From the short film by Louis Lumière, Interview between Napoleon and the Popecreated in 1897, with an epic fresco Napoleon by Ridley Scott, some 180 films have been devoted to the man who has in turn been nicknamed the little corporal, the great general, the black angel of Corsica, the tyrant, the despot, the butcher.
To date, none of these films has surpassed Napoleon by Abel Gance, an innovative and daring masterpiece released in 1927, a restored seven-hour version of which should see the light of day in 2024. Not even the one announced as the cinematic event of 2023, which recounts the high feats of arms and the tormented loves of the first French emperor, from the execution of the last queen of France until her death on the volcanic island of Saint Helena, after being defeated by the English at Waterloo.
In fact, despite its undeniable aesthetic, artistic and technical qualities, the Napoleon by Ridley Scott, experienced in large-scale films such as Gladiator, The kingdom of heaven And The last duel, appears like a tedious history lesson where the major characters take three short turns and then leave, such as Barras (Tahar Rahim) and Wellington (Rupert Everett). Worse still, a history lesson to which we would have liked to add a touch of humor and during which we would have omitted several pages, even entire chapters, in order to concentrate on the two passions, not to say obsessions, of Napoleon : the war and Josephine.
Whose fault is it ? To the screenwriter David Scarpa (All the money in the world) or to Joaquin Phoenix, who would have had the scenario changed? One thing is certain, neither one nor the other has as much wit as Sacha Guitry, whose theatrical Napoleon (1955) was told from Talleyrand’s point of view – played at Scott’s by Paul Rhys.
Perhaps we will have to see the four and a half hour version, which will be offered on Apple TV+ next year, to better appreciate the approach of Ridley Scott (who so magnificently visited the Napoleonic era in his first feature footage, The Duelistsin 1977). And before declaring that the filmmaker should have refrained, like Stanley Kubrick at the end of the 1960s, from sticking to this Corsican of modest origins thirsty for territorial and feminine conquests.
However, it would be highly unadvisable not to first see Napoleon on the big screen. If only for the battle scenes, including that of Austerlitz, which turns out to be a true anthology moment with its underwater shots. In line with War and peace (1956), by King Vidor, by Waterloo (1970), by Sergei Bondarchuk, where there were 20,000 extras, and Colonel Chabert, by Yves Angelo, where the Battle of Eylau was recreated, Scott’s sumptuous historical fresco does not just highlight the strategic genius of the emperor. Breathtaking, epic, incomparable, the battle scenes powerfully reveal all the horror of the Napoleonic wars. And the blind ambition of the stubborn general.
Played by Joaquin Phoenix, who mumbles like Marlon Brando in Desiree (1954), by Henry Koster, and histrionics as Rod Steiger in Waterloo, Napoleon appears as a thick, libidinous and whining brute at the center of all this opulence. Worse still, alongside Vanessa Kirby, a 35-year-old English rose playing with grace the unfaithful and intriguing Joséphine de Beauharnais, the 49-year-old actor struggles to make people believe that he is 6 years her junior.
While the uprisings of the people and the military campaigns are gripping and impressive, the intimate scenes of the imperial couple prove to be embarrassing and boring interludes. On this account, it is better to rewatch the ambitious miniseries Napoleon (2002), by Yves Simoneau, with Christian Clavier and Isabelle Rossellini.
Indoors
Biographical drama
Napoleon (VO Napoleon)
Ridley Scott
Joaquin Phoenix, Vanessa Kirby, Tahar Rahim
2:30 a.m.