Ridley Scott's Director's Cut is an anti-Great Man comedy

Posted in: Apple, Movies, Review | Tagged with: Apple TV, Barry Lyndon, Fabio Napoleoni, feature film, historical epic, Joaquin Phoenix, Napoleon, Napoleon the Director's Cut, Rupert Everett, Stanley Kubrick, Vanessa Kirby

Napoleon: The Director's Cut is a better paced, more comprehensive film that shows that Ridley Scott's intention was to make a subversive comedy

SHOCKER: Napoleon: The Director's Cut is good! It may be longer, but it's better than the theatrical cut as it's better paced, restores scenes and moments that explain the historical and political reasons behind the characters' actions, and it's also a more complete story that shows director Ridley Scott's true intentions, which was to make an anti-Great Man story a completely irreverent comedy. The main character is not a Great Man, but a pathetic jerk, and the film's message seems to be, “Don't trust the myth of a Great Man.” This makes it the most subversive historical blockbuster epic of the 21st century. When you keep that in mind, it's actually very funny, even if the laughter does get bitter at times.

Napoleon is not a great man, but just a pathetic fool!

Ridley Scott seems to have a very strong point of view here that contradicts the narrative of the “Great Man of History”. It feels as if he has deliberately Joaquin Phoenix play Napoleon Bonaparte as the most unlikable, uncharismatic, insecure, incel dweeb imaginable. He's moody and uncouth, makes weird noises with his mouth to get attention, and is prone to tantrums. He's the epitome of every unhappy twelve-year-old boy you've ever had the misfortune of taking care of, and what's worse is that he's a horny grown man and not even sex and love make him happy. I have a hard time not laughing at every scene where Phoenix does something, be it physical or verbal, that just makes this guy absolutely repulsive and hilariously unattractive. Phoenix plays Bonaparte like he doesn't want to be there, and Paul SchraderThe complaint about his lack of charisma may be the crux of the matter. Bonaparte's military prowess or skill here make him neither charismatic nor glamorous; he doesn't even take pleasure in winning. Some viewers may have found the subversion of history in “The Great Man” confusing, as we're all conditioned to treat historical biopics with respect, but this film is very funny. The casting of many British comedy actors usually familiar to British TV audiences seems to be an indication of Scott's intentions here. Yet Scott's staging of the epic battles, each bigger than the last, culminating in Napoleon's defeat at Waterloo, can be considered one of the best in film history. The Battle of Waterloo is perhaps the best depiction of a war of attrition I've ever seen in a film, with each side trying to wear down the other to achieve victory.

▶” style=”border: 0px;” allow=”accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; fullscreen;” loading=”lazy” src=” title=”Youtube video”>

A Napoleon film that will anger all of France

The French still have a sentimental and romantic view of Napoleon and even his romance with Josephine, and Scott seemed to make it so venomous and horrible, as if he really wanted to piss them off. The whole movie is made even funnier when you consider that Scott spent over $100 million to piss off the French, something any Englishman would gladly do if given the slightest chance. Despite all the huge, spectacular battle scenes and set pieces, the chronicle of Napoleon's rise (told in an almost farcical way rather than in epic splendor that makes him look great or sublime) and his humiliating fall is told in the most unsentimental way Scott could muster. Of course, the real Napoleon Bonaparte had passions and pleasures and at least some dynamic that led the French to trust and adore him, at least for a time, but this movie is not about the real men, it is about Ridley Scott's opinion of him and all “Great Men.” Scott doesn't want us to like, sympathize, or even feel empathy for the man at any point during the three and a half hours. The Director's Cut is just two steps away from the hilarious BBC children's series Terrible stories (created, written and performed by the same team that later made the sitcom hit Ghosts for BBC and CBS), which teaches children true historical facts through a snarky SNL-style sketch show.

The toxic, tragic love story with Josephine is more complete here

In the theatrical version, large parts of the love story between Napoleon and Josephine were reportedly removed (Vanessa Kirby), but that subplot has a complete beginning, middle, and end in this version. Their relationship is portrayed as obsessive, codependent, and toxic, not the great, tragic romance some versions of the story believe it to be. It's frequently abusive and destructive, and yet the two are completely lost without each other. A French film would have made it poignant and sweepingly romantic, but Scott doesn't believe that at all, so it's watched from a distance, as neither of them are considered particularly likable. And Napoleon is at his most childish and petulant when he's with Josephine. It's probably the most unhappy love story ever put to film, and Kirby doesn't play it for laughs. She plays it with absolute conviction, as if she were in a completely different movie, a French film about a doomed woman in a doomed relationship.

A possible allusion to Stanley Kubrick

Ridley Scott’s reference here could be Stanley Kubrick'S Barry Lyndona dry, ironic satire, and Scott's Napoleon has just that flair. The film is not so dry and severe, but is permeated with utter irreverence. We are conditioned to expect historical epics to be very serious, but Napoleon is not that at all. The film gives the illusion of being very serious, but is in fact a spoof with its superficial approach to historical events (Napoleon never witnessed the beheading of Marie Antoinette, nor did he ever fire cannons at the pyramids of Egypt, but in a film it certainly looks spectacular and gets the point across faster!) and its treatment of the main character as a complete buffoon – a buffoon who was responsible for the deaths of over a million people. Any parallels to the current political leader are probably no coincidence.

The big topic: Never trust “big men”!

There is a theme about the folly of men who aspire to a great destiny and think they will be great men, and this is usually done to assuage an inner emptiness or wound. Scott seems to see Napoleon as a pathetic little mama's boy, desperate to be loved or at least liked. For all his military and strategic prowess, Bonaparte still comes across as a complete jerk. Even Wellington, who defeated Napoleon at Waterloo and is still revered by some people in England, comes across as an asshole, albeit one with great intelligence and sensitivity, and Rupert Everett plays him as an asshole with a noble, pompous comic touch. Beneath all the comedy lies a horror, namely that this pathetic fool has killed over a million people. In Ridley Scott's eyes, there are no great men in power, only fools who rise to power.

Napoleon – The Director's Cut is streamed on Apple TV+.

Napoleon – The Director's Cut

---

Rating of Adi Tantimedh

---

8/10

Napoleon: The Director's Cut, while longer, surpasses the theatrical cut with better pacing, restored scenes and moments that explain the historical and political reasons behind the characters' actions, and is also a more complete story that reveals director Ridley Scott's true intentions, which were to make an anti-Great Man story a completely irreverent comedy. The main character is not a Great Man, but a pathetic buffoon, and the film's message seems to be, “Don't trust the myth of any Great Men.” This makes it the most subversive historical blockbuster epic of the 21st century.

Stay up to date and support the site by following Bleeding Cool on Google News today!