Little rant from a disappointed History Buff...
Ridley Scott had a budget of $200M for Napoleon, yet how could it be so bad. The movie feels like a parody. Let's analyze some of the key battles portrayed in "Napoleon" 1/21
Full movie analysis on YT: youtu.be
Ridley Scott had a budget of $200M for Napoleon, yet how could it be so bad. The movie feels like a parody. Let's analyze some of the key battles portrayed in "Napoleon" 1/21
Full movie analysis on YT: youtu.be
The main problems are:
1. cannonballs are not bouncing, countless explosions instead
2. No actual formations, just swarms of soldiers
3. Trench warfare being used both at Austerlitz and Waterloo
4. Viking style melee moshpits
5. NAPOLEON CHARGING ON HIS HORSE! ❌ 2/21
1. cannonballs are not bouncing, countless explosions instead
2. No actual formations, just swarms of soldiers
3. Trench warfare being used both at Austerlitz and Waterloo
4. Viking style melee moshpits
5. NAPOLEON CHARGING ON HIS HORSE! ❌ 2/21
6. No regimental flags, always the same 🇫🇷
7. Napoleon uses flags and hand motions to send orders (In reality, he sent written orders to be delivered by messengers on horseback)
8. No proper firing techniques & volleys
9. Massive chronological time jumps 3/21
7. Napoleon uses flags and hand motions to send orders (In reality, he sent written orders to be delivered by messengers on horseback)
8. No proper firing techniques & volleys
9. Massive chronological time jumps 3/21
For example, the first battle portrayed was The Siege of Toulon (1793). Yes, the French did storm a fort which allowed them to bombard the British fleet. That's about how historically accurate the movie gets. 4/21
However, Ridley Scott doesn't depict the pivotal role of young artillery officer Napoleon Bonaparte. His strategy allowed the French to be victorious, and unblock a siege that was dragging on for weeks and weeks. 5/21
The movie only shows the attack against Fort de l'Eguillette as if it all happened in one night. In reality, the main fighting took place around Fort Mulgrave for weeks. The French artillery positions only held because of Bonaparte's timely counterattack. 6/21
The fact that in the movie the French troops used ladders to climb up the fort is simply ridiculous, and extremely inconvenient when done with a musket. In reality, grenadiers got close to the wall and opened a breach using explosives. Then all the troops poured inside. 7/21
It is this constant dumbing down of Napoleon's story that's disappointing. Every battle follows a similar pattern:
- 0 tactics
- bad CGI
- swarms of soldiers crashing into each other
- not the right landscapes 8/21
- 0 tactics
- bad CGI
- swarms of soldiers crashing into each other
- not the right landscapes 8/21
The next battle portrayed is The Pyramids (1798). We are not even told the geopolitical context as to why Napoleon ended up in Egypt in the first place. What's his objective? ... Don't know 9/21
Then he orders his canons to fire straight at the pyramids. Not only that never happened because the battle took place 17km from the pyramids, but the battle ends there... No cavalry charge of the Mameluks against French squares. Nothing. 10/21
I would have preferred the part of Napoleon in Egypt to be scraped, and more attention and story telling on The Siege of Toulon. 11/21
Napoleon's greatest victory Austerlitz is so underwhelming. It's just a moshpit viking melee over some sort of camp? Then canons fire at the frozen lake and that's it. Every battle scene feels like a parody of the real thing. 12/21
The worst is that after the battle we jump to the Treaty of Tilsit, completely ignoring 2-3 years of fighting and Napoleon's invasion of Prussia. That was my main worry during the trailer. How can you cover Napoleon's entire career in only 2h30? 13/21
The battle of Borodino. Yet another swarm of troops crashing into each other + Napoleon charging the enemy on horseback (historically never happened). 14/21
Throughout the movie, Napoleon is depicted as having 0 tactical skills or strategy... He's always just sending his men forward to slaughter. Once again, feels like a cheap parody. 15/21
Then in one scene we see Napoleon's retreat from Russia (1812), and next one, he is ABDICATING! This is when I lost it 😡😠 The movie skipped two of the most eventful years of the Napoleonic wars (watch video analysis for more info). 16/21
Lastly, as for Waterloo, the battle just takes place in a huge field. The farms/villages of Hougoumont, La Haye Sainte, Papelotte and Plancenoit are completely absent, when they had a pivotal role in the course of the battle. 17/21
Because of its simplicity, the battle is rushed to the extreme. They even go as far as to show Napoleon charging the British squares. The lack of extras also renders the battle extremely underwhelming. 18/21
Compare the shot above with this one from the movie Waterloo (1970). How come a $200M budget and modern technology can't rival what was done over 50 years ago? 19/21
Instead of a useless dark filter, we can clearly see the bright colored uniforms of the Napoleonic era. We also see units marching in proper & structured formations, as they are led to battle by their officers. 20/21
In the end, I was disappointed. At every turn, the movie only tried to humiliate Napoleon. Perhaps it's not a good idea to let a British movie director cover French history. Not only was the movie historically inaccurate, but it also didn't feel epic. 21/21
Loading suggestions...