Published 11/24/23.
Anyone who has taken a primary school history class knows Napoleon Bonaparte. Even those who don’t know his name should recognize the pint-sized military man with his hand in his jacket pocket. He’s immediately familiar. In fact, it feels almost surprising that Hollywood retellings of his life are so few and far between. So, when Ridley Scott announced Joaquin Phoenix to play the universally recognized historical figure, my mind boggled. Would the pairing harken back to the glory days of Gladiator? Or would the result be simply another flat and utterly mediocre historical drama?
Napoleon traces the life of the General and French Emporer of the time (Joaquin Phoenix) charting his rise to military power, through his relationship with (the love of his life) Josephine (Vanessa Kirby). Ridley Scott directs the movie from a script by David Scarpa.
Napoleon hits theaters with big and lofty goals. This story covers a lot of complicated, but oft-explored history during its two-and-a-half-hour runtime. Like many Ridley Scott films, there is a lot going on here through all levels of production.
RELATED: Documentary Review: Pencils vs. Pixels
To begin with, Napoleon is a veritable feast for the eyes. Every frame is stylistically gorgeous and looks like “a million bucks”. Ultimately, this should come as no surprise. Ridley Scott stands among the greatest filmmakers of the last half-century. He gave us Blade Runner, for crying out loud.
In fact, it makes perfect sense that the director who brought us Gladiator would bring a movie with such vivid and operatic battle sequences. These moments, which are scattered throughout the runtime are most certainly the cinematic high point.
The peak is likely The Battle of Austerlitz. The sequence is stark and harsh, but at the same time, beautifully atmospheric. The seasoned and wily filmmaking, when brought together with a borderline unhinged performance from Joaquin Phoenix, results in a magnetic sequence. It’s difficult to tear your eyes away from everything happening on-screen.
RELATED: Five Nights at Freddy’s Spoiler Review
At the same time, there’s a bit of a wildcard present here. The film’s lead. Few actors are quite as unapologetically themselves as Joaquin Phoenix. As Napoleon, Phoenix is tonally “all over the place.” For large stretches of the narrative, his performance is listless, almost flat. To be brutally honest, for much of the first act, he looks bored. Even Napoleon doesn’t want to be in Napoleon.
However, this all sets up a strange and wacky second act. All of a sudden, Napoleon is layered. Phoenix is playing to the cheap seats. Napoleon is even perhaps, kinky? Who would have imagined that?
This roughly forty-minute second act shows the movie taking some wacky and interesting swings. Throughout this section of the story, Phoenix takes real chances.
In fact, for this portion of the movie, his casting feels to be a reflexive comment on Napoleon as a human being. Phoenix’s performance brings more than the occasional reminder of his work in Gladiator. This character may be a majestic leader, but he’s still a simpering, yet petulant manchild. This is a brave choice that flies in the face of how we often remember historical figures.
RELATED: Horror With a Side of Cheese: Howling II: Your Sister is a Werewolf
I found myself desperate for this self-reflexivity to continue throughout the film. I kept waiting… and waiting. Unfortunately, though, this weird, wacky, and decidedly different Napoleon vanishes, never to return. Perhaps it is a character decision. However, it just as easily feels like Joaquin Phoenix accidentally burst through the screen in all his quirky glory before being shoved back in. This change sadly leaves this fascinating brave decision feeling more like a mistake. It stands out for all the wrong reasons.
At the same time, Napoleon becomes yet another work in a long line of films to commit a cardinal sin: underutilizing Vanessa Kirby. Since the actress burst on the scene in The Crown, she’s been heralded as one of the best of her generation. However, she keeps finding herself in movies that don’t know how to use her talents. This is yet another.
As Josephine, Kirby is champing at the bit. There’s a beautiful independence and emotional struggle inherent in this woman. However, it’s unfortunate that she’s never able to showcase this side of her. We constantly hear throughout the film how important Josephine is to Napoleon. Sadly, the film never shows us this. I implore you, Hollywood, figure out how to use Vanessa Kirby.
RELATED: Movie Review: Killers of the Flower Moon
In the grand scheme of things, Napoleon is deeply invested in this man and his world, particularly the military and political story. It is unfortunate that at the same time though, the film incorporates a structure that stifles any true narrative depth. While the film covers so much history, it presents little more than historical tableaus. Audiences are treated to well-crafted and picturesque images before the narrative takes a massive leap forward to the next point in history. Decades pass in the transitions. All at once, it becomes clear. Napoleon isn’t interested in the history or even these characters. It only wants to play in this rich and vivid world.
Ultimately, strong world-building is Napoleon‘s true selling point. Ridley Scott unsurprisingly puts forward a visually stunning feature. It looks as rich and vivid as this history should be. However, this is largely a case of style over substance. While there are interesting moments involving these characters, nothing gels into anything cohesive. There are many flashes of brilliance, but their depictions pale in comparison to the beauty of the world-building.
Napoleon is now playing in theaters around the country.
RELATED: Check out other movie reviews, here.
https://www.geekgirlauthority.com/may-december-movie-review-julianne-moore-natalie-portman-todd-haynes/
- Movie Review: QUEER - December 2, 2024
- Movie Review: MOANA 2 - November 28, 2024
- Movie Review: GLADIATOR II - November 22, 2024
