmanship of this film is consistent throughout, and thoroughly enjoyable, while maintaining a surprisingly light heart for such an epic saga. 

While Napoleon has some issues, I ultimately recommend it, emphasizing that it should be seen in theaters. As with anything concerning Bonaparte, longer is always better, and when the extended cut of this film comes out in the coming weeks, we will then be able to judge it more holistically. The film should play as a welcome contender at the box office: I for one would watch 100 Napoleon’s with open arms before watching another 250 million dollar CGI snooze fest. Of all companies, Apple is offering our elder auteurs the opportunity to make their passion projects, using all the ludicrous cash they earn from rereleasing the same phone every year to help make cinema that any other company would scoff at. Apple now is where Netflix was 5 years ago, and I hope they maintain this, with perhaps some future releases on physical media.