With roughly 60% of critics and 59% of audiences submitting positive reviews on Rotten Tomatoes, Ridley Scott’s historical epicNapoleonhas, for the most part,kept most people divided. Some Napoleon historicists take offense to the (normally expected) Hollywood exaggeration of a storied figure in history. There are Scott loyalists who defend the director’s honor as one of the champions of cinema. And then there are simple moviegoers, desperately attempting to decipher whose opinions matter when evaluating a film and which barometers provide the most accurate assessments.
As if impersonating the French emperor himself, Ridley Scott has seemingly made an enemy of anybody speaking out against the Joaquin Phoenix-ledNapoleon. His public feud with critics raises questions about what holds more weight when analyzing a film, historical accuracy, or creative license. As a historical fiction narrative, certainly, the filmmakers bear some responsibility in portrayingthe character of Napoleon Bonapartewith a respectable semblance of accuracy. However, as a piece of art, the film hardly stands as a definitive version of history. Though films can achieve a sense of realism, movies will never be a completely accurate portrayal of reality.
From its inception, cinema has been an art form centered around marvel and entertainment, and Scott’s interpretation of Napoleon is no exception. While the film’s overall design harkens to a period of the past, Phoenix’s portrayal of Napoleon and the general story arc leans more into fiction than history. But the film finds its excellence in combining these two elements, for Joaquin Phoenix’s boyish unseriousness pairs well with Scott’s obsessive maximalist design. This is why Ridley Scott’sNapoleonis far better than its Rotten Tomatoes score suggests.
Napoleon Is an Excellent Display of Cinematics
Since the turn of the decade,Ridley Scotthas been somewhat obsessed with characters of the past. Whether it’s 1980s Italy or medieval France, Scott understands the importance of displaying spectacle on the big screen. WithNapoleon, the massive IMAX screen is fortified through the film’s gaudy visual design, captivating action sequences, and memorable imagery.
Of the most criticized scenes from the movie, Napoleon shooting cannonballs into the tips of the Egyptian Pyramids stands out as a union of all three aspects. Despite the blatant disregard for historical accuracy, the absurdity of the action serves as a symbolic representation of Napoleon’s thirst for power and the distance he was willing to go to attain it. This becomes increasingly apparent in other scenes, including violence or intense action. Thebattle on the lakerepresents Napoleon’s bloodthirsty brutalism and keen military cleverness. The attempt to conquer Russia and the Battle of the Bulge depict his detrimental obsession with power.
Napoleon is immediately thrust into a near-death experience as his own horse is blasted with a small cannonball. While both terrifyingly grotesque and utterly ridiculous, the absurd treatment of violence throughoutNapoleonis matched by the maximalist set designs and thoughtful camerawork. The interiors boast incredibly high ceilings with exquisitely designed decor and furniture. Large armies stretch across green landscapes, their totality emphasized by making them the size of toy soldiers in the frame.
Related:Napoleon: Why Ridley Scott Made the Wrong Choice With His Extremely Long Director’s Cut
Scott’s sharp sense of design dates back to his early work inAlien(1979),Blade Runner(1982), andThelma & Louise(1991), where genre pieces and character studies allowed for more subjective and expressive visual design. This has since remained constant in films such asAmerican Gangster(2007),The Martian(2015), andAll the Money in the World(2017). Like the rest of his filmography,Napoleonrelies onperiod-driven set piecesand character-centric action sequences, emphasizing overall tone and emotional arc.
Napoleon Is an Unserious Biopic
The glaring issue with historically accurate biopics is the obsession with fact and truth, which can create a stale storyline with dry characters. By plainly pasting important event after important event, a film risks resembling a Wikipedia article rather than a piece of entertainment. “Wikipedia movies” have hinderedmusic biopics the most, withStraight Outta Compton(2015),Bohemian Rhapsody(2018), andRocketman(2019) all following this formulaic story writing.
Instead of a forced attempt at failed comedy, Scott and actor Joaquin Phoenix find a more truthful depiction of Napoleon through their palpable sense of visual and situational comedy. Scott’s dry British humor reads more like a Monty Python movie than a pretentious history epic. Phoenix’s dedication to exploring character through his typical boyish charm adds life to a historical figure previously remembered through paintings and written accounts.
Related:The Greatest Biopic of All Time Is Totally Phony (That’s Why It’s Great)
This thoughtful blend of history and comedy pulls inspiration from oneStanley Kubrick. Unable to move forward with his passion project about Napoleon Bonaparte, Kubrick pivoted into his historical epicBarry Lyndon(1975). As Scott attempts to revive his late idol’s unrealized project,Barry Lyndonundoubtedly serves as inspiration for Scott’sNapoleon.
Although bombastic and ridiculous,Napoleonholds up as a fruitful creative marriage between two of Hollywood’s most outlandish talents.
If you’re interested in MovieWeb’s list of the best movies with a 100% Rotten Tomatoes score, check out our video below.
