If the film focuses on Napoleon’s relationship with Josephine the movie will be far more shallow than I certainly had hoped. What a tired Hollywood maneuver to make it about a personal relationship instead of really attempting to bring to the larger public how important and critical this man was in shaping the destiny of France and Europe.
It's about Napoleon being a coward and needing a "strong independent woman" to be the power behind the throne. In other word, another woke Hollywood film.
@@demianseale501I wouldn’t go that far. The movie certainly lacks any king of feeling of stakes or momentum, though, which is a huge feet for one of the most incredible periods in history. The movies failure has nothing to do with womkeism.
Napoleon was a strategic and military genius but what is forgotten by most is the way he rebuilt the organization (territorial, civil, military) of France, which inspired so many countries in Europe.
I saw the movie yesterday. It was disappointing that his character wasn't developed more and that there were so many historical inaccuracies. Also, Ridley Scott's comment that he didn't understand how Napoleon could have been obsessing over Josephine while fighting great battles makes me believe that the director's love life has been severely lacking. Great love transends everything earthly.
Gee It's a tough call trying to eclipse the Clavier/Rossellini/Depardieu version of Napoleon released in 2002. that was a 6hr 20 min 46M epic which was simply outstanding.
That's probably what Ridley was thinking. He's never been one that carres what the audience thinks, e.g.: his vision of Prometheus explored a variety of interesting ideas and focused out of the horror aspect, which annoyed a lot of alien fans. If you want to see something more historically relevant watch the 2002 version.Ridley was trying to achieve something else, maybe even that his time in life he wanted to explore things that are more about personal interest in growth
This movie is incredibly disappointing. They had all the money in the world and a gifted lead actor and they still sh!t the bed. I was really looking forward to this movies release but The costumes and sets were way more interesting then the weak storyline they invented. Napoleon’s story is amazing with tons of documented history and with great scholars on the subject available to be consulted on getting things at least some what correct. Ridley Scott said screw all that and just did as he wanted history and entertainment value be dammed. So super disappointed especially since I really enjoy Joaquin Phoenix as an actor and he just seems handcuffed by this weak story never really able to get all the way there. Not his fault in my opinion.
Watched the movie last night and was a little disappointed. Great battle scenes but was a bit slow and his relationship with Josephine dominates the story.
In Europe, most empires had relatives sitting somewhere else in power. Cousins, sisters, brothers. Power married power. Nothing different to the days we live in. Rich marries rich. Famous marries famous. - Start counting how many Austrian were married around Europe to the powerful.
For a woman that could not have children, she had a few of them. The Swedish and Bavarian royal families are all decedents of her. Josephine is the grandmother of many dynasties, napoleon has no dynasty to talk about. Her son Eugen married the daughter of the Bavarian king, and her granddaughter married the Swedish king. She has a connection to the Austrian royal family too. One of her grandchildren was the godmother of Austrian Empress Sisi The Last Royal to rule the German Empire, Max von Baden, was her great grandson. Napoleon III was a decedent of Josephine, not a decedent of Napoleon.
It's too bad that the film is so inaccurate. (I won't even mention Phoenix's overtly American accent and his playing Napoleon as though he were on pacifier drugs.)
The title of this video is misleading. It should be called “Vanessa Kirby’s Take on Ridley Scott’s Napoleon.” I wish I heard more from Scott and Joaquin Phoenix.
1970 movie made by an Italian using thousands of Russian Soviet troops. That probably will never happen again. It was more about the battle, than the man.
I just watched Napoleon in the cinema in Serbia. They could have put more emphasis on the horror that the joint French-European army experienced in Russia.
And horror to Russians also. Leon Tolstoy despised Napoleon. Killing Russian people and burning Moscow was horrible and remember Russian army did not burn Paris next year
They would not be allowed to show a Russian victory even though it was 200 years ago. It won't agree with the current propaganda narrative against Russia.
Interesting how the french always forget to mention that Napoleon brought back slavery in the French Caribbean colonies after it was abolished in order to fund his military campaigns.
My fear too. 2h and 40m to try and capture Napoleon's achievements is wildly optimistic as it stands. Josephine is just a footnote of his life... put it this way, without Napoleon no one would know who she was. Without her, makes no difference to Napoleon's legacy. But that's Holywoke for you...."gurl powa!"
Yeah but he raped...A LOT of women, murdered his half-brother for power and made pyramids of children's skulls..I doubt many modern-day audiences would care for it.
Why have they not interviewed Joaquin Phoenix? I mean he's the leading role and this is France 24. Is it not part of the contract and promotion of the film? so weird.
@@Hauerization true, but he made it to the french premiere, so I was just wondering what have happened for him to either decline o have his interview removed
@@laurawilliams2790 its not woke Liberalism this was 1800s not 21st Century and all other countries had either banned slavery or were to in coming years. Only France under Bonaparte reintroduced it after abolishing it......
I would prefer French actors to be in this movie speaking in French. The greatest worrior was Alexandra the Great, it'll be nice to see a biopic of Alexandria
Are you kidding me you have the direct lineal descendent of Marshall Murat as an actor in Hollywood but you have the direct lineal descendent of Napoleon still living in France but you want to interview a Puerto Rican staring in a English directed comedy about the greatest enemy of England since Caesar not only is your history twisted but your sence of decency with respect to one of the most notable Corsican to have ever lived
I don't understand why they don't mention his Greek ancestry. It's a serious fact that could give more emphasis to the plot. Anyway, let's just be satisfied that they didn't make him a black native too.
I wonder how us English would react if we saw a film about Henry VIII with all the actors speaking not in Jerrias or Norman French, but plain old Ile de France French, or if the Spanish had a film in Castillian about Reina Isabella, sorry Queen Elizabeth. No matter how much money and talent was thrown at them, they would always look wrong. I had the misfortune of seeing a German production of a soap filmed entirely in county Galway. Everyone was speaking German as if we were living in a Man in the High Castle dystopia.
Seriously , just lighten up , it’s a movie , it’s entertainment about people that existed 200 years ago. None off the dialogue ‘actually’ happened, its a screenplay.
The movie is “presented” in Paris, but the video is nothing but historically semi-literate Brits pronouncing about Napoleon. Says a lot about the movie.
Napoleon was a student of history. If anything he encouraged the protection of articfacts and historical items. His campaign in egypt jumpstarted the interest in Egyptology.
The TV shows I Dream of Jeannie and Bewitched had a Napoleon character. The way studios can find an actor, costume and set decor for a show that is shot in a week or two is amazing.
I thought this was Ridley's best film in 20 years. In fact, I liked it so much, that I was sad when it ended at only 2hrs 30mns. I wanted another hour in the cinema. Was it flawless, not quite (What film is?), but it was very very good. Beautifully staged battle scenes, especially the opening and final battle, meticulous set design and detail, wonderful locations. To me, this felt like the Ridley style I've been longing for since his cut of Kingdom Of Heaven, Gladiator and since his epic 1492 Conquest Of Paradise.
I saw the movie today. It was ok as an entertainment. However the big shock was at the end of the movie when they listed about 8 battles of Napoleon and the number of dead the French army has suffered… It was clear then that this was an anti-Napoleon movie … This was very disappointing as it was so biased against one of the best military leaders and mind the world has ever seen in ancient and modern times ..
When he agreed to do that super heroes movie for China, I mean America's remaining film production companies, I feared I'd never see him do a role worth watching again. All is not lost, it seems.
The Napoleonic Wars went on for 16 years so, I don't see how all of that can be condensed into a 2 1/2 hour movie. But I am sure it will be worth watching.
not sure a brickthick-book history of Napoleonic Wars would be the aim of such a movie..that could be a Ken Burns mini-series project like THE CIVIL WAR ...but I doubt it is going to happen..even though, apparently, according to more learned historians then me..Napoleon dwarfs Hitler for his impact/footprint on Europe..
The major release of the Kingdom of Heaven was really lacking but the Directors Cut was fantastic...I wonder if their is another version sitting in the archives?!
There are no REAL stars anymore... And Phoenix is MUCH too old. Bonaparte was a youth - and he was (of course) VERY french... And "Josephine" looks like a porn star. @@michaeljohnangel6359
Just saw the movie last night, really enjoyed it but yeah, I find myself thinking, ok which Hollywood actor really looked like him? I would have gone with Rob Schneider or DannyDeVito.........
1:30 the guy in a condescending tone is wondering how a guy about to bring Europe to its knees is such a cry baby wimp caring about whose cocking his wife back home, then ppl ask why Scott portrayed napoleon as a weak man. That’s how he thinks of napoleon, it’s okay though becuz that’s how I feel about Alexander as a Persian, but you don’t see a film about Alexander being given to a Persian director anytime soon.
@5:34...this guy doesn't think highly of Napoleon by the way he puts his wrist against his face when talking...that lil'movement is tryin to push out something nice but it is not cominig out.
We didn't think so. We liked it. BUT you would have had to have know something about Napoleon and his era to really appreciate it. Otherwise without the back story you would be kind of lost.@@mrrandom1265
Saw the movie- only problem is Napolean was FRENCH. Joaquin Phoenix sounds like he is from Illinois in this movie. No effort at having a French accent at all. Otherwise, the movie was FANTASTIC. CLOTHING ON POINT. FIGHTING, incredible. Recommended??100%
gping for the costumes sets and real period atmosphere as I am writing something based around 1807 for my own amusement. It will never be finished, but I feel a affinity with Josephine and her effect on his destiny. He had considered suicide before he met her and tried to commit suicide later after failure. Would like to see the 4 hour version before it was xut.. A diversion away from American politics and our mess. Wars and power struggles destroying lives.
Those complaining about apparent accents haven't seen Gladiator. In the end, it's all about entertainment. If he were French, they would complain that his voice was too low or too high. Then they'd cry about having to read subtitles from a French actor who didn't look like Napoleon...SMDH Ridley Scott at least put forth a great effort.
In Gladiator Scott purposefully used different accents, including an American one (Quintus), to evoke the diversity of the Roman empire. Not sure how this works with Napoleon, tho I can't comment, because I haven't seen it yet.
Movies made in English for Americans about people who spoke other Languages are hilarious. They wouldn't talk with accents. And the "high class" people wouldn't have English accents.
This is more of a promo for the movie. It is not a review of the movie. Every review of the movie that I have seen so far is highly critical, except for the costumes.
It’s in the English language which is more appealing for viewers to watch worldwide. Napoleon movies in the past have been in french. Now is the time for an English language version. Suck it up.
It sounds like they tried to do a subversion of Napoleon to do something different. But that won't work with Napoleon, because you can't subvert the incredible achievements of his life. That had to come from a certain kind of personality. They could have come at it from a different angle to still keep it interesting. And his whole life in one movie...ummm...how?
I saw the movie today. It was ok as an entertainment. However the big shock was at the end of the movie when they listed about 8 battles of Napoleon and the number of dead the French army has suffered… It was clear then that this was an anti-Napoleon movie … This was very disappointing as it was so biased against one of the best military leaders the world has ever seen in ancient and modern times ..
I saw the film last week. It was undermined by the emphasis on his relationship with Josephine. Instead, it should have concentrated on the political power struggles and intrigue with the royalists. The action sequences themselves seemed curtailed in parts - the Egyptian bit for example, heralded in the trailer but of little impact - instead, him worrying about the absence of letters from Josephine! His American accent was also annoying. The war was with Britain and the British, not England and the English!
As Someone who has read and studied so much about Napoleon, I think they did an admirable job with the film. Ridely Scotts direction especially of the incredible battle scenes was flawless. I thought the cast was absolutely perfect. The history of Napoleon is so vast and so detailed that it is very hard to get it all in. The only criticism that I would say about the film is that it didn't even really touch on how incredibly influential Napoleon was in developing modern France. It is one of the reasons why so many still see him as a hero. But other than that I thought it was very entertaining and definitely something to see in a very big theater.
Was stoked to see this picture but don’t tell me this vintage epic has been soiled with a neo pop pseudo ghetto soundtrack. Please NOT an attempt to pander to contemporary absurdist equitable consumer culture…
Look at what happened during Napoleon’s time and then think about Putin who thought that taking Ukraine was his desire and right. Imperialist conquests we’re not good then and it certainly isn’t now.
He was from a very low nobility from Corsica. He barely got to become an officer in Brienne/Paris in the military academies because of his origins, and he was constantly mocked for being an outsider, "poor" and having an accent in the Brienne military academy. His family was not exactly influential. He got up from the bottom after all.
@@VieiraBrandt-hn5fg The bottom would literally mean a nobody, not nobility, no family house, no family legacy, a regular, normal person born among the masses who worked from the ground up. Like a farmer or something. 😂 That is NOT the same thing.
Well, then it depends on what you mean by 'nothing' or 'bottom' here. You can always go downwards with the definition. It was not uncommon for a farmer to be better off than a worker from a city, for example. Would the farmer still be considered 'the bottom'? What about if he were a woman? Wouldn't she be at the real bottom? Or a foreigner? Or a woman from another country, such as England? This creates a never-ending discussion about what is the legitimate 'bottom,' which is not very useful. The important question to ask is: was he in a difficult situation to climb the ladder of power from the start? The answer is: absolutely. First and foremost, he was from Corsica, which is as Italian as it can get. All his cultural landscape and relations were from Corsica, so much so that his life plan for a long time was to be a leader in Corsica, not France (being a 'new Pasquale Paoli'). He got into a military school, which, yes, was only possible because of his noble origin (even if it was low nobility). But afterward, with the revolution, noble origins were actually terrible for your career. The great advantage he had was becoming an officer when the system was the Ancien Régime, but it doesn't seem to me that there was much more than that. He started to shine really after his extremely important plan and leadership in the Siege of Toulon. He was still a low officer, and a meritocratic spirit (only possible during the revolutionary government) led to his promotion to general. From then on, he had important people backing him, but they were more conquered by Napoleon himself than a 'starting point.' By the way, his father only left him the mistrust of Pasquale Paoli as a political starting contact. Paul Barras, Du Tel, Augustin Robespierre, Dugommier... he earned the respect of all of them by himself, not his family, nor his origins, nothing like that. His family relations probably would have made him be a little bit important in the city of Ajaccio with all the 'former' Italians who lived there. But even that is questionable, since Pasquale Paoli, the most important leader, saw his entire family as traitors and sabotaged them when he saw fit. So when you say 'a regular, normal person born among the masses who worked from the ground up,' it seems to imply that naturally Napoleon had many supports because of his noble origins. As said before, it was not only not the case, as it was actually the opposite that used to happen during the French Revolution. @@starofdabloc
So, I am a person who has worked for some of the largest design & media companies in the world, I've taught at the finest design colleges, I have multiple advanced college degrees. But I also have the unique personal experience(s) of being able to recall some of my 'past lives'. And one that keeps coming back to me is being alive during the time of Napoleon. - so many memories, bitter sweet, of lost love, of ego & glamour, and, of dying on a battlefield. When I finally visited Paris and went to where Napoleon's body is kept, inside multiple coffins surrounded by large warrior angels, presumably to keep Napoleon from rising up again, I felt near infinite rage storming inside of me, I was soooo angry toward him - even now, in 'this' life. Angry that he took my earlier life, a life I clearly was enjoying, causing me to no longer enjoy the many wonderful moments I was enjoying in that life, until I was shot dead on a battlefield. I can even clearly recall that moment, of moving forward into the fight, only to suddenly stop, and walk backwards away from it, which was unlike me and my disposition at the time. I watched as those around me, including my friends and compatriots, fall dead all around me, as I, in now 'ghostly' form, walked away from the battle, and 'into the light'. Even writing this now I am still mad - at Napoleon. Not certain I am ready to watch this film as it will likely bring back too many triggering memories....
Love story, well, that’s not what I wanted to see. I wanted a well done history of someone that helped shape the politics of the world. I think this is too bad, missed opportunity.
The movie is not historically accurate. The movie is only accurate for about 38 minutes. We know what the facts are because be have first hands accounts as well as Napoleon's own writing. I really wish fictions were not used to mislead and misinform viewers. The truth is superior.
If the film focuses on Napoleon’s relationship with Josephine the movie will be far more shallow than I certainly had hoped. What a tired Hollywood maneuver to make it about a personal relationship instead of really attempting to bring to the larger public how important and critical this man was in shaping the destiny of France and Europe.
It's about Napoleon being a coward and needing a "strong independent woman" to be the power behind the throne. In other word, another woke Hollywood film.
I believe your post is spot on.@@demianseale501
@@demianseale501I wouldn’t go that far. The movie certainly lacks any king of feeling of stakes or momentum, though, which is a huge feet for one of the most incredible periods in history. The movies failure has nothing to do with womkeism.
@@demianseale501she was so independent that Hipolite Charles fu***ed her in the imperial bed!
Napoleon was a strategic and military genius but what is forgotten by most is the way he rebuilt the organization (territorial, civil, military) of France, which inspired so many countries in Europe.
Yeah
Exactly
I saw the movie yesterday. It was disappointing that his character wasn't developed more and that there were so many historical inaccuracies. Also, Ridley Scott's comment that he didn't understand how Napoleon could have been obsessing over Josephine while fighting great battles makes me believe that the director's love life has been severely lacking. Great love transends everything earthly.
Gee It's a tough call trying to eclipse the Clavier/Rossellini/Depardieu version of Napoleon released in 2002. that was a 6hr 20 min 46M epic which was simply outstanding.
Thanks, I want to check this out now
I loved it. I also recommend “Monsieur N”.
Just started watching it this morning after seeing a number of bad reviews of Scott's effort.
I’m totally agree with you, Napoleón TV show is the best ever
That's probably what Ridley was thinking. He's never been one that carres what the audience thinks, e.g.: his vision of Prometheus explored a variety of interesting ideas and focused out of the horror aspect, which annoyed a lot of alien fans.
If you want to see something more historically relevant watch the 2002 version.Ridley was trying to achieve something else, maybe even that his time in life he wanted to explore things that are more about personal interest in growth
This movie is incredibly disappointing. They had all the money in the world and a gifted lead actor and they still sh!t the bed.
I was really looking forward to this movies release but
The costumes and sets were way more interesting then the weak storyline they invented. Napoleon’s story is amazing with tons of documented history and with great scholars on the subject available to be consulted on getting things at least some what correct. Ridley Scott said screw all that and just did as he wanted history and entertainment value be dammed.
So super disappointed especially since I really enjoy Joaquin Phoenix as an actor and he just seems handcuffed by this weak story never really able to get all the way there. Not his fault in my opinion.
Watched the movie last night and was a little disappointed. Great battle scenes but was a bit slow and his relationship with Josephine dominates the story.
Um... actually, Napoleon divorced Josephine in 1810 because she couldn't have children. Then he married Marie Louise of Austria, who could.
I am amazed that austria was prepared to lend france another princess, after what happened to marie antoinette
In Europe, most empires had relatives sitting somewhere else in power. Cousins, sisters, brothers. Power married power. Nothing different to the days we live in. Rich marries rich. Famous marries famous. - Start counting how many Austrian were married around Europe to the powerful.
For a woman that could not have children, she had a few of them. The Swedish and Bavarian royal families are all decedents of her. Josephine is the grandmother of many dynasties, napoleon has no dynasty to talk about.
Her son Eugen married the daughter of the Bavarian king, and her granddaughter married the Swedish king.
She has a connection to the Austrian royal family too. One of her grandchildren was the godmother of Austrian Empress Sisi
The Last Royal to rule the German Empire, Max von Baden, was her great grandson.
Napoleon III was a decedent of Josephine, not a decedent of Napoleon.
Those children were with her first husband, she was quite a bit older when married to Napoleon. He had a son with his second wife.
@@matthewjudge3763 She married Napoleon when she was 33
It's too bad that the film is so inaccurate. (I won't even mention Phoenix's overtly American accent and his playing Napoleon as though he were on pacifier drugs.)
Wtf was Scott thinking casting Phoenix as Napoleon?
The title of this video is misleading. It should be called “Vanessa Kirby’s Take on Ridley Scott’s Napoleon.” I wish I heard more from Scott and Joaquin Phoenix.
Tom Burke's portrayal of Bonaparte at Toulon is stupendous.
What about Waterloo with Rod Steiger?
1970 movie made by an Italian using thousands of Russian Soviet troops. That probably will never happen again. It was more about the battle, than the man.
I just watched Napoleon in the cinema in Serbia. They could have put more emphasis on the horror that the joint French-European army experienced in Russia.
And horror to Russians also. Leon Tolstoy despised Napoleon. Killing Russian people and burning Moscow was horrible and remember Russian army did not burn Paris next year
They would not be allowed to show a Russian victory even though it was 200 years ago. It won't agree with the current propaganda narrative against Russia.
Too bad there was way too many historical inaccuracy in the movie..
Napoleon words about love were: « En amour, la victoire c’est la fuite. »
Interesting how the french always forget to mention that Napoleon brought back slavery in the French Caribbean colonies after it was abolished in order to fund his military campaigns.
Was so looking forward to this movie, until I understand it’s just a romantic drama.
My fear too. 2h and 40m to try and capture Napoleon's achievements is wildly optimistic as it stands. Josephine is just a footnote of his life... put it this way, without Napoleon no one would know who she was. Without her, makes no difference to Napoleon's legacy. But that's Holywoke for you...."gurl powa!"
What about Genghis Khan? He went from being a nomad to becoming the world's greatest conqueror.
You are correct.
Yeah but he raped...A LOT of women, murdered his half-brother for power and made pyramids of children's skulls..I doubt many modern-day audiences would care for it.
I know love stories sell movies, but the true backbone of Napoleon's victories is his general berthier.
I don't expect very much from this movie, the last good one from Ridley Scott is dated 1996.
Why have they not interviewed Joaquin Phoenix? I mean he's the leading role and this is France 24. Is it not part of the contract and promotion of the film? so weird.
He notorious for making weird interviews, could be it.
@@Hauerization true, but he made it to the french premiere, so I was just wondering what have happened for him to either decline o have his interview removed
Yeah with Phoenix everything is possible.@@tempehburger
He’s shy
Sure.@@Rnankn
France abolished slavery, but Napoleon reintroduced it, what a fine chap.
Way to flaunt your woke liberalism. You can't apply today's standards to yesterday's culture. Grow up.
@@laurawilliams2790 its not woke Liberalism this was 1800s not 21st Century and all other countries had either banned slavery or were to in coming years. Only France under Bonaparte reintroduced it after abolishing it......
Joaquín very old for the roll althoug he is an excellent actor
I would prefer French actors to be in this movie speaking in French.
The greatest worrior was Alexandra the Great, it'll be nice to see a biopic of Alexandria
Are you kidding me you have the direct lineal descendent of Marshall Murat as an actor in Hollywood but you have the direct lineal descendent of Napoleon still living in France but you want to interview a Puerto Rican staring in a English directed comedy about the greatest enemy of England since Caesar not only is your history twisted but your sence of decency with respect to one of the most notable Corsican to have ever lived
Calling Caesar an enemy of Britain, is like calling Hurricane Katrina an enemy of your fart.
I don't understand why they don't mention his Greek ancestry. It's a serious fact that could give more emphasis to the plot. Anyway, let's just be satisfied that they didn't make him a black native too.
but probably Wellington's army are noble Zulus..
🤣🤣🤣
Nobody cares Greek boy. You’re not Napoleon.
are you greek?
I wonder how us English would react if we saw a film about Henry VIII with all the actors speaking not in Jerrias or Norman French, but plain old Ile de France French, or if the Spanish had a film in Castillian about Reina Isabella, sorry Queen Elizabeth. No matter how much money and talent was thrown at them, they would always look wrong. I had the misfortune of seeing a German production of a soap filmed entirely in county Galway. Everyone was speaking German as if we were living in a Man in the High Castle dystopia.
Most French audiences will see it dubbed by French actors.
Seriously , just lighten up , it’s a movie , it’s entertainment about people that existed 200 years ago. None off the dialogue ‘actually’ happened, its a screenplay.
The American accent kills this film dead. No authenticity. Pheonix is a great actor, surely he can rustle up a believable accent?
English/Anglo accents didn't hurt Chernobyl, IMO.
He is too old for that role ...
The movie is “presented” in Paris, but the video is nothing but historically semi-literate Brits pronouncing about Napoleon. Says a lot about the movie.
powerful women - yeah right
He also destroyed countless historical documents/artwork/monuments. World historians will never forgive him for that.
Who? Ridley Scott? Lol...
Napoleon was a student of history. If anything he encouraged the protection of articfacts and historical items. His campaign in egypt jumpstarted the interest in Egyptology.
The TV shows I Dream of Jeannie and Bewitched had a Napoleon character. The way studios can find an actor, costume and set decor for a show that is shot in a week or two is amazing.
first movie I will see since covid arrived
They will kick it out of their theaters. If it wasn't for Joan of Arch and Napoleon, France would not be France.
I thought this was Ridley's best film in 20 years. In fact, I liked it so much, that I was sad when it ended at only 2hrs 30mns. I wanted another hour in the cinema.
Was it flawless, not quite (What film is?), but it was very very good. Beautifully staged battle scenes, especially the opening and final battle, meticulous set design and detail, wonderful locations. To me, this felt like the Ridley style I've been longing for since his cut of Kingdom Of Heaven, Gladiator and since his epic 1492 Conquest Of Paradise.
It’s a great piece of fiction
Apparently a 4 hour Director's cut is going to be released from what I've read
I saw the movie today. It was ok as an entertainment. However the big shock was at the end of the movie when they listed about 8 battles of Napoleon and the number of dead the French army has suffered… It was clear then that this was an anti-Napoleon movie … This was very disappointing as it was so biased against one of the best military leaders and mind the world has ever seen in ancient and modern times ..
I wonder what really happened to Napoleon illegitimate son in this movie? What's his name and who took care of him
This movie having "historical inaccuracies" is like saying Biden makes gaffes.
I'm not French but I don't think this movie depicts anything as it should.
When he agreed to do that super heroes movie for China, I mean America's remaining film production companies, I feared I'd never see him do a role worth watching again. All is not lost, it seems.
looks amazing
The Napoleonic Wars went on for 16 years so, I don't see how all of that can be condensed into a 2 1/2 hour movie. But I am sure it will be worth watching.
And why would you watch a movie for 16 years long?
@@mitkram99 Doesn't everyone spend a solid 16 years watching just ONE film?
not sure a brickthick-book history of Napoleonic Wars would be the aim of such a movie..that could be a Ken Burns mini-series project like THE CIVIL WAR ...but I doubt it is going to happen..even though, apparently, according to more learned historians then me..Napoleon dwarfs Hitler for his impact/footprint on Europe..
The movie was a disgrace for FRANCE AND NAPOLEON.
Saw it twice. Thought it was great!
The major release of the Kingdom of Heaven was really lacking but the Directors Cut was fantastic...I wonder if their is another version sitting in the archives?!
Why choose an actor that SO NOT looks like Bonaparte...? And talks like John Wayne. It's just absurd. Really. What a shame.
Napoleon With a soft smokey American Accent 🙄😮💨
Paul Dano would have been much, much better.
There are no REAL stars anymore... And Phoenix is MUCH too old. Bonaparte was a youth - and he was (of course) VERY french... And "Josephine" looks like a porn star. @@michaeljohnangel6359
Just saw the movie last night, really enjoyed it but yeah, I find myself thinking, ok which Hollywood actor really looked like him? I would have gone with Rob Schneider or DannyDeVito.........
@@michaeljohnangel6359well I was thinking Paul Giamatti but, let me check this other dude
Rumor has it the french will not take this movie kindly.
Well he’s not French so he’s an American.. Americans RULE and France is just France!!
He´s british, you troglodyte.@@casper191985
Going to see it tomorrow.
Popcorn snd haribos at the ready.
BUT GO LIGHT ON THE HARIBO😮😮
we need the director's cut asap!
1:30 the guy in a condescending tone is wondering how a guy about to bring Europe to its knees is such a cry baby wimp caring about whose cocking his wife back home, then ppl ask why Scott portrayed napoleon as a weak man. That’s how he thinks of napoleon, it’s okay though becuz that’s how I feel about Alexander as a Persian, but you don’t see a film about Alexander being given to a Persian director anytime soon.
@5:34...this guy doesn't think highly of Napoleon by the way he puts his wrist against his face when talking...that lil'movement is tryin to push out something nice but it is not cominig out.
“I found the crown of France in the gutter………” and can someone please treat my laryngitis!
i'd wait for the fabulous michael bay's version, that'll be intense
OMG, please no!
Its funny we just returned form Paris. Our guides couldn't stop talking about this movie. We plan to watch tomorrow, can't wait.
Was it as bad as they said?
We didn't think so. We liked it. BUT you would have had to have know something about Napoleon and his era to really appreciate it. Otherwise without the back story you would be kind of lost.@@mrrandom1265
They must not know much history.
Saw the movie- only problem is Napolean was FRENCH. Joaquin Phoenix sounds like he is from Illinois in this movie. No effort at having a French accent at all. Otherwise, the movie was FANTASTIC. CLOTHING ON POINT. FIGHTING, incredible. Recommended??100%
Napoleon was not
@@anne-no2ic from Illinois? Yes, I know. He DID have a foreign accent however, and he WAS fluent in FRENCH
gping for the costumes sets and real period atmosphere as I am writing something based around 1807 for my own amusement.
It will never be finished, but I feel a affinity with Josephine and her effect on his destiny. He had considered suicide before he met her and tried to commit suicide later after failure.
Would like to see the 4 hour version before it was xut..
A diversion away from American politics and our mess.
Wars and power struggles destroying lives.
did she miss out Rod Steiger ?? I think she did.
Hé speaks good English :-)
Those complaining about apparent accents haven't seen Gladiator. In the end, it's all about entertainment. If he were French, they would complain that his voice was too low or too high. Then they'd cry about having to read subtitles from a French actor who didn't look like Napoleon...SMDH Ridley Scott at least put forth a great effort.
In Gladiator Scott purposefully used different accents, including an American one (Quintus), to evoke the diversity of the Roman empire. Not sure how this works with Napoleon, tho I can't comment, because I haven't seen it yet.
Movies made in English for Americans about people who spoke other Languages are hilarious. They wouldn't talk with accents. And the "high class" people wouldn't have English accents.
Un britannique qui fait un film sur Napoléon. c'est comme si un Esquimaux ferais un film sur les Africains.
Abba will always be a hard act to follow
This is more of a promo for the movie. It is not a review of the movie. Every review of the movie that I have seen so far is highly critical, except for the costumes.
I love Ridley Scott, He is a Genius!
Shame so much of what is depicted in this movie, never actually happened.
But the sheeples will believe it all.
this should be in French or at the very least, have the actors do a French English accent
Complete lack of Latin in Gladiator.
Hollywood magic makes you believe everything and anything. 😂😂
Western production.🤔
It’s in the English language which is more appealing for viewers to watch worldwide. Napoleon movies in the past have been in french. Now is the time for an English language version. Suck it up.
It’s not effing ‘ello ‘ello
Says all i quote him ," nothing impossible" women natural!!!!!!!!!!! When comes back !!!!!!!! FANTASTIC!
It will be laughed at...hard
It's a poor movie primarily because of poor dialog.
But the new generation cares little about words .
it's just too jarring with the American accent
It sounds like they tried to do a subversion of Napoleon to do something different. But that won't work with Napoleon, because you can't subvert the incredible achievements of his life. That had to come from a certain kind of personality. They could have come at it from a different angle to still keep it interesting. And his whole life in one movie...ummm...how?
I saw the movie today. It was ok as an entertainment. However the big shock was at the end of the movie when they listed about 8 battles of Napoleon and the number of dead the French army has suffered… It was clear then that this was an anti-Napoleon movie … This was very disappointing as it was so biased against one of the best military leaders the world has ever seen in ancient and modern times ..
I have seen his tomb as a child.
Oh, Vanessa.
Cool acoustics.
Napoleon... nearly as great a man as Lord Horatio Nelson 👍🏴
I saw the film last week. It was undermined by the emphasis on his relationship with Josephine. Instead, it should have concentrated on the political power struggles and intrigue with the royalists. The action sequences themselves seemed curtailed in parts - the Egyptian bit for example, heralded in the trailer but of little impact - instead, him worrying about the absence of letters from Josephine! His American accent was also annoying. The war was with Britain and the British, not England and the English!
3:24 he has what?
I really hope they don't use the music they used in the trailer, blergh
Soundtrack is horrible.
The end justifies the means. I made war to secure peace but a Peace that could last for a couple of dozens of centuries. Napoleon Bonaparte
Relative peace lasted 100 years in europe, after Waterloo.
Was not avare N had a hare's lip?
Napoleon with an American accent 🙄😮💨
Thanks Ridley Scott....
200 million for this? Napoleon who sounds ,and is, a dude from LA. All about battles, but not of him. No thanks.
My goodness!!! Vanessa Kirby has got nothing to say…….. except a whole lot of empty clichés.
Do any of the horses die during filming?
Was it worthy to see
Waterloo of 1970 will always be the standard for anything napoleon movie. Ridley Scott should've stopped making films after the original Bladerunner.
As Someone who has read and studied so much about Napoleon, I think they did an admirable job with the film. Ridely Scotts direction especially of the incredible battle scenes was flawless. I thought the cast was absolutely perfect. The history of Napoleon is so vast and so detailed that it is very hard to get it all in. The only criticism that I would say about the film is that it didn't even really touch on how incredibly influential Napoleon was in developing modern France. It is one of the reasons why so many still see him as a hero.
But other than that I thought it was very entertaining and definitely something to see in a very big theater.
You have seen litle
its a fantasy movie
Love Napoleon...Josephine was a w**re!
Was stoked to see this picture but don’t tell me this vintage epic has been soiled with a neo pop pseudo ghetto soundtrack. Please NOT an attempt to pander to contemporary absurdist equitable consumer culture…
don't worry. That's just for the trailers, which are edited by studio editors, not the director. The movie has classical music in it.
Look at what happened during Napoleon’s time and then think about Putin who thought that taking Ukraine was his desire and right. Imperialist conquests we’re not good then and it certainly isn’t now.
Well sais Anna, a tyrant then is exactly like all the tyrants have been since.
Did you learn that from The View?
@@laurawilliams2790 get a education Laura.
How did he start from nothing when he was literally descended from nobility? 😂
He was from a very low nobility from Corsica. He barely got to become an officer in Brienne/Paris in the military academies because of his origins, and he was constantly mocked for being an outsider, "poor" and having an accent in the Brienne military academy. His family was not exactly influential. He got up from the bottom after all.
@@VieiraBrandt-hn5fg The bottom would literally mean a nobody, not nobility, no family house, no family legacy, a regular, normal person born among the masses who worked from the ground up. Like a farmer or something. 😂 That is NOT the same thing.
Well, then it depends on what you mean by 'nothing' or 'bottom' here. You can always go downwards with the definition. It was not uncommon for a farmer to be better off than a worker from a city, for example. Would the farmer still be considered 'the bottom'? What about if he were a woman? Wouldn't she be at the real bottom? Or a foreigner? Or a woman from another country, such as England? This creates a never-ending discussion about what is the legitimate 'bottom,' which is not very useful. The important question to ask is: was he in a difficult situation to climb the ladder of power from the start?
The answer is: absolutely. First and foremost, he was from Corsica, which is as Italian as it can get. All his cultural landscape and relations were from Corsica, so much so that his life plan for a long time was to be a leader in Corsica, not France (being a 'new Pasquale Paoli'). He got into a military school, which, yes, was only possible because of his noble origin (even if it was low nobility). But afterward, with the revolution, noble origins were actually terrible for your career. The great advantage he had was becoming an officer when the system was the Ancien Régime, but it doesn't seem to me that there was much more than that. He started to shine really after his extremely important plan and leadership in the Siege of Toulon. He was still a low officer, and a meritocratic spirit (only possible during the revolutionary government) led to his promotion to general. From then on, he had important people backing him, but they were more conquered by Napoleon himself than a 'starting point.' By the way, his father only left him the mistrust of Pasquale Paoli as a political starting contact. Paul Barras, Du Tel, Augustin Robespierre, Dugommier... he earned the respect of all of them by himself, not his family, nor his origins, nothing like that. His family relations probably would have made him be a little bit important in the city of Ajaccio with all the 'former' Italians who lived there. But even that is questionable, since Pasquale Paoli, the most important leader, saw his entire family as traitors and sabotaged them when he saw fit.
So when you say 'a regular, normal person born among the masses who worked from the ground up,' it seems to imply that naturally Napoleon had many supports because of his noble origins. As said before, it was not only not the case, as it was actually the opposite that used to happen during the French Revolution.
@@starofdabloc
Napoleon was a gifted mathematician and artillery strategist. His Corsican legacy came down to his domineering mother and dependent siblings.
@@VieiraBrandt-hn5fg Lmao 🙄 so still not a “nobody”
it's number of days, not amount of days. Ridley wouldn't make the error
Napoleon was also racist, what he did to Alexandre Dumas was a tragedy
LOL~
Joaquin is too shy to be interviewed.
Russia was never taken
So, I am a person who has worked for some of the largest design & media companies in the world, I've taught at the finest design colleges, I have multiple advanced college degrees. But I also have the unique personal experience(s) of being able to recall some of my 'past lives'. And one that keeps coming back to me is being alive during the time of Napoleon. - so many memories, bitter sweet, of lost love, of ego & glamour, and, of dying on a battlefield. When I finally visited Paris and went to where Napoleon's body is kept, inside multiple coffins surrounded by large warrior angels, presumably to keep Napoleon from rising up again, I felt near infinite rage storming inside of me, I was soooo angry toward him - even now, in 'this' life. Angry that he took my earlier life, a life I clearly was enjoying, causing me to no longer enjoy the many wonderful moments I was enjoying in that life, until I was shot dead on a battlefield. I can even clearly recall that moment, of moving forward into the fight, only to suddenly stop, and walk backwards away from it, which was unlike me and my disposition at the time. I watched as those around me, including my friends and compatriots, fall dead all around me, as I, in now 'ghostly' form, walked away from the battle, and 'into the light'. Even writing this now I am still mad - at Napoleon. Not certain I am ready to watch this film as it will likely bring back too many triggering memories....
Amazing recollection Given the number of people who have experienced similar intense experiences and who are now reporting them online.
U need to get help quickly & urgently!
@@keithkhan174 Fortunately the reviews are saying the film is boring, so, not a problem.
Sorry to hear that .War is terrible.Prays go to those on the Ukraine
Love story, well, that’s not what I wanted to see. I wanted a well done history of someone that helped shape the politics of the world. I think this is too bad, missed opportunity.
This movie is gonna suck.
Great Movie. I just saw it.
The movie is not historically accurate. The movie is only accurate for about 38 minutes. We know what the facts are because be have first hands accounts as well as Napoleon's own writing. I really wish fictions were not used to mislead and misinform viewers. The truth is superior.
Surprised they made it out alive,..This movie sucked~
An " American in Paris "
Hipolite charles was josephine's lover immediateky after napoleon married her