Posted on 11/26/2023 8:06:44 PM PST by Rummyfan
If, at 85, Ridley Scott has reached the final season of his filmmaking career, Napoleon is the ideal work of wintry grandeur to mark it. Scott’s 28th feature is a magnificently hewn slab of dad cinema with a chill wind whistling over its battlefields and round its bones: its palette is so cold, even the red in the tricolore is often the shade of dried blood.
Spanning 32 years, from the outbreak of the French Revolution in 1789 to its title character’s death on St Helena in 1821, it casts Napoleon Bonaparte’s rise, reign and downfall as both a prickly psychodrama and a sweeping military epic, in which the intimate lives of its central players and the fate of France itself become instantly and anxiously entwined.
Napoleon himself is played with startling blunt-force charisma by Joaquin Phoenix, who is working again with Scott for the first time since 2000’s Gladiator. Phoenix’s undisguised soft Californian accent is one of a number of details that might irk historical sticklers – television’s Dan Snow has already chimed in with a list of inaccuracies, to which Scott’s not unreasonable response was “get a life”. But on screen it’s oddly ideal, reinforcing the idea that this Corsican roughneck can never fully settle into the role for which history has him picked out.
We get the measure of the man almost instantly at the Siege of Toulon, as the French Republican forces lay siege to the British-occupied harbour fort. In the dead of night, as Napoleon leads the advance, a cannonball tears through the shoulder of his horse – the film earns its 15 certificate fast – though almost before he hits the ground he hurriedly barks “I’m OK,” and strides on, shaken but resolute, and smeared with the blood of his steed.
(Excerpt) Read more at uk.style.yahoo.com ...
Some critics speculate that that's intentional. Phoenix's accent differs from the other actors, in the same way that Napoleon's Corsican accent must have sounded different to the Parisians.
I've read that the film over-emphasizes the historical importance of Josephine.
-PJ
“IF THEY HAVE TO KILL A HORSE ...”
OK, at least you honestly state your point of view, thanks.
Now the rest of us can view your criticism accurately and adjust our opinion of your review appropriately.
Personally, I don’t think seeing an image of brutality will affect me much, but I might not take one of my more sensitive kids to see it.
“ My grandfather was named Napoleon.
My father in law was named Lafayette.
Yeah ... we are an odd crew for down here in the old south.”
Up here in Connecticut I worked with a fellow named Napoleon Samson. Talk about a name impossible to live up to…
This movie is very very shocking.... in that they did not find a black person to play napoleon.
—
A black female transgender would have been perfect for the role!
Scott said his original cut is over 4 hours and he’ll release that on Blue Ray.
They were filmed in Betamax.
He’s in hell so what does it matter? The end is far more important than the beginning. And for that matter, he slaughtered millions on all sides.
But is Joaquin Phoenix a better bowler?
I’m with you. Movies aren’t truth. Nobody is enlightened by seeing sex scenes. Everyone knows husbands and wives have sex. Everybody know soldiers swear.
Basically movie sex scenes and constant swearing is wallowing in the gutter and some of us aren’t entertained by that.
Is this correct? It is alright to depict the deaths of tens of thousands of humans in the various Napoleonic battles but not the death of one horse? Thousands and thousands of horses perished. It would be a farce to make a movie about Napoleon and not note the deaths, both human and animal, in which he played a significant role.
Originally a Spanish colony, lateer sold to the French and subsequently to the United States.
If yahoo says it sucks it is probably good
It was the reason she had so many truly personal and long standing relationships with politicians and others throughout the pre and post revolutionary era. She was accepted and appreciated by people on both sides of French politics ... even until the end. It's the reason too, that after Napoleon's abdication, the leader of Russia, and other enemies of France, made it a point to visit her and to show her the respect due an empress. She represented both the old regime and the Empire.
I think that her status and connection to so many old regime personalities is the main reason that he married her. It's how he got his ticket punched ... so to speak. After the revolution, French politics remained unsettled and confused but her friends still held enough power and influence to help to him along. She validated his position and made it easier for him to gain their interest and support. Many people who disliked him, tolerated him out of respect for her.
It was a well done fun movie to watch. Not Phoniex’s best performance but very enjoyable. Definitely worth the price of admission.
Military officers were disappointed with the coronation as well and some actually attended under duress. The event was carried out in a way that matched the pomp and splendor of Bourbon times. Many notable Marshals and other ranks had held on to their ‘republican’ spirit and the idea of a crowned head of France certainly didn't go down well.
There is a story that Marshal Ney attended the coronation and was surly the whole time, mumbling and obviously disapproving. At one point he said (loudly enough to be overheard) ... “Two million Frenchmen died to put and end to this kind of s*&t.”
Napoleons House is my favorite bar in N’Orleans.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.