Ridley Scott's Napoleon (Nov 2023)

[DetCord]

I'm a history nut but I don't demand everything being totally exact to the very letter of history. 

I especially don't mind a bit of puffery around this period.  Propaganda was in full swing during the Napoleonic Wars, both on the part of Napoleon and against him.  I like some of the stories being represented on screen even if they don't match the letter of history, but at least its spirit. 

I actually went over a lot of British Propaganda about Napoleon written at the time, and he was portrayed as a spoiled, incompetent dwarf who was utterly incapable of waging war effectively and shot off the nose of the Sphinx out of anger that there were monuments to men greater than he.  Clearly untrue but fun to sometime represent ala Terry Gilliam's segment in Time Bandits with Ian Holm in the role.

I mean, I used to show Gladiator in my World History class, not because it was an accurate representation of the historical figures it claimed to follow, but because it was a good movie and it fit the spirit of Roman history if not the letter.  It got kids interested and they then listened to me when I told the real story. 

This film might be too much for a class in school, but I can tell you it'd have a much better chance of engaging people and getting them interested than the hyper-accurate Bondarchuk Waterloo film will ever do. 

It'll be engaging for sure, but judging the trailer as is, its full of historical fallacy.

Napoleon did not fire upon the Pyramids. This is a lie. Marie Antoinette was not executed amongst a raving crowd, they were mostly quiet and reserved as reported by various European and Colonial pubs. The Royalist Insurrection cannonade is also depicted as a bunch of brave, steadfast unarmed protesters, marching purposefully into fire for their cause. This is also nonsense as the vast majority were armed and firing at Revolutionary forces throughout, only to be brought to a halt via cannon. He (Scott) is purposely deviating from history to tell the story he wants to tell with the accustomed "modern" political elements he wants included. 

The historical deviations and outright lies are evident throughout and these are the only one visible from the trailer. Ridley, a man that has only a few great films under his belt with well over 100 projects directed and produced, yet people clamor for it and more. What a fuckin' joke.

The man is hack well past his prime. I mean come on, he hired Damon Lindelof as a writer...

[SirAndrewD]

The historical deviations and outright lies are evident throughout and these are the only one visible from the trailer. Ridley, a man that has only a few great films under his belt with well over 100 projects directed and produced, yet people clamor for it and more. What a fuckin' joke.

The man is hack well past his prime. I mean come on, he hired Damon Lindelof as a writer...

I can agree with a lot but I don't with Scott.

Scott is a notorious Napoleon fanboy and deep adherent to him as underappreciated in history.  He was obsesssed with Kubrick's  failed film.

I don't think Scott's as bad as you say, he has had some recent great success with films like The Martian and Last Duel.  Prometheus was underrated.

I'm not sure what to make of the trailer for Napoleon but I know Scott is a firm Napoleon supporter and yeah, you're right, there were no rounds that hit the Pyramids and the depiction of the Royalist insurrection seems off but, I'm willing to see the movie on its merits. 

Scott has regularly admired Napoleon as a very heavy anti-religious secularist and he followed Kubrick in that mold.  He has long said that he was the bringer of democratic reform, secular humanism, and fair legal reform to Europe and that he was opposed by the forces of divine right, religion and monarchy.

I want to see the movie first. 

[DetCord]

I can agree with a lot but I don't with Scott. Scott is a notorious Napoleon fanboy and deep adherent to him as underappreciated in history. He was obsesssed with Kubrick's failed film.

If he was as you say, he'd have depicted the events accurately. He doesn't, period...

I don't think Scott's as bad as you say, he has had some recent great success with films like The Martian and Last Duel.  Prometheus was underrated.

The Martian was written by Weir. The Last Duel, Prometheus, and Covenant, were helmed, produced, and co-written primarily by Scott. They're all awful films. Truly, truly, awful. 

I'm not sure what to make of the trailer for Napoleon but I know Scott is a firm Napoleon supporter and yeah, you're right, there were no rounds that hit the Pyramids and the depiction of the Royalist insurrection seems off but, I'm willing to see the movie on its merits.

As is the Hollyweird norm, he's painting and depicting an ahistorical narrative while push the 'message'.   

Scott has regularly admired Napoleon as a very heavy anti-religious secularist and he followed Kubrick in that mold.  He has long said that he was the bringer of democratic reform, secular humanism, and fair legal reform to Europe and that he was opposed by the forces of divine right, religion and monarchy.

I want to see the movie first. 

The trailer depicts the exact opposite. 

[SirAndrewD]

I'm going to withhold judgement and say we'll see Det.

I'm going to be right there with you if it's absurd. Trust me, I also am someone who really wants to see Napoleon done right and if Scott screws the pooch with this one I'm not going to be shy on it.

We'll see what Spielberg does with Kubrick's script as well.

I want to see a very solid and fair representation of Napoleon done on screen.  And please, let it be known, I 100% think Napoleon has been painted quite poorly outside of Waterloo.

I want to see a fair and honest film about him, it's something majorly lacking. 

[DetCord]

We already have a very accurate series though, that being Napoleon from 2002.

[SirAndrewD]

We already have a very accurate series though, that being Napoleon from 2002.

Eesh, yes.  I've seen it.  I wasn't entirely sold on Clavier but it was not bad.

I still think Stiger was the best.

Fun story I turned an entire class of inner city African American kids into Napoleon fans with my lesson plan on him that included Bonderchuk's Waterloo.

[SirAndrewD]

[Sigwolf]

We already have a very accurate series though, that being Napoleon from 2002.

It's a shame it is not available to stream anywhere.  Amazon does have it available on bluray for the bargain price of $498.34, though.   

[Gusington]

Ridley Scott is one of my favorite directors and very from a hack. Chalk it up to taste.

[JasonPratt]

As a director he's hard to beat!

As a writer, he has problems. He doesn't always pick good writers or adapters either.

[Gusington]

^Of course.

Think about the worlds he created just in the Alien universe, though.

Incredible imagination, especially taking into account the sci-fi era they were created in (late 70s).

Most of historical movies I really enjoy as well...and don't even get me started on Thelma + Louise 

[Sir Slash]

Damn, did he do that one too? How long has he been around?

[Gusington]

Full disclosure: I did not know about Thelma and Louise until about three days ago and had no idea.

Scott is 85 years old! His more successful run of movies started in the 1970s with The Duelists and of course Alien in 1979.

[Con]

Love the Duelist
Amazing grog details in the hairstyle and uniform dress for the different periods of the Napoleonic era
His films have made 4.2B  Thats nothing to sneeze about on his value to the business
Con

[Skoop]

I'm all for historical accuracy down to the minutiae.  But I'm with sir Andrew on this one, big production movies like this thrust historical periods into the view of normal non grog people and start conversations about history that otherwise wouldn't have taken place.  This will be perfect to take my 10 year old to see.