Joaquin Phoenix in Ridley Scott’s rough saga – The Hollywood Reporter

Joaquin Phoenix in the movie “Napoleon”

Several times in Napoleonfog settles over a winter landscape, delicately summoning visual echoes Duelists, the 1977 debut feature film set during the same period that put Ridley Scott on the map. Then there are the large-scale war scenes more characteristic of the veteran director’s later works, particularly the Battle of Austerlitz, where cannon fire from Bonaparte’s army plunges Austrian and Russian troops to icy deaths in a frozen lake, its waters stained with turbidity. blood. But for all its power, atmosphere and solidly choreographed combat, it’s too bloated and sprawling historical tapestry to remain compelling, especially when its focus veers away from its central couple.

Joaquin Phoenix’s performance in the lead role is as eccentric as any mercurial actor, even if his tics don’t always feel entirely rooted in the character. But when he’s on screen with Vanessa Kirby as Josephine, an aristocrat who fell once again after marrying Napoleon and then was pushed aside when she failed to produce an heir, the nearly three-hour historical saga comes alive.

A 1927 French silent film by Abel Gance, also titled Napoleon, is the most famous screen portrayal of a historical figure. The five-and-a-half-hour film follows the protagonist from his formative childhood years through the early turmoil of the Revolutionary Wars and ending in Italy, with visions of glory on the future battlefield filling the head of the 26-year-old military commander.

Perhaps picking up where Stanley Kubrick left off in his ill-advised attempt to make a film about Napoleon, Scott aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the subject’s entire military life. But even with the near-constant infantry clashes, covert attacks, skirmishes, and thunderous bloodbaths, Napoleon The narrative often feels muddy, boring, and flat.

David Scarpa’s screenplay begins in 1793 with the guillotine of Marie Antoinette and the unrest in France that creates an opportunity for Napoleon to make a name for himself as a talented military strategist. He achieved this at the Siege of Toulon, where he led forces to take the Anglo-Saxon fleet by surprise, secure the port and thus restore the city to the Republic.

The film progresses through a timeline that will be familiar to students of history, though not entirely clear to anyone hoping for a crash course here – the fall of Robespierre; The end of the reign of terror; Conquest of Egypt; The coup of 1799 that overthrew the existing French regime; Napoleon crowns himself Emperor of France in 1804; Decisive Battle of Austerlitz; Failed attempts to make peace with England and establish alliances with Prussia and Austria; The French invasion of Russia with its heavy losses; Napoleon’s abdication and initial exile to the island of Elba in the Mediterranean; His return to lead France in a humiliating defeat against England; His final exile to the British-controlled island of St. Helena in the South Atlantic Ocean.

That’s a lot for any audience to take in in one sitting, and while Scott can be commended for his ambition, neither he nor Scarpa have been able to build those many pieces of plot into a seamless narrative.

The dividing line is Napoleon’s relationship with Josephine, whom he met at the Survivors Ball in newly liberated Paris and whom they married two years later. For all his self-confidence in military maneuvers, Napoleon recognized from the beginning that Josephine was his equal, or perhaps even his superior. When he returns from Egypt, angry at being ridiculed in the press for his flirtation with her, Josephine rebuffs his attempts to embarrass her: “You’re nothing without me.”

Perhaps that unusual dynamic between one of the most powerful men in the world and his husband who was in prison not long ago was enough to give more attention. Napoleon A more consistent pulse Their scenes together were given room to breathe and develop. But Scott is always so anxious to return to the field, that Napoleon’s letters to Josephine must maintain the theme.

Despite frequent bouts of sex that Phoenix amusingly plays like a farm animal, Josephine’s stomach remains empty. But she happily blames her husband at the dinner table, calling him fat. And in one of the many touches of gonzo humor that energized Phoenix’s performance, he once again said, “Fate brought me here! Fate brought me this mutton chop!” An unwillingness to admit defeat of any kind, whether marital or military , is a key theme of characterization, making it both funny and pathetic when Napoleon shouts “We win!” on a battlefield littered with the corpses of his infantry.

But somehow, none of this adds up to a comprehensive picture of one of the most driven men in history; Sometimes I wondered if Phoenix was still in character Boo is afraid. Kirby’s sly wit, cat-eye sensuality, and innate royalty make Josephine the most interesting character and certainly makes Napoleon’s addiction to her understandable. But there must be real influence in the manipulation of his mother and other advisors to get him to divorce her and produce an heir elsewhere, even if he remains loyal to his ex-wife and with a love that continues after her death.

The film’s biggest extended scene is the Battle of Waterloo, with Rupert Everett’s English chewing the scenery as disdainfully as a scowling pantomime Ponce as the Duke of Wellington. (This is not a film where the supporting cast can generally make much of an impact.) The fighting itself was expertly coordinated, with Napoleon failing to anticipate the overwhelming effectiveness of a frontal attack by the British and a flanking attack by the Prussians. But the film’s battles are more impressive in scale than in visceral impact, even with Martin Phipps’ inventive use of period music and large-scale score. There’s also a disappointingly murky look to much of cinematographer Dariusz Wolski’s widescreen visuals.

Even after this final defeat, Napoleon remained steadfast in his disdain for self-accusation, blaming the men under his command for their inability to properly carry out his orders. “That’s the hardest thing in life, accepting other people’s failures.” There’s a fascinating potential study of deluded leadership in this statement, but somehow it never coheres into a satisfactory form here.