Ridley Scott's "Napoleon," - HATED IT

“Napoleon” - hated it

I have been asked to provide a review of the latest Ridley Scott “Historical Epic,” purportedly the military life of the French Emperor Napoleon.  I am happy to do so, even though it is still a raw memory, even three months along.

So much to unpack, even now.  With one exception, I want to focus on the butchery of history in the movie.  That exception is the age of the actors.  Josephine was nearly 6 years older than Napoleon.  And yet Joaquin Phoenix is 15 years older than Vanessa Kirby.  In fact Phoenix is the age of Napoleon shortly before his death.  The results of this are twofold.  First, Napoleon was young and hungry.  Not old and brooding.  The movie demanded a Michael Corleone and instead got Vito (acknowledging that that is very unfair to Brando!).  Also, Josephine’s inability to bear more children was a major plot point, but one which would have been more understandable if Kirby had been kept, but a younger actor such as Timothee Chalamet had played Napoleon.

So, now, on to the history.  The movie is episodic, and skips large and relevant parts of Napoleon’s life.  This will read like a laundry list, so bear with me.  We begin at Toulon, which did establish Napoleon’s reputation.  But then the Italian campaigns are almost completely skipped.  The reasoning for the return from Egypt was given as his jealousy upon finding out that Josephine was cheating on him.  In fact, Napoleon’s response to that was to take a mistress!  While the coup of 18 Brumaire is shown, and is one of the most accurate parts of the movie, we then skip the Marengo campaign and go straight to the coronation and Austerlitz, in 1805!  From then on, its a wave top look, skipping the campaigns of 1806 - 1807 against the Prussians and Russians, then skipping the Spanish campaign (Napoleon’s Vietnam), as well as the 1809 Campaign against Austria.  1812 is shown, but we are led to believe that it led directly to the abdication of 1814.  And then we have Waterloo.

Three big complaints here.  One, there is no context for the wars, except, increasingly, “Napoleon Bad, Napoleon Crazy.”  The why of these wars matters, especially when the thesis is that it’s all one man’s fault. (Hint, it wasn’t).  Of course the battle scenes are atrocious.  The “mob scrum” battle that was sort of ok (but wrong) in Gladiator, and beautiful (but wrong) in Kingdom of Heaven, is a straight up piece of ignorant disinformation in portraying modern battles.  Standouts:  There was no battle on the ice at Austerlitz, and no Artillery Ambush.  See what really happened here:  Battle of Austerlitz | Summary, Casualties, Facts, & Napoleon | Britannica

Napoleon led no charges at Borodino. In fact, he was sick for most of the battle.

Finally, Waterloo:  No trenches (why come OUT of a trench to form a square?), no mob scrum, and maybe most egregious of all, the Prussians arrived from the east to save the British, not the west!!! Napoleon’s defeat at the Battle of Waterloo and its aftermath | Britannica

And two additional kicks to the face to top them all.  One, the portrayal of Wellington was absolutely terrible, making him the worst chariciture of Victorian military officers (Yes, it is true that the Victorian era was later. My point still stands).  Also here, Napoleon and Wellington never met, not even once!!!!

Second kick.  Josephine died in 1814, shortly after Napoleon’s first banishment, to Elba.  She was long gone when he returned in March 1815. There was no rush to get her before death, all of those scenes were complete and utter claptrap.

Finally, at the end of the movie we are given a selected list of battles and campaigns of the Napoleonic Wars.  The implication is that this was all one man’s fault.  And yet, as a final point, half of the wars mentioned were not started by the French.  History note:  In 1805, 1806/1807, 1809, and 1815, the allies were the aggressors.  Just more dismissing of history in favor of ill informed diatribe.  I would close by noting that the French REALLY dislike this movie.

One more thing - google "Napoleon and the Lambchop of Destiny." You'll laugh, you'll cry, you'll wonder why there is a food fight in a Napoleon movie.

Ironically, Ridley Scott has delivered a nearly perfect Napoleonic Movie, 1977’s “The Duellists.” The Duellists (1977) - IMDb That movie, based (if loosely) on real people, focuses on two French Cavalrymen who meet periodically through the period to fight in service of a long running vendetta.  Harvey Keitel’s character, the most frequent aggressor, is played as an allegory for Napoleon himself.  HIGHLY Recommended!