‘Napoleon Review’: the pursuit of artistic license in place of historical accuracy
Photo Courtesy : Sony Pictures
Perhaps people were uncertain what to expect from Ridley Scott’s 2 hour and 45-minute cinematic biopic on French emperor and military commander Napoleon Bonaparte. Historical inaccuracies began with the premiere of the US trailer for the film, which tried to paint a rags to riches image of Napoleon in its byline: “He came from nothing. He conquered everything.” In actual fact, he was descended from Italian nobility. This is one of several inaccuracies in the film that have been pointed out by historians, not to mention the fact that French historical figures speak with American accents.
Though widely panned by critics, the film undoubtedly offers many points of redemption. Wide and long shots in the epic battle scenes impress, for example at the Battle of Borodino. Issues lie in the dry and often unintentionally funny dialogue, and quite frankly unappealing character of Napoleon (Joaquin Phoenix). The film attempts to portray two parallel plots: Napoleon’s rise in his military career, and his contentious relationship with his first wife Joséphine de Beauharnais (Vanessa Kirby). Both fail to become enmeshed in a way that works well, resulting in a disjointed plot that leaves the audience asking what Scott wants the focus to be.
In emotional terms the film is also flat, particularly though the portrayal of Napoleon’s relationship with Joséphine. For example, in the beginning of their courtship, Josephine opens her legs in front of him and utters the atrocious line: “if you look down, you’ll see a surprise. Once you see it, you will always want it.” Dialogue like this cringes and irritates, and the scene relegates her to a purely sexual role, downplaying the impact Joséphine had on Napoleon’s life in other matters. Graphic and emotionless sex scenes further this sentiment. Even when Joséphine takes on a lover, this is not fleshed out, and we only see Napoleon’s fury at finding out.
Scenes like this where women openly prostrate themselves to men through the offering of sex is a tired trope. An obvious parallel to this scene is Martin Scorsese’s 2013 film The Wolf of Wall Street, in which Margot Robbie’s character Naomi Lapaglia teases Leonardo DiCaprio’s despicable Jordan Belfort by opening her legs and telling him “From now on, it’s going to be nothing but short, short skirts around the house”. Like Naomi, there is more to Josephine than her sexuality.
Another issue lies in the ages of the actors. Joséphine was 6 years older than Napoleon. This age gap is central to understanding their relationship, as Napoleon required an heir after having created a hereditary monarchy in 1804. Her inability to provide this, impacted by her age, ultimately results in their divorce. Napoleon was also reportedly insecure about her sexual experience compared to him, as she had had many lovers before. Kirby is fourteen years younger than Phoenix, and little attempts are made to de-age Phoenix: the film shows Napoleon between the ages of 24 and 46, but he looks the same throughout, resulting in Kirby’s contrasting youthfulness standing out. In not casting an older actor to accurately portray Josephine’s age, a chance to go against the grain in Hollywood was missed.
All this is not to say Kirby does a bad job: on the contrary, she is a phenomenal actress. But the material she is given unfortunately diminishes her character. Her own agency is glanced over and barely looked at throughout the film, until she quickly and quietly dies from pneumonia, and is then forgotten. Scott conveniently reassures us that Josephine was still on Napoleon’s mind when he died uttering the words: “France, the Army, the head of the Army, Josephine”. Whether Napoleon actually said this is unclear, but it certainly succeeds in creating a definite ending.
And what is Scott’s take on all of this discourse? “I don’t think it matters”. He points to other historical inaccuracies where he utilises creative license in the film: in one scene, Napoleon fires a cannon at the pyramids. “I don’t know if he did that, but it was a fast way of saying he took Egypt.”
Scott stands by his use of creative license. And that’s okay: at the end of the day, it’s just a movie. And an average one, at that. But, general sentiment seems to suggest it could have been done better. Napoleon’s life, after all, was far from ordinary.