Napoleon (2023)

Score: C (7.5/10)

Napoleon feels like it wants to be a historical epic and a political satire simultaneously, but in doing so, fails to deliver a structurally sound narrative surrounding Napoleon’s political and romantic life for audiences to sink their teeth into.

---

In some regards, Napoleon Bonaparte was ahead of his time in battle tactics. A general first and foremost, the former emperor of France lived off the land he led his armies through, allowing for swift movement across land masses. His tactics on the battlefield, however, are the highlight. His brutal approach granted him many iconic victories, but he built his reputation on his stubbornness. Throughout his tenure, he led over three million soldiers to their deaths, with his failed invasion of Russia providing a majority of those losses–circumstances eerily similar to one seen almost 150 years later in World War II. Once people start to learn and understand Napoleon’s highs and lows and general and emperor, many would find excitement in Ridley Scott’s Napoleon to see it follow the man’s life. However, the resulting film is not what many may expect it to be.

Instead of focusing on the emperor’s career on the literal and political battlefield, Napoleon relies on the man’s failed romantic escapades as general and emperor. It may seem like a logical step when adapting Napoleon’s life onto the big screen. Many disregard the man’s personal life because of everything else occurring in France during his lifetime. However, how the movie chooses to show off Napleon’s romantic side pulls audiences away from the movie’s more historical epic nature. Many sequences cut from Napoleon’s battles to making love with a woman or something similar. The film’s more romantic scenes also act like a completely different movie, making it feel more like a satire than the historical epic it could have been. It’s not afraid to poke fun at Napoleon and all of France for what occurred during the French Revolution and the Napoleonic Wars, making it harder to take the film outside of its more dramatic moments seriously.

Fortunately, Ridley Scott did one thing right once Napoleon took itself seriously: warfare and politics. The film brilliantly showcases the unbelievably massive battles Napoleon took part in brilliant detail, both in action and tactics. Audiences witness the general’s strategies unfold against his enemies, showcasing the man’s masterful but stubborn prowess on the battlefield. Napoleon shared a similar way of thinking before and during his reign as Emperor of France. He meticulously placed himself into certain positions to get closer to his allusive destiny of ruling France. He used the French Revolution as an opportunity to rise through the ranks, which he also accomplished in his popularity among the people. He took credit for events he was not responsible for and altered them to make his image look better to the French people. Napoleon is a selfish and stubborn man who wants nothing more than respect and power, and the film and Joaquin Phoenix expertly establish his character and way of thinking throughout the movie’s runtime.

It shouldn’t be surprising that I expected Napoleon to be a historical epic, and while I was correct in certain aspects, the result misses the mark of what could have otherwise been a fantastic film. Napoleon’s career as a general and a lover is quite polarizing, which the film makes a great example of. However, how it’s told on screen makes it difficult to take seriously. It frequently loses its edge on the audience by switching between Napoleon’s private and public lives, resulting in the satire it occasionally feels like it wants to be. Napoleon feels like it wants to be a historical epic and a political satire simultaneously, but in doing so, fails to deliver a structurally sound narrative for audiences to sink their teeth into. It’s unfortunate to see a film riddled with conflicting perspectives get so much right on paper and the battlefield–something many wish Ridley Scott did more justice than it turned out receiving.