X
In Theaters Now
- 2023
- R
- 2 h 38 m
- 2023
- R
- 2 h 38 m
Summary Napoleon is a spectacle-filled action epic that details the checkered rise and fall of the iconic French Emperor Napoleon Bonaparte (Joaquin Phoenix). Against a stunning backdrop of large-scale filmmaking orchestrated by legendary director Ridley Scott, the film captures Bonaparte's relentless journey to power through the prism of his ad...
Directed By: Ridley Scott
Written By: David Scarpa
In Theaters Now
- 2023
- R
- 2 h 38 m
- 2023
- R
- 2 h 38 m
Napoleon
64
4.6
Where to Watch
Summary Napoleon is a spectacle-filled action epic that details the checkered rise and fall of the iconic French Emperor Napoleon Bonaparte (Joaquin Phoenix). Against a stunning backdrop of large-scale filmmaking orchestrated by legendary director Ridley Scott, the film captures Bonaparte's relentless journey to power through the prism of his ad...
Directed By: Ridley Scott
Written By: David Scarpa
Where to Watch
Top Cast
Metascore
Generally Favorable
Based on 60 Critic Reviews
64
53% Positive
32 Reviews
32 Reviews
43% Mixed
26 Reviews
26 Reviews
3% Negative
2 Reviews
2 Reviews
Metascore
Generally Favorable
Based on 60 Critic Reviews
64
53% Positive
32 Reviews
32 Reviews
43% Mixed
26 Reviews
26 Reviews
3% Negative
2 Reviews
2 Reviews
Phoenix is the key to it all: a performance as robust as the glass of burgundy he knocks back: preening, brooding, seething and triumphing.
Napoleon isn’t a movie about grand triumph, or about disastrous failure. It’s a story about masculine insecurity, and how it can reduce the world to violence.
User Score
Mixed or Average
Based on 225 User Ratings
4.6
35% Positive
78 Ratings
78 Ratings
25% Mixed
56 Ratings
56 Ratings
40% Negative
91 Ratings
91 Ratings
User Score
Mixed or Average
Based on 225 User Ratings
4.6
35% Positive
78 Ratings
78 Ratings
25% Mixed
56 Ratings
56 Ratings
40% Negative
91 Ratings
91 Ratings
If Scott's Gladiator was sort of a perfect epic emotional movie, also played incredibly by the not so well known Joaquin Phoenix at the time, time goes, Ridley Scott finally recast now more experienced and growing Joaquin Phoenix in this phenomenal poetic romance epic movie, Napoleon, an epic and grand film, 157 minutes of great storytelling, a long but intriguing character development, perform so great by all the cast especially both Phoenix and Vanessa Kirby, it felt personal, a world conflict that probably will be boring if it's not because of Napoleon and his incredible depiction played again so great by Joaquin Phoenix making it some of the best real life person depiction in movie i've ever seen don't care whether it's accurate or not, and also one of the most interesting complicated romance story ever told and ever depicted in movie, all the battle sequences in Napoleon was also some of the most fascinating one, Napoleon is epic in every way, the score, the direction, the cinematography, the performances, the set was incredible, and the practical effects was incredible, overall Napoleon was simply one of the best films of the year, this is the film that are so great to see in the theaters for the visual and sound experience, also a story that needs to be told more, a movie direction that needs to be made and inspired more, interesting to think that i can enjoy a 157 minutes way more than a boring same 2 hours plus or under superhero movie lately.
Report
Director Ridley Scott's recent film, "Napoleon," takes a daring leap into the realms of historical fiction, offering audiences a fresh and unexpected perspective on the iconic French military leader. Starring Joaquin Phoenix in the titular role, the movie dares to challenge conventional historical narratives, presenting a Napoleon that is both complex and, at times, even vulnerable.
Joaquin Phoenix is Napoleon, just as Robert Downey Jr. is Iron Man. In a performance that transcends the conventional portrayal of historical figures, Phoenix brings a depth to the character that goes beyond the triumphant conqueror we are accustomed to. Instead, we witness a Napoleon who grapples with doubt, personal struggles, and the weight of his own ambitions. Phoenix's portrayal is nothing short of mesmerizing. The actor's skill captures the essence of a man burdened by his own aspirations, providing a glimpse into the emotional complexity behind the historical facade. Ridley Scott's directorial choices add another layer to the film's unique appeal. The cinematography and set design transport viewers to the grandeur of the Napoleonic era, while Scott's decision to deviate from historical accuracy serves a purpose.
By taking creative liberties, the director challenges us to question our preconceived notions about history and encourages a more critical examination of the past. "Napoleon" may not align with the textbooks, but it succeeds in sparking conversations about the nature of historical storytelling. In the end, the film is not just a movie; it's a bold reinterpretation that invites us to engage with history in a new and thought-provoking way, with Joaquin Phoenix embodying Napoleon just as Robert Downey Jr. did with Iron Man.
Report
No one should mistake Scott’s Napoleon as an overtly political film. It’s true ambitions are to entertain and inform, in that order.
Napoleon was without a doubt a complex and controversial character whose shadow loomed large over the first quarter of the 19th century. He deserves a better-focused, more passionate movie than the one Scott has provided.
Napoleon isn’t a failure on anyone’s part. But it’s not a rousing success, either. It’s not really a rousing anything, which is the problem. Maybe Scott should have gone in even more on Phoenix’s quirks and mannerisms, which are the most purely entertaining things about the film. Whatever the case, it doesn’t quite measure up.
More times than not, the film’s bursts of humor clash awkwardly with the far more frequent attempts at gravitas that the filmmakers strive for when our protagonist is in battle or engaged in political discussions.
We don't need another hero, but when it comes to the man at its center, Napoleon could have used a lot more oomph.
This film is perfect on the story, direction artist and actor. This film is of 10
Report
If you've seen any of Ridley Scott's epics, you're undoubtedly familiar with his style. Whether it's Gladiator or The Last Duel, you've got a good sense of what to anticipate, and, naturally, Napoleon carries that unmistakable ****, even someone with a modicum of discernment would recognize that encapsulating the existence of a historical figure such as Napoleon Bonaparte was not going to be accomplished in a mere 158 minutes. However, it was equally implausible to imagine that the whole thing would exude such a dispiriting atmosphere. Napoleon comes off as a sort of compilation of some of his life's highlights, cherry-picking key battles and significant moments from his time on this earth, in an attempt to integrate them into what is evidently intended to be a cohesive narrative. However, it never achieves that cohesion.I mean, despite the grand scale of the battles, none of them exude excitement or tension. They come across as mechanical and expendable. Even the portrayal of his defeat at Waterloo, consuming about 15 minutes of the film's concluding stretch, feels rather ****, it's a movie that aims to be an epic, and yet it feels so hollow.Joaquin Phoenix was good, but he has done better.Even his Commodus in Gladiator had more personality than his Napoleon.This is not a bad film, and I appreciate that Ridley Scott continues to create them with impressive energy at 85 years old. He's made 18 in 23 years, but perhaps that prolific career should be considering better projects.Quality over quantity, because as he said in a recent interview, that Scorsese made Killers of the Flower Moon, in the same amount of time it took him to make four new movies, yet Scorsese doesn't lower his quality. Scott does.
Report
CIERTA DECEPCIÓN CON ESTA FRANCIA REVOLUCIONARIA
Me revienta ir al cine a ver películas basadas en hechos reales, películas biográficas, e históricas. Me gusta, aprendo y conozco, a veces más que a las personas que tengo alrededor mía, a las que puedo amar u odiar, y no sé qué opción es mejor en esta miserable época. Es por eso (y por más razones) que a veces prefiero aferrarme al cine y los libros, entre otras artes, dónde al menos pueda desahogarme y fantasear cuestionando si otra época habría sido la correcta para mí. Y cuando voy a ver este género me pregunto si es mejor afrontar la realidad de lo sucedido, y empatizar con los afectados creando sentimientos desgarradores, o ignorar y crear lo que para mí sería perfecto, y creo que cualquiera de las dos opciones son tan erróneas como acertadas.Y por eso no culpo a Ridley Scott, el director de obras maestras como Gladiator (también retocada por él), Blade Runner (toda una fantasía mía en la cuál me muero y renazco) y Alien. También pertenecedor de Los Duelistas: aquella sobre oficiales del emperador francés. Y es ahora cuando ha podido extenderse con él, con uno de los mayores conquistadores del mundo. Entonces, siendo Ridley Scott el director, mi cuerpo me obliga a acudir a ver sus particulares y proteicas historias. Acudo para ver cómo Napoleón le da competitividad a la excelente y grandiosa Oppenheimer. Quiero ver como mis fibras se revolucionan como el pueblo el día de la guillotina a Maria Antonieta, quiero sentir un Joaquin Phoenix y una Vanessa Kirby inimaginables, porque voy a presenciar unos “hechos” increíbles. Bien pues, su metraje es de dos horas y cuarenta minutos, y solo siento la necesidad de mirar el reloj en unas pocas ocasiones, no abruma pero durante el visionado me preocupa aburrirme. No se hace eterna pero sí un poco larga. Solo un poco. Pero no me preocupa el tiempo porque no me disgusta. No obstante, tienen tantos puntos positivos como negativos, sus hechos: ficción y realidad. Todo me resulta confuso para conocer a Napoleón, ese no es el verdadero conquistador. Era alguien más excéntrico, muy perverso, dantesco, admirable y a la vez muy temido. Se ven esos aspectos en él, pero no son analizados y profundizados, puede parecer superficial, y para alguien como él este me lo parece. Mientras que Josefina es todo lo contrario pero tampoco exageradamente, muchas de mis fibras se despiertan con todas esas cartas y sus momentos más temblorosos, melancólicos. Necesitada de pastillas, aunque la época… Ellos hacen de mí un interesado sobre todo el recorrido matrimonial, por las morbosidades que pertenecen. El guión es escaso fijándonos en la gran extensión histórica que Bonaparte experimentó. Y por lo que escucho Francia no lo ha recibido muy bien. Hasta yo me siento insultado, les comprendo. Es obvio que tiene grandiosos y relucientes momentos que se tienen que presenciar en la gran pantalla: la guillotina, Waterloo y Rusia.
OTRO CONQUISTADOR AL QUE NO SE LE HACE JUSTICIA
Me duele asumir que Phoenix, uno de mis favoritos, no está a la altura de lo que esperaba, no se queda corto, pero tampoco sobrepasa, mientras que Vanessa sí que no me decepciona, la quiero nominada, no sé sí ganadora. Sigo apostando por Oppie y Cilian. Scott deja mucha historia que contar, y espero que en el metraje oficial, alrededor de 4 horas, consiga redimirse, o al menos en un futuro presenciar en la gran pantalla el verdadero retrato del este emperador francés y no volver a la decepción.-RICHIE VALERO
Report
I will name my future child any **** not josephine...Never....I LOVE Vanessa Kirby and Joaquin Phoenix!But that was nothing...
Report
A terrible and false rappresentation of Napoleon.
Director seems obsessed by the fact that the wife was cheating him, nearly 2/3 of the movie is about that, with most of the facts totally invented by RS just to bully the character.
It question if there is something personal about wife cheating...
At the end, RS presents 3 million deaths and over 60 battles (but he showed some minutes of them without any explanation) obviously misleading about the many more the english empire was making in the same period...
Ridicolous and boring.
Report
Awards
Camerimage
• 1 Nomination
