Documentary/Biopic Ridley Scott’s Napoleon (Phoenix)

[Drizzle]

This scene would have been fire to see in a theater

 

[Monsieur Xavier]

One case where I think a longer cut would've made sense, but it's tough to release movies like this over three hours.

Also the use of subtitles throughout the film didn't help matters in scenes that didn't really have room to breathe so you'd just jump to the next scene and then see another subtitle.

They are dialogues spoken in French in the English version ? Good to know.

 

[DKDetective]

I saw the film earlier and it is very disjointed and choppy.

Vanessa Kirby is the standout performance of the film.

I didn't care for Joaquin Phoenix's performance. It felt like he couldn't really nail down what he was doing, so he was just trying a bunch of different things. It's a weird awkward performance. I don't really get any of the charisma or sense of leadership that made Napoleon so dangerous and inspired such loyalty in his followers.

Yeah, I notice a lot of European critics and historians are dismayed by the fact that it is a very British take on Bonaparte and falls back on the old British propaganda that the guy was a sad little megalomaniac, completely ignoring the fact that he was a fervent revolutionary for most of the 1790s and did much to tear down the old feudal order in Europe and spread of Enlightenment ideas across the continent. Much of that legacy still survives to this day. The guy's legacy is not all bad and what makes Bonaparte fascinating to historians is all of his complexity and contradictions.

 

[TheVileOne]

Yeah, I notice a lot of European critics and historians are dismayed by the fact that it is a very British take on Bonaparte and falls back on the old British propaganda that the guy was a sad little megalomaniac, completely ignoring the fact that he was a fervent revolutionary for most of the 1790s and did much to tear down the old feudal order in Europe and spread of Enlightenment ideas across the continent. Much of that legacy still survives to this day. The guy's legacy is not all bad and what makes Bonaparte fascinating to historians is all of his complexity and contradictions.

From my understanding and research, the common folk and French public loved Napoleon because they viewed him as one of them. And they supported his rule as Emperor of the French because he enforced the ideals of the Revolution and enforced progressive changes across the empire. We didn't get a good sense of how the public viewed or supported Napoleon in this film, which would've been interesting to show how he gained so much support among the military and the public.

 

[TheVileOne]

They are dialogues spoken in French in the English version ? Good to know.

No. The subtitles are just names of characters and certain locations and settings, IE subtitles introducing "Paul Barras, General of France blah blah blah" or "1793, The End of the Reign of Terror." Things to introduce certain characters, times, or places.

I do think some lines are spoken in German, like when one character is speaking to an Austrian ambassador.

 

[blue scholar]

Yeah, I notice a lot of European critics and historians are dismayed by the fact that it is a very British take on Bonaparte and falls back on the old British propaganda that the guy was a sad little megalomaniac, completely ignoring the fact that he was a fervent revolutionary for most of the 1790s and did much to tear down the old feudal order in Europe and spread of Enlightenment ideas across the continent. Much of that legacy still survives to this day. The guy's legacy is not all bad and what makes Bonaparte fascinating to historians is all of his complexity and contradictions.

A Napoleon Bonaparte movie could be one of the best examples of "you either die a hero or live long enough to become the villain".

Going by the reviews, sad that this isn't that kind of movie.

 

[Incarnadine]

Looks like Napoleon will end up #2 this weekend after Wish under performed...

 

[TheVileOne]

In terms of awards, I'd be fine if this got nods for Best Cinematography, Production Design, Visual Effects, Costumes, and Best Supporting Actress for Kirby. Anything else would be ridiculous and proof IMHO that the big awards are ridiculous.

Joaquin Phoenix blew it in terms of his performance here. Scott didn't appear to have a clear vision for what he wanted this to be and his story to be about. They did not earn the nods here.

 

[scarlet-witch]

What on Earth was Phoenix doing here? I laughed plenty, but it was such a strange choice.

I feel like half of Kirby's scenes must have been left on the cutting room floor.

 

[Gothamsknight]

I plan on seeing this today or Wednesday I think. Not sure what to expect lol.

 

[TheVileOne]

What on Earth was Phoenix doing here? I laughed plenty, but it was such a strange choice.

I feel like half of Kirby's scenes must have been left on the cutting room floor.

Joaquin Phoenix is a tremendous actor, but he had no idea what he was doing here. He never found his character, and he couldn't figure out what he wanted his Napoleon to be. The movie shows him kind of farting around and experimenting, but he and Scott have no clear vision for Napoleon.

It's a classic case of miscasting. Great actor, great pedigree, but no clue on what to do.

 

[Arachnerd]

I watched this earlier today and while I didn't think it was bad (for as innaccurate as it was, the Austerlitz scene on its own was fantastic), there were... certain weird choices that were taken with Napoleon that I was either confused by or made me cringe.

 

[:eek:]

https://www.darkhorizons.com/no-plans-set-for-4-hour-napoleon-release/

 

[Hurm...]

Phoenix mentioned that, in his research, he found Napoleon to have a case of arrested development. He found his behaviour to be very playful, immature and juvenile -- particularly towards women. However, I don't think the film appropriately set that up in the script so it makes Joaquin's acting choices seem bizarre.

 

[blueharvest]

 

[Captain Tired]

A guy named Cox shouldn't br throwing around insults abouts another actor's name lol.

 

[DKDetective]

Joaquin Phoenix is a tremendous actor, but he had no idea what he was doing here. He never found his character, and he couldn't figure out what he wanted his Napoleon to be. The movie shows him kind of farting around and experimenting, but he and Scott have no clear vision for Napoleon.

It's a classic case of miscasting. Great actor, great pedigree, but no clue on what to do.

Phoenix mentioned that, in his research, he found Napoleon to have a case of arrested development. He found his behaviour to be very playful, immature and juvenile -- particularly towards women. However, I don't think the film appropriately set that up in the script so it makes Joaquin's acting choices seem bizarre.

The quotes from Ridley about how Phoenix had no idea how to approach the character right before filming was set to start say it all. Ridley said they had to sit down and go through the script scene by scene at the last minute. There clearly was a lot of disconnect about how to approach the script and character.

It definitely is a clear example of miscasting as is Kirby. I love Kirby as an actor but if they wanted to examine Napoleon's arrested development in relation to women, it would have been much smarter to cast an older woman. The historical accounts are very clear that Josephine as an older, more experienced woman had the younger, naive Napoleon wrapped around her finger.

 

[Filmfreak]

Brian Cox having zero tact per usual. Though I don't disagree with what he's saying.

 

[TheVileOne]

I mean I agree with the criticism, but he didn't have to personally insult one of his fellow actors. I would assume Phoenix is an admirer of Cox's work.

Then again, Brian Cox might just be in a "I don't give a crap" mode at this point.

Phoenix is a fine actor. This one just didn't click.

 

[Drizzle]

Brian Cox is the embodiment of "Old Man Yells at Cloud" which I usually have zero tolerance for but for some reason I find his ramblings to be hilarious.

 

[Elayis]

I regret not seeing this in theaters now that the four hour cut isn't happening.

 

[Elayis]

It's a shame the longer cut isn't happening. The film was a mess, but it had enough of a promise that I truly could've seen it somewhat coming together with all the missing material.

It seems like it was just an idea Scott was spitballing while talking to the press, not something that he had any official approval for from Apple.

 

[Lily Adler]

I can't wait to see Trump sail across the Delaware with tanks and nukes with a basket of paper towels to save Puerto Rico from the Hurricane! When Ridely does his film.

 

[:eek:]

"Napoleon" Director's Cut Is 205 Mins - Dark Horizons

The official runtime of the director’s cut of Ridley Scott’s historical epic “Napoleon” has been revealed. The longer version of the film isn’t the four-and-half hour version that Scott suggested last year, instead it will come in at around 205 minutes – just under three-and-a-half hours. That’s...

www.darkhorizons.com

 

[Elayis]

Damn, I knew I should've waited. I finally gave up hope on this existing and watched it last month. It ended up being pretty mid and nowhere near as good as The Last Duel, which is the only film of Scott's that I've truly enjoyed in over a decade. I wonder if the extended cut will actually make the film better, or just longer.