Offre un aperçu personnel des origines de Napoléon et de son ascension rapide et impitoyable vers l'empire, vu à travers le prisme de sa relation addictive et souvent volatile avec sa femme ... Tout lireOffre un aperçu personnel des origines de Napoléon et de son ascension rapide et impitoyable vers l'empire, vu à travers le prisme de sa relation addictive et souvent volatile avec sa femme et son véritable amour, Joséphine.Offre un aperçu personnel des origines de Napoléon et de son ascension rapide et impitoyable vers l'empire, vu à travers le prisme de sa relation addictive et souvent volatile avec sa femme et son véritable amour, Joséphine.
- Nommé pour 3 Oscars
- 5 victoires et 46 nominations au total
Avis à la une
The success of any film depends mostly on the script. Why Scott would initiate such an expensive project without ensuring a refined and sophisticated script is a mystery. I'm not convinced there is a single interesting scene that provides insight into the characters or captures through language the prevailing political ideas. Scott's frequent missteps as a director reflect a greater interest in the cinematic rather than in the dramatic. However, this seems inevitable when your priority is delivering a blockbuster that will have broad appeal instead of digging deeper into culture, society, or history. A colossal waste of an extraordinary opportunity to create an important film about a fascinating historical figure.
This should have been called "Napoleon and Josephine" because, frankly, there's too much of Josephine in it, and not nearly enough of the brilliance and personality of Bonaparte. The historical inaccuracies are manifold. I read that director Scott says that "If you weren't there then you can **** off". Well I was not there, but the erroneous simplification of one of history's greatest characters shows Scott wasn't there either. The battle scenes are gaining accolades, but even they shouldn't. Wrong and over simplified. If you are going to make a movie about Napoleon, his generalship should have taken centre-stage, not his domestic tussles with the Missus. A grand disappointment. An artilleryman, as Napoleon was, taking part in a cavalry charge? I don't think so! Oh, how I wish Kubrick had carried through to make his version. I give this six stars, mostly for having the courage to take on such a mighty story. Too bad it fell far short of its subject matter.
Ridley Scott's Napoleon is more hysterical than historical. History is like an uninvited guest in this movie. Stunning battle visuals don't make up for gross historical approximations.
If you want to watch a masterpiece then see Waterloo, with Rod Steiger and Christopher Plummer. And if you want a historical enumeration then watch the Napoleon series with Christian Clavier, Isabella Rossalini, John Malkovich and Gerard Depardieu.
This movie was made for Apple streaming. Then they made a butchered version for cinema to be able to compete for the Oscars. The original Apple streaming version will be at least 2 hours longer. This cut version for cinema is somewhat rushed, disjointed and, as a result, confusing.
We never really learn why Napoleon was so powerful and won the admiration of so many. Here it's almost as if he stumbles through greatness. He was a great politician in reality, over here he's shown as a childish brute. The focus was more on set pieces and his relationship with Josephine.
Joaquin Phoenix can play odd or troubled characters well. Here he barely succeeds in persuading the viewers that he is Napoleon. He's too old for this role (Napoleon was 24 when Marie Antoinette was guillotined) and made the character seem bizarre than a charismatic leader. Vanessa Kirby as Josephine gets more traction.
The cinematography by Dariusz Wolski is of a very high order. The battle scenes are filmed well. Ridley Scott knows how to make action scenes slick and impressive. But overall it's a below average movie. Napoleon deserves better than this shambolic movie.
If you want to watch a masterpiece then see Waterloo, with Rod Steiger and Christopher Plummer. And if you want a historical enumeration then watch the Napoleon series with Christian Clavier, Isabella Rossalini, John Malkovich and Gerard Depardieu.
This movie was made for Apple streaming. Then they made a butchered version for cinema to be able to compete for the Oscars. The original Apple streaming version will be at least 2 hours longer. This cut version for cinema is somewhat rushed, disjointed and, as a result, confusing.
We never really learn why Napoleon was so powerful and won the admiration of so many. Here it's almost as if he stumbles through greatness. He was a great politician in reality, over here he's shown as a childish brute. The focus was more on set pieces and his relationship with Josephine.
Joaquin Phoenix can play odd or troubled characters well. Here he barely succeeds in persuading the viewers that he is Napoleon. He's too old for this role (Napoleon was 24 when Marie Antoinette was guillotined) and made the character seem bizarre than a charismatic leader. Vanessa Kirby as Josephine gets more traction.
The cinematography by Dariusz Wolski is of a very high order. The battle scenes are filmed well. Ridley Scott knows how to make action scenes slick and impressive. But overall it's a below average movie. Napoleon deserves better than this shambolic movie.
There's so much available content to tell this story. Why the hell was it a 2.5 hour film rather than the multi part limited series it deserves to be? The film has over 20 years of history to cover but includes so many huge time skips that you can't help feeling that you're missing out on a huge amount. This should have been a series and given the writers and the actors the time they deserved to tell the story properly but instead we get something that seems rushed and has huge gaps in time where things are shunted forward just se we can reach the end of the story before time runs out. The acting is above par (Despite Phoenix mumbling through some scenes) and the action sequences are excellent but there is just a feeling that it could have been so much more.
I will not get in to the historical inaccuracies, as in a lot of historical movies history is adapted for dramatic purposes. It is Hollywood after all and especially for big budget movies the goal is to make a lot of money. Beautiful Trailer.
My main criticism is the portrayal of Napoleon. Of course all who knew him are long gone and many accounts are subjective, so we have to make do with that information.
But I can not imagine that a man who ends up on top after all the chaos of the French Revolution, whose generals and soldiers stay loyal to him after all the battles and blood, wasn't an enormous charismatic man.
And that's where the film completely fails for me. You can hate him, admire him, love him, belittle him as Wellington, but the film makes him, and his relationship with Josephine, uninteresting and dull, and as the title is Napoleon, that was my feeling leaving the cinema. A bit more effort of Mr Scott and Mr. Phoenix to know the character and history would probably have added value.
My main criticism is the portrayal of Napoleon. Of course all who knew him are long gone and many accounts are subjective, so we have to make do with that information.
But I can not imagine that a man who ends up on top after all the chaos of the French Revolution, whose generals and soldiers stay loyal to him after all the battles and blood, wasn't an enormous charismatic man.
And that's where the film completely fails for me. You can hate him, admire him, love him, belittle him as Wellington, but the film makes him, and his relationship with Josephine, uninteresting and dull, and as the title is Napoleon, that was my feeling leaving the cinema. A bit more effort of Mr Scott and Mr. Phoenix to know the character and history would probably have added value.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesEugene de Beauharnais, the 12 year old boy who requests his father's sword from Napoleon in the film, became an able politician and military commander in his own right. Napoleon cared deeply for Eugene even formally adopting him in 1806 and making him heir presumptive to the Italian throne and Viceroy of Italy where he was de facto ruler. Eugene followed Napoleon on most of his campaigns. In 1809 Eugene commanded his own campaign with the French 'Army of Italy' beating the Austrians in nearly every battle.
- GaffesAfter being defeated at the Battle of Waterloo, Napoleon surrendered to the British on-board HMS Bellerophon. Although receiving many guests, he never met the Duke of Wellington face-to-face in real life.
- Citations
Napoleon Bonaparte: You think you're so great because you have boats!
- Crédits fousThe opening credits in the poster and vignettes of the film start with "Columbia Pictures and Apple Original Films present", but the opening credits in the actual film start with "Apple Original Films present".
- Versions alternativesA director's cut was released in August 2024 on Apple TV+ which includes over 48 minutes of new footage.
- ConnexionsFeatured in Jeremy Jahns: Napoleon - Movie Review (2023)
- Bandes originalesÇa Ira !
Music by Jean Françaix
Lyrics by Sacha Guitry
Performed by Édith Piaf
Courtesy of Warner Music UK Ltd.
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Site officiel
- Langues
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Napoleón
- Lieux de tournage
- Sociétés de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 200 000 000 $US (estimé)
- Montant brut aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 61 524 375 $US
- Week-end de sortie aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 20 638 887 $US
- 26 nov. 2023
- Montant brut mondial
- 221 394 838 $US
- Durée
- 2h 38min(158 min)
- Couleur
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 2.39 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant