Napoleon Review: Joaquin Phoenix, Ridley Scott are consumed by facts not emotions

The Ridley Scott-helmed biographical drama Napoleon is a visual spectacle. The dichotomy of this statement is that the film quite actively finds itself reduced to just that. Scott is in the midst of his own cinematic renaissance, juggling multiple star-spangled projects - the Gladiator franchise being the foremost of this lot. That being said, his love for tense war action is not unbeknownst to the audience - it has been one of his greatest cinematic strengths. Sadly, Napoleon's greatest tragedy - besides the trajectory of the erstwhile Emperor's own life - is Scott's exaggerated focus on the battlefield and brawn over the man himself.

Hot take

Napoleon is Ridley Scott's ode to history more than the former French conqueror. Joaquin Phoenix, despite his undisputable screen presence, appears inconsequential to the course of the film. One keeps expecting Napoleon's story to take over at some point, but the war montages and dated interludes continue to build the framework for the entirety of the film. Vanessa Kirby as Josephine brings originality to her portrayal which manages to stand taller than the bourgeoning script and story.

Does Napoleon live up to the hype?

The simple answer to this is a clear no. The skillfully edited trailer painted what could have been a magnanimous tale tracing the persona of a larger-than-life historical figure. However, what we have instead are passionately filmed war sequences simply borrowing from the life of Napoleon.

Joaquin Phoenix is a mere pawn in Ridley Scott's love letter to war action

The biggest takeaway for the audience from Ridley Scott's Napoleon is regret over the misdirected and lost potential of the Academy Award-winning actor. The film's opening with Marie Antoinette's execution over a direct reference to Napoleon should have been indication enough of the meticulous but unfounded path Scott has set up over the film's two-hour and forty-minute runtime. 

Phoenix, however, true to his craft, effectively essays Napoleon's growth from anxious, jitter-ridden footsteps and performative confidence to steadfast surety ultimately ending in the shell of a proud but defeated man. Despite his talents being abjectly underused in the narrative, Phoenix's screen presence is what saves the film from turning into a 160-minute cinematised war documentary.

Vanessa Kirby refuses to be consumed by the script

It is easy to see why Vanessa Kirby was the obvious choice to play Josephine, wife to Napoleon. In a few fleeting scenes, she establishes herself as one of the film's pillars. Kirby as Josephine allows audiences what appear to be authentic glimpses into Napoleon's jaded yet dry personal life.

As a matter of fact, in a press release for Napoleon, the actress had admitted not knowing much about French history which then sent her on a quest to understand the skin of Josephine before stepping into it. Kirby's dedicated prep took her to Paris as well as Josephine's tomb - an inward journey introducing gushes of originality to the film's narrative.

Watch it or skip it?

If you are a history buff, Napoleon is going to make for a dream watch. For the rest, the increased and gradually tiresome focus on infantry, rifles, cannons and dead bodies runs its course rather early in the film. Joaquin Phoenix, however, does deserve an audience for his measured portrayal of Napoleon.

Bottomline

Narrated through the former French Emperor's letters to Josephine, the film shapes up to be Ridley Scott's own love letter to the destructive spectacles of history - a complex cinematic allegory. The meticulous attention to detail and ensuring the audience has context are both things that can be appreciated. If Napoleon the film was to be explained briefly it would be much like the Emperor's last words - "France...Army...Josephine..."

Rating: 2.5/5 stars