Napoleon – 2023 

Film Review by Richard Livsey

I tip my proverbial cap to Ridley Scott for taking up the unenviable task of condensing the life of Napoleon into a cinematic production; from the turbulent days of the French Revolution to his exile on the distant island of Saint Helena, Scott guides viewers through the life of Napoleon Bonapart.

Scott’s film, while visually captivating in its portrayal of battlefield chaos and the meticulous strategies of Napoleon, struggles to present a nuanced exploration of the man behind the military genius. Joaquin Phoenix’s performance, oscillating between buffoonery and petulance, offers glimpses into Napoleon’s character but perhaps falls short of a deeper dive. 

The film’s notable sequences include the siege of Toulon, a pivotal moment in young Napoleon’s career, and the decisive victory at the snowbound battle of Austerlitz. These scenes, crafted with multiple cameras, immersive sound, and intricate choreography, transport the audience into the heart of the overwhelming tumult and meticulous planning that defined Napoleon’s military prowess.

Yet, amidst the murk and mud that dominates the film’s palette, there’s a notable absence of historical accuracy. The decision for cannon fire against the Giza Pyramid, although lacking a factual basis, injects a creative touch that, in the filmmaker’s view, brings history to life. Personally, I am happy for directors to go “off piste” and show artistic licence as long as not fundamentally getting facts wrong. Further more the departure from historical precision actually works well to combat Scotts main problem, film duration……

“Cannon fire was a fast way of saying he took Egypt.” Ridley Scott 

The film introduces Vanessa Kirby as Joséphine, purportedly the key to unlocking Napoleon’s psyche. While the film could have explored Joséphine’s historical role and influence more deeply, Kirby’s performance injects vitality into the character. Her wit, intelligence, and the chemistry with Napoleon add layers of complexity to the narrative. 

As the story unfolds, crucial events such as Napoleon’s exile to Elba, the ill-fated invasion of Russia, and the subsequent downfall are brought to life and these events, integral to understanding Napoleon’s complex legacy, are essential pieces of the historical puzzle but perhaps needing more focus.

The Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars, epic in scale and consequence, cost around 3 million military and 1 million civilian lives, with a significant portion belonging to the French side. This staggering toll highlights the human cost of Napoleon’s ambitions, a fact that the film, much like its protagonist, seems rather casual about. The lowly infantry, mere cannon fodder in Bonaparte’s grand schemes, remains largely undeveloped, overshadowed by the brilliance of the battlefield.

Ridley Scott’s “Napoleon” is a visual spectacle, with its masterfully crafted battle sequences standing out as its crowning achievement.  However, the film stumbles in providing a comprehensive exploration of Napoleon’s life, leaving out his childhood and his Corsican background. The creative liberties taken with historical accuracy, such as the cannon fire at the pyramids, add a cinematic flair but may leave history enthusiasts yearning for a more faithful portrayal.