Review: In Ridley Scott’s ‘Napoleon,’ the Emperor Has No Clothes but Plenty of Ego

 This image released by Apple TV+ shows Joaquin Phoenix in a scene from "Napoleon." (Apple TV+ via AP)
This image released by Apple TV+ shows Joaquin Phoenix in a scene from "Napoleon." (Apple TV+ via AP)
TT
20

Review: In Ridley Scott’s ‘Napoleon,’ the Emperor Has No Clothes but Plenty of Ego

 This image released by Apple TV+ shows Joaquin Phoenix in a scene from "Napoleon." (Apple TV+ via AP)
This image released by Apple TV+ shows Joaquin Phoenix in a scene from "Napoleon." (Apple TV+ via AP)

For such a famed historical figure, Napoleon has made only fleeting appearances in movies since Abel Gance’s 1927 silent film.

Stanley Kubrick had grand designs for a Napoleon epic that went unmade. (Steven Spielberg is attempting to revive those plans as a series). Napoleon and his bicorne hat — more icon of history than a real character — mostly only pops up in time-traveling odysseys like "Time Bandits" or "Bill and Ted’s Excellent Adventure."

The party, though, is finally on in Ridley Scott’s "Napoleon," starring Joaquin Phoenix. Scott doesn’t do anything small, not even famously diminutive French emperors. And his two-hour-38-minute big-screen biopic serves up a heaping historical spectacle complete with bloody European battles and massive military maneuvers.

But don’t mistake "Napoleon" for your average historical epic. Our first sense that this may not be a grand glorification of a Great Man of history comes early in the film, when a 24-year-old Bonaparte leads the siege on the British troops controlling the port city of Toulon. When Napoleon, then a major, charges forward in the fight, he’s visibly terrified, even panting. He looks more like Phoenix’s anxious protagonist in "Beau Is Afraid" than the man who would become France's Caesar. Napoleon doesn’t storm the gates so much as lurch desperately at them.

And for the rest of Scott’s film and Phoenix’s riveting performance, Napoleon’s actions are never much more complicated than that. He assumes power cavalierly. His coup d’état against the French Directory in 1799 is a ramshackle farce. He flings his armies around the continent without the slightest concern. He’s prone to petulant rages, screaming at the British: "You think you’re so great because you have boats!"

"Napoleon" subscribes more to the Not-So-Great Man theory of history. This Napoleon isn’t extraordinary nor is he much of a man. He’s a boyishly impulsive, thin-skinned brute, careening his way through Europe and leaving battlefields of dead soldiers in his wake. When he, while on a campaign in Egypt, is informed over lunch that his wife, Joséphine (Vanessa Kirby), is having an affair back in Paris, he responds curtly to the messenger: "No dessert for you."

For more than 200 years, characterizations of Napoleon have ranged from genius reformer born out of the French Revolution to marauding tyrant whose wars left three million dead. Napoleon, himself, helped shape his legacy while exiled on St. Helena with a self-serving memoir. Some of the titans of 19th century literature reckoned with him. Victor Hugo wrote Napoleon lost at Waterloo because he had grown "troublesome to God." Tolstoy, in "War and Peace," was less impressed, calling him, "that most insignificant instrument of history."

In "Napoleon," which begins with Marie Antoinette at the guillotine and ends with Napoleon on St. Helena where he died at age 51 in 1821, it's startling how much disregard the movie has for its protagonist. Hollywood historical epics have traditionally leaned toward aggrandizement, not the undressing of fragile, deluded male egos who exclaim over dinner: "Destiny has brought me here! Destiny has brought me this lamb chop!"

Here is a sweeping historical tapestry — no one does it better today than Scott — with a damning, almost satirical portrait at its center. That mix — Scott’s spectacle and Phoenix’s the-emperor-has-no-clothes performance — makes "Napoleon" a rivetingly off-kilter experience.

It’s not always a smooth mix. Phoenix’s characterization may at times have more in common with some of his past depictions of melancholy loners ("The Master," "The Joker") than any factual record of Napoleon. A quality like ambition, you'd think, would be prominent in depicting Napoleon. He was a notorious workaholic, meticulously organized and an energetic intellectual — little of which is present here, making Napoleon’s rise to power sometimes hard to fathom.

But that’s also part of the point of "Napoleon," which surely has some contemporary echoes. There are plenty of enablers along the way (a highlight of the supporting cast is Paul Rhys as the scheming diplomat Talleyrand) as the film marches through major events like the fall of Robespierre, the 1799 coup, Napoleon making himself Emperor in 1804 and the triumphant Battle of Austerlitz. The last is Scott’s finest set piece in the film, ending in a rout of the Russian forces as they flee over a frozen pond while the bombardment of cannons plunges them into an icy grave.

But in David Scarpa’s screenplay, the real through line in "Napoleon" isn’t the string of battles leading up to the downfall we all know is coming at Waterloo. (There, Rupert Everett’s sneering Duke of Wellington enlivens the military tactics.) It’s Napoleon’s relationship with Joséphine that makes the main thread.

When he first sees her across a crowded party, he stands transfixed. Anyone would be. The slinky Kirby, sporting a pixie cut, rivals Phoenix for most potent presence in "Napoleon." She has a complete hold on Napoleo. When he returns from Egypt furious from the well-publicized rumors of her infidelity, they have a prolonged fight that ends with her turning the tables. "You are nothing without me," she tells him, as he cowers, happily. "Say it."

There's a version of the film that could be wholly focused on their dynamic. Joséphine is omnipresent for a long stretch — he writes her constantly from the battlefront in letters narrated to us — but "Napoleon" never quite finds its balance in cutting between their life together and the military exploits. Scott is expected to release a four-hour director's cut on Apple TV+ after the film's theatrical run, which may offer a more calibrated version.

But the 85-year-old Scott — himself a symbol of ceaseless ambition — has made a film that, like his previous "The Last Duel," is a provocative takedown of male power. Scott has made plenty of brawny, swaggering epics in his time — including "Gladiator," with an Oscar-nominated Phoenix as the Roman emperor Commodus. But even though not everything in "Napoleon" coheres, it's appealing destabilizing. In one of the film's final images, Napoleon and his hat are in silhouette as he slumps to his death like a keeling ship, going down.



‘How to Train Your Dragon’ Tops the US Box Office

This image released by Universal Pictures shows Mason Thames, as Hiccup, riding Night Fury dragon, Toothless in a scene from "How to Train Your Dragon", (Universal Pictures via AP)
This image released by Universal Pictures shows Mason Thames, as Hiccup, riding Night Fury dragon, Toothless in a scene from "How to Train Your Dragon", (Universal Pictures via AP)
TT
20

‘How to Train Your Dragon’ Tops the US Box Office

This image released by Universal Pictures shows Mason Thames, as Hiccup, riding Night Fury dragon, Toothless in a scene from "How to Train Your Dragon", (Universal Pictures via AP)
This image released by Universal Pictures shows Mason Thames, as Hiccup, riding Night Fury dragon, Toothless in a scene from "How to Train Your Dragon", (Universal Pictures via AP)

Neither Pixar nor zombies were enough to topple “How to Train Your Dragon" from the No. 1 slot at North American box offices over the weekend. The Universal Pictures live-action remake remained the top film, bringing in $37 million in ticket sales in its second weekend, despite the sizeable new releases of “Elio” and “28 Years Later” , according to studio estimates Sunday. “How To Train Your Dragon” has rapidly amassed $358.2 million worldwide, The Associated Press reported.

Six years after its last entry, the Dean DeBlois-directed “How To Train Your Dragon” has proven a potent revival of the DreamWorks Animation franchise. A sequel is already in the works for the $150 million production, which remakes the 2010 animated tale about a Viking boy and his dragon.

Pixar's “Elio” had a particularly tough weekend. The Walt Disney Co. animation studio has often launched some of its biggest titles in June, including “Cars,” “WALL-E” and “Toy Story 4.” But “Elio,” a science fiction adventure about a boy who dreams of meeting aliens, notched a modest $21 million, the lowest opening ever for Pixar.

“This is a weak opening for a new Pixar movie,” said David A. Gross, who runs the movie consulting firm FranchiseRe. “These would be solid numbers for another original animation film, but this is Pixar, and by Pixar’s remarkable standard, the opening is well below average.”

“Elio,” originally set for release in early 2024, had a bumpy road to the screen. Adrian Molina — co-director of “Coco” — was replaced mid-production by Domee Shi (“Turning Red”) and Madeline Sharafian. Back at Disney’s D23 conference in 2022, America Ferrera appeared to announce her role as Elio’s mother, but the character doesn’t even exist in the revamped film.

Disney and Pixar spent at least $150 million making “Elio,” which didn’t fare any better internationally than it did in North America, bringing in just $14 million from 43 territories. Pixar stumbled coming out of the pandemic before stabilizing performance with 2023’s “Elemental” ($496.4 million worldwide) and 2024’s “Inside Out 2” ($1.7 billion), which was the company's biggest box office hit.

“Elemental” was Pixar's previously lowest earning film, launching with $29.6 million. It rallied in later weeks to collect nearly half a billion dollars at the box office. The company's first movie, “Toy Story,” opened with $29.1 million in 1995, or $60 when adjusted for inflation. It remains to be seen whether “Elio's” decent reviews and “A” from CinemaScore audiences can lead it to repeat “Elemental's” trajectory.

With most schools on summer break, the competition for family audiences was stiff. Disney’s own “Lilo & Stitch,” another live-action remake, continued to pull in young moviegoers. It grossed $9.7 million in its fifth weekend, bringing its global tally to $910.3 million.

“28 Years Later” signaled the return of another, far gorier franchise. Director Danny Boyle reunited with screenwriter Alex Garland to resume their pandemic apocalypse thriller 25 years after “28 Days Later” and 18 years after its sequel, “28 Weeks Later.”

The Sony Pictures release opened with $30 million. That was good enough to give Boyle, the filmmaker of “Slumdog Millionaire” and “Trainspotting,” the biggest opening weekend of his career. The film, which cost $60 million to make, jumps ahead nearly three decades from the outbreak of the so-called rage virus for a coming-of-age story about a 12-year-old (Alfie Williams) venturing out of his family’s protected village. Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Jodie Comer and Ralph Fiennes co-star.

Reviews have been good (90% fresh on Rotten Tomatoes) for “28 Years Later,” though audience reaction (a “B” CinemaScore) is mixed. Boyle has more plans for the zombie franchise, which will next see the release of “28 Years Later: The Bone Temple” next year from director Nia DaCosta.

“28 Years Later” added another $30 million in 59 overseas markets.

After its strong start last weekend with $12 million, A24’s “Materialists” held well with $5.8 million in its second weekend. The romantic drama by writer-director Celine Song and starring Dakota Johnson, Pedro Pascal and Chris Evans has collected $24 million so far.

Next weekend should also be a competitive one in movie theaters, with both “F1,” from Apple and Warner Bros., and Universal’s “Megan 2.0” launching in cinemas.