Thursday, 23 November 2023

Today I lost Four hours of my life I will never get back.

   Life is full of disappointments, failed romances, jobs that dont work out, ambitions that are never achieved, and to be honest after a while you realise that is just how things are. The rough with the smooth, and then you have Ridley Scott's latest film, Napoleon.  

 I will admit Im a Napoleon nut. It was what got me into wargaming and over the next 50 odd years I bought ever increasing numbers of books, figures, visits to museums in an effort to learn as much as a could about the man. Eventually I realised that I had to scale back my interests and sold most of my book collection and all my armies but the interest has remained. 

 So when it was announced that Ridley Scott was making a film about the great man I was very excited. The Duelists is one of my favourite films. The beauty of the film backed by a wonderfully interesting story based on fact has always been a great film to continually return to. And then we had Waterloo, which is another of my favourite films. Yes it has its detractors, but it captured the battle and certainly Rod Steiger was a very believable Napoleon.

So today I frantically went to see the latest interpretation of the great man's life, and what a life he led.

 I had sensible expectations, I didnt expect that any battle scenes would be accurate but I knew the look would be right, the soldiers correctly attired and that the viewer would glean a little about the man.

 Sadly, very sadly I can honestly say it is one of the worst films I have ever had to sit through. Ignoring the lack of historical accuracy, the actual film is a car crash and I cannot believe that Ridley Scott actually directed the whole sorry mess. 

 Looking for excuses for him, the subject was huge and Scott unfortunately thought he could cram Napoleon's amazing life into 2+ hours and allow the viewer to come away understanding what actually occurred. He failed spectacularly on that score. 

The dialogue? Christ it was at times infantile and at other times just laughable.

Phoenix reprised his role as Emperor Commodus and introduced some very odd sounds that frankly made Napoleon sound like a nut job. At other times it was difficult to understand the dialogue which I suppose could be seen as a blessing.

 We never found out why men were prepared to follow the Emperor through thick and thin, simply because the character was one dimensional. 

As for the action, well all I can say is the uniforms were accurate.

Whoever did the advising regarding the actual battles should be taken out and shot. Did anyone know that Napoleon led a mounted charge at Waterloo, or had the military foresight to camouflage his artillery at Austerlitz? And for me the worst bit, when Wellington aka Rupert Everitt meets Napoleon face to face on the Bellephron. Yes I know its a film, but it didnt really have any purpose in the story. It would have been better to have chosen Stephen Fry using one of his funny voices and hrumpping a bit as they talked, at least it would then be intentionally funny.

 The only redeeming factor was the lady playing Josephine, oh and Miles Jupp as the King??? Francis.

 I do like Miles, he is a very funny guy. The rest? It was a pile of s@@@@. 

Oh I forgot, the end. A closing shot, a silhouette of the great man staring out to sea before tipping sideways off his seat. It reminded me of Captain Pugwash without the detail. 

 Save your money and buy a copy of The Battle of Austerlitz starring Jack Palance, at least that was funny.





   


30 comments:

  1. I had high hopes for this one. Those hopes, now, look dashed. Thanks for the review. Sorry for your lost four hours.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Watch it Jonathan, it may be me, but I like to think I am fair.

      Delete
  2. Thanks Robbie, I almost stopped reading at Napoleon leading a charge!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sadly not just one charge, he led others, and he charged towards the walls of Toulon allegedly.

      Delete
  3. I had looked forward to this but reading your review and a couple of others, I think it would be wise to give it a miss, such a shame that the chance was ruined.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I truly believe that people should make their own judgements. If Scott had concentrated on say the first ten years of Napoleon's rise to power he could have made a great film, but sadly he didnt.

      Delete
  4. I think I will still go and see it - this is the second negative review on a wargaming blog v one positive - and we of course are likely to be more critical than most! I expect I will quite enjoy it, as my actual knowledge of the period is pretty sketchy, given I started wargaming with Airfix Napoleonic's in the mid Seventies! (I do know Napoleon did NOT lead any cavalry charges, particularly at Waterloo!)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. One should make up their own minds. I hope when Apple release the longer? version it may make more sense, but the subject is simply too big to cram into a couple of hours. I didn't go with the intention of picking out the mistakes, but tbh, the only accuracy was the uniforms that didnt add anything to the film. In fact it would have made more sense to dress everyone in make believe outfits.

      Delete
  5. Well another rather damning view of the film which, given the trailers I've seen, is not really a surprise. Small errors can be forgiven, but not the howlers that this film contains. I'm not sure I would watch it if it came on tv, as I think I would get too irate!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ignoring the 'history' I found the film simply badly made. Badly edited and in parts difficult to understand. God knows what people make of it that know nothing of the period.

      Delete
  6. Oh god, really? I had hoped it would tick at least a few boxes?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It may, certainly the uniforms were nice, but perhaps I wanted too much, but trenches? cavalry charges and strange animal sounds?

      Delete
  7. I shall still go and see it anyway - with so much being said I feel uninformed not having seen it myself and if it's that bad I'll be able to air my own particular set of gripes. Still half hoping that it will be historical b*ll*cks but fun like 'Knight's Tale', 'Le Retour du Héros', or even 'Gladiator' - I watched the latter again earlier this week and thoroughly enjoyed it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Everyone should watch it. Everyone has different tastes. Jack Palance in War and Peace was of its time and somehow I found it interesting, but I was a boy then. But I expected so much more from Ridley Scott, the man is for me a film giant.

      Delete
  8. Thankfully I am spared film unless it has subtitles! Having seen the trailers though I can't fathom how anyone could expect anything but a crock of 🚽

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Now David, a retired should have an open mind. Watch it and then decide. I got tickets for free via Sky, I would have hated to have paid money.

      Delete
  9. It always amuses me that film makers choose an amazing, popular story which stands the test if time and think they can improve it by changing it., I got to visit St. Helena in 1970.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I visited Ajaccio, it was wonderful, Les Invalides was emotional. The real story was amazing, so how couldnt a top film director not take even part of Napoleon's life and create a great film?

      Delete
  10. I was hoping it was going to be a half decent film, may just wait for a few more reviews before deciding to see it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Get yourself there, use Sky to get free tickets, but take plenty of refreshments to make the time pass quickly.

      Delete
  11. So the jury's still out as far as you're concerned? 🙂

    I suppose I'll have to go. I just hope the Directors cut does for this what it did for Kingdom of Heaven...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Now Andy, you should go with an open mind, just like I did, and then decide. Ignore the lack historical accuracy and attempt to watch it as a piece of entertainment as I did, and I look forward to your opinion. No one is more disappointed than me.

      Delete
  12. I shall probably go and see it Robbie…
    But I have yet to encounter someone who thought it was good…

    All the best. Aly

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Aly I look forward to your opinion. Sadly the more I think about it, the sadder I get. What an opportunity missed by a director I have a lot of time for, Im gutted.

      Delete
  13. Sadly Robbie...your review is actually more positive than the comments from my mates. When I said to one that i was going to see it- he said: 'Don't'. And his view was the most complimentary.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I really wanted to like the film, and cannot believe that the Telegraph gave it four stars and the Guardian gave it five! But then they always run contrary to good sense.

      Delete
  14. Robbie, I saw the film yesterday and find myself in one hundred percent agreement with your comments. It began so well with the execution of Marie Antoinette - and then rapidly descended downhill. Frankly, it made the Waterloo episode of Sharpe look quite good, which is saying something.
    How the director of The Duellists could have created this tosh is beyond me. I'm no great admirer of Boney, but the man deserves better than this.
    Glad I'm no longer teaching history - the time and effort I would have had to take to erase the false ideas this film will put into children's heads...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It really pains me to slag off the film. I wanted it to be a beautifully rendered film similar to the Duellists but with more detail. What I struggle to understand is what happened to the actual script. I have always admired the two Ridley brothers but having lived through this mess, I think its time Ridley retired.

      Delete
  15. I went to see it last night. IMAX. It looked and sounded great. The uniforms and look were great. But it failed as a film, failed as a biopic, and failed as an historical epic. I never really engaged with the two leads. And nothing in the story explained why Napoleon rose to Emperor and why France loved him. Maybe the directors cut will resolve that.

    The battles. FFS. There were little glimpses of what could have been epic battles... before it descended into Sharpe territory. Waterloo. Apart from the action around the squares, it was embarrassing to watch.

    What a waste of a huge production budget...

    ReplyDelete
  16. I am fortunate. The trailer had me thinking that I'd avoid it. Reviews such as yours from people who actually know a bit about the man and period have convinced me that I will not waste my time nor money.
    A good friend of mine who went 'over the top' (i.e saw it and would have left after ten minutes had he not been there with friends) suggested that I would be 'traumatised’ if I watched it!! :)
    I mentioned to him that I had heard that the uniforms are done well. He said ‘Yeah, they look great. The film is good, apart from the story and script.” I said, “Oh, it’s like a porn film then?” He replied, “Yeah, but with 'Napoleon' it is the audience who get f_____!"

    ReplyDelete

My 6mm Napoleonic set up.

My 6mm Napoleonic set up.
Austria 1809.

Austrian Hussars

Austrian Hussars
Hinchliffe figures

Austrian Grenzer

Austrian Grenzer
Austrian Grenzer

Smoggycon 2013

Smoggycon 2013
Smoggycon 2013

Smoggycon 2012

Smoggycon 2012
Smoggycon 2012

Smoogycon 2009

Smoogycon 2009
My French getting another beating