Napoleon

"It gave an insight to Napoleon’s love for France, his country, insight also in his love life which seemed more like an obsession or clinging he had to Josephine rather than love. The fighting was pretty realistic. Overall good movie, a little bit confusing with the time period/year changes every 20 minutes. Also, pretty long movie. The aesthetics and music was beautiful."

"3/5 ⭐️ This story of history's greatest cuck is packed with good Ridley pageantry, is funnier than you'd expect, and feels stripped of a lot of narrative and thematic connective tissue to keep the runtime neat."

"Aesthetics were perfect, music stunning, for those who felt Joaquin Phoenix’s performance was subpar, I say the opposite he portrayed what was written on the odd character of Napoleon quite well - his blind ego, obsession for power, stubbornness, and love for France. Yet, even though he led so many battles, he was unhinged and unstable - I’d say his match Josephine was no different. What an odd and eerie couple. I didn’t feel the movie was three hours long, it went by so quickly. "

"Just saw a trailer for this. Looks interesting. Joaquin Phoenix plays Napolean Bonaparte. No idea of the historical accuracy. I really don't know much about Napoleon. Except that he actually wasn't that short."

"Disappointing."

"Outstanding production and cinematography (as always from Ridley Scott) but I truly fail to see the point of this movie. We have seen many epic historic war movies before and I thought we had finally surpassed glorifying these wars. I guess in an age where Europe is once again being embroiled by nationalistic sentiments and idiocy there also is a desire for this type of movie again. If Ridley Scott was trying to make a nuanced point on power, love and ambition he definitely missed the mark. 6 out of 10"

"Instead of centering around Napoleon's military campaign, this movie largely focuses on his personal relationships (specifically with his first love, Josephine). I found this movie refreshing, as it centered on Napoleon's complex personality and the treatment of women, which is often overlooked in these historical dramas. There are a few entertaining battle scenes, but if you just want to see Napoleon's talent for strategic battle, you will be let down. That being said, I personally enjoyed it and believe that it provided a new lens to see Napoleon through."

"This movie did have some good parts, however there was also slow at parts. My husband and I both feel like they didn’t spot light some of the more interesting parts. "

"Napoleon 2½⭐/5⭐ - Not without its quirks, but oddly not very interesting despite them. I'm not knowledgeable about Napoleon beyond the cliff notes, and I have little to no problem with historical inaccuracies seeing as how certain historical figures have more in common with old myths than recent events in terms of artistic work. Having said that, this movie seemed surprisingly pedestrian for (A) a Ridley Scott film, and (B) a movie featuring a Joaquin Phoenix lead performance. I'm not sure I would call it boring, and visually every dollar is on the screen in skillful fashion, but it feels somewhat hollow by the end. This is precisely how I would expect Gladiator to play by eliminating much of the violence and gore. It's a shame because I'm positive one could make a more interesting story and character study than this. This movie is called Napoleon, but it should have been called Josephine seeing as how her character is the best thing about it. Disappointing. Makes me wish Stanley Kubrick had made his movie. + Ridley Scott is probably the greatest mainstream stylistic filmmaker alive today. He knows how to recreate a time period like no other and Napoleon is no exception. Every production aspect is superb, and in my opinion, the only reason to see it on the big screen. If you are a film buff, you will want to catch it in theaters just for the visual beauty and sweep, even if like me it is ultimately disappointing. I hate giving this a negative review. I really wanted to like it more. As it is I would definitely recommend giving it a look on Apple+ when it starts streaming. Visually it deserves to be appreciated. Overall: Fantastic production value, decent performances, but oddly hollow and lacking interesting character study. It's also way too long for being this hollow a movie. It looks spectacular on the big screen and may be good to run for awhile on the Apple+ streaming service post theater run. "

"This is such a strange mishmash of a film. The many battle scenes are epic in scale and, for the most part, played straight. However, the political and personal aspects are, at their best, broadly satirical (similar to The Death of Stalin) and at their worst, bad sketch comedy. Napoleon is portrayed as a kind of idiot-savant. A bumbling, childish character who happened to have a great aptitude for military strategy. This is the equivalent of keeping all of the battle scenes in Saving Private Ryan but replacing Tom Hanks with Adam Sandler, who is playing his character from The Waterboy. I guess the point they’re trying to make is that Napoleon was a facist, so he should be mocked rather than celebrated? It’s baffling that this much time, money and effort went into recreating an era for this purpose."