‘Napoleon’ Review
Stars: Joaquin Phoenix, Vanessa Kirby, Tahar Rahim, Rupert Everett, Mark Bonnar, Paul Rhys, Ben Miles, Riana Duce, Ludivine Sagnier, Edouard Philipponnat, Miles Jupp, Scott Handy, Youssef Kerkour | Written by David Scarpa | Directed by Ridley Scott
“When the legend becomes fact, print the legend” – one of cinema’s most famous quotes from John Ford’s 1962 classic western The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance. That quote can be used to describe how Ridley Scott has chosen to approach the story of Napoleon. Scott has chosen to ignore much of the historical accuracy in this historical biopic and that has caused historians to be irate and critics to be torn.
Joaquin Phoenix is Napoleon and throughout the film we get to witness his rise and fall across 32 years, from the beginning of the French Revolution to the eventual death of Napoleon in 1821. The first instance we get to see what Napoleon is all about is in the Siege of Toulon where Napoleon leads his men in the dead of night to attack a British port. The sequence is everything we can expect from Ridley Scott, exciting and exhilarating, putting you right in the heart of the chaotic action. Throughout the rest of the Napoleon the set pieces stay like this. Scott puts us right in the heart of every battle, every sword swing, and every cannon fire, instantly giving the film its 15 rating. The sequences feel dirtier and grittier than anything else we get, the violence is disorderly and random, making it feel real and shocking. These set pieces are scattered throughout the film and are the real high points. Scott has always been a director who astonishes in the grand and makes big events feel even bigger. For the rest of the film, however, the pace that was established in the set pieces comes to a grinding halt.
Most often a film is only as good as its script and a director can only do so much with what he has been given. It’s the case with many filmmakers and the same could be said with Ridley Scott throughout the years. However, Scott does have a different level than most, after all, he made Gladiator, which famously began production without a locked screenplay in place, and the film went through multiple rewrites as filmmaking was taking place. If there was ever anyone who could work with a bad script and turn it into something beyond its worth, it’s Ridley Scott. Unfortunately, for the most part Scott has been unable to conjure up the magic of previous works.
The biggest issue Napoleon has all comes down to its screenplay. For the most part – and what has been mentioned the most – is the film’s historical inaccuracies, which if truth be told I don’t care for and won’t speak about further, after all, I’m a lover of film, not a historian. Films shouldn’t have to always tell history, they should have to tell a story, unfortunately Napoleon never even really does that. The issues I have in the script and with the film itself are its runtime and lack of focus. The film feels every minute of its 158-minute runtime, and was one of the first films this year that’s forced me to check my watch on multiple occasions. The main reason for this feels like the lack of focus. The film has no real arc and never feels like it has anything to say about the man and about his life. We cut through moments of Napoleon’s life and the span of his 32 years in power, but the film cuts through these moments with no purpose or reason, so you’re left never really knowing what the point of any of it is.
The best historical biopics have something to say and something the audience can learn about the person or event they focus on, whether it’s focused on one moment in history and fully honing on that or showing the power of history itself. It’s a continuing issue that biopics have had over many years, trying to cram in so many years into one film, that it forces the story to lose any sense of purpose. If your film is just going to showcase the history, and that’s not even correct, it does raise the question of what’s the point?
Napoleon features great performances and brilliant direction throughout. The set pieces are worth seeing on the big screen and I’d be very interested to see Ridley Scott’s director’s cut that is set to be released on streaming. History has taught us time and time again that Scott always delivers on his directors or extended cuts. More often than not they are much better than the theatrical releases; Blade Runner and Kingdom of Heaven are two examples where the quality vastly improves. Hopefully the same will happen with the director’s cut of Napoleon. As far as the theatrical release that is in cinemas now, unfortunately it feels like a let down and the film is unable to tell a true story with any meaning surrounding it.
** 2/5
Napoleon is in cinemas now.
