Napoleon

Joaquin Phoenix

I waited for the inevitable director's cut of Ridley Scott's Napoleon before diving in and had a very mixed reaction. The subject requires a mini-series format of twelve hours at a minimum and this is why I waited to see the whole enchilada. History buffs, like me, would seem to be the best audience for this flick, though the film interjects many ahistorical moments, starting with Napoleon witnessing Marie Antoinette's execution. Scott certainly has proven he has the eye for historical epics and the lavishness of the production is eye-popping. The CGI segments of the battle sequences are less distracting than usual and in the case of the underwater shots of the Battle of Austerlitz, powerful.

However, the film is choppy. There are precious few memorable supporting characters. Fascinating figures like Barras, Fouché, Caulaincourt, Ney, Davous, and Dumas whiz by us as mere name checks. I could differentiate Talleyrand, but only because of the brace on his leg. Edouard Philipponnat as Tsar Alexander and Rupert Everett as Wellington stand out because David Scarpa's script paints them so broadly. Sinéad Cusack as Nappy's mother is given a few choice scenes which paint her as a stage mom, but she soon disappears into the ether. Napoleon's siblings, a motley crew of preening problemistas, are absent save for stolid Lucien.

Vanessa Kirby

Scarpa's script had to leave out a lot, so I'm not saying it was neccesarily a bad thing to leave out Napoleon's family background or his political and diplomatic stances. What we are left with is a film that primarily focuses on spectacle and Napoleon's relationship with wife number one, Josephine. As I've intimated, Scott handles the bloody tumult of battle well, though good luck to those seeking to glean Bonaparte's tactical brilliance. The coronation sequence, which mimics David's painting of the event, captures Napoleon's seizing his crown as a moment of grotesque self-actualization. The Pope was supposed to crown the impudent upstart, but, since this is not conveyed to the audience, this fine cinematic flourish is muffled, Similarly, the impact of the film's portrayal of Napoleon's execution of the Duke of Enghien lacks impact for the audience because the background information provided about the event is so scant.

The film does boast a fine Josephine in Vanessa Kirby in a role originally meant for Jodie Comer. Kirby captures both the sexual allure and steely resolve of a noblewoman who became a courtesan in order to survive. The film displays how Josephine was better suited to maneuver through the salons of Paris than Napoleon who was very much a Corsican bumpkin when he first emerged as a national figure. The film, if anything, is tilted in sympathy to Josephine. Napoleon is portrayed as a clumsy and abrupt lover who discards his wife when no heir is forthcoming, hardly a romantic ideal. I can certainly buy this point of view, but the film's presentation of Napoleon and Josephine's romance as the primary passion of their lives is hooey. Both partners had many lovers and if I would characterize their relationship as anything, it would be transactional.

The biggest problem in the film's portrayal of the relationship between Napoleon and Josephine is Joaquin Phoenix's age. Phoenix looks the same at the beginning of the film as he does at the end. He cannot be convincing as the callow social climber who depended on the older Josephine's social connections and knowhow. Phoenix is too good an actor not to give us some interesting moments, I especially enjoyed his encounter with a mummy during the Egyptian campaign, but he is too old and too neurotic in approach for the role. Phoenix gives us the immature husband besotted by his more experienced mate, but not the brilliant military tactician or the Machiavellian political leader. Napoleon has its moments, but it is a facsimile of a great film.