‘Napoleon’ had everything to be extraordinary; g1 already seen

[ad_1]

Director Ridley Scott and Joaquin Phoenix remake ‘Gladiator’ to tell the fascinating story of the French emperor. Despite doing everything right, the film fails to impress. “Napoleon” had everything to be extraordinary: Filmmaker Ridley Scott, responsible for historical epics such as “Gladiator” (2000); his reunion with Joaquin Phoenix, one of the great actors of his generation; and a fascinating true story starring a genius, complex and remarkable character. The film that premieres this Thursday (23) in Brazilian cinemas is undeniably well-made, with mature direction and full of competent performances – but it also never completely wins over the audience. It’s difficult to meet expectations generated by a CV like this. Even more so in a project that never knows exactly what it wants to be. Divided between a biopic with hints of satire, which tries to demystify its great protagonist, a dark romance and a war epic, “Napoleon” suffers from a chronic lack of soul or urgency. Watch the trailer for ‘Napoleon’ The Emperor’s Paradox The script by David Scarpa, who worked with Scott on “All the Money in the World” (2017), portrays the rise and fall of Napoleon Bonaparte (Phoenix), from an ambitious commander during the French Revolution until his exile in disgrace decades later. The scenes of his military and political conquests are intertwined with his troubled relationship with Josephine de Beauharnais (Vanessa Kirby), the woman who became empress alongside him. Unfortunately, with the exception of the novel, the film never delves deep enough into any other point in its protagonist’s life. Everything is mentioned somewhat in passing, as key points of a High School History presentation. A great battle, masterfully filmed by the director, is followed by the appointment as consul, which soon turns into a coronation as emperor. What happened to the other two leaders with whom Napoleon shared power? The film certainly doesn’t care. This creates a bizarre paradox in which a minimum of historical knowledge about the period portrayed is required – while at the same time it does not give lovers of the subject anything new. More interesting than seeing the conclusion of remarkable moments would be understanding how they happened. Proof of this is the freezing Battle of Austerlitz, the only one that truly portrays the general’s military mastery, and by far the best sequence in the film. Vanessa Kirby and Joaquin Phoenix in a scene from ‘Napoleon’ Disclosure The English are coming Phoenix and Kirby (“Mission: Impossible – Reckoning Part 1”) are the closest thing to what “Napoleon” could call a soul, or even a heart , and shine enough that their nationalities don’t bother like such iconic French figures. The same cannot be said for the other actors. Historically, Hollywood has used Americans, Brits and other English-speaking countries to play characters from other parts of the world. With a plot with so many diplomatic relations, however, this choice gets in the way. The mostly British cast not only sounds like it, but looks British. In an English-language film, there are several moments when it is not possible to know whether the characters on screen are French, Russian, Austrian or, in fact, English. This is almost as bizarre as the characterization of the protagonist’s age (and Josefina’s too, it’s true), which changes little in the three decades portrayed. Poetic freedom can be justified there, but once again it is up to the audience’s prior knowledge to be able to understand the passage of time. In Scott and Phoenix’s hands, it’s not unfair to expect more. “Napoleon” had everything to be extraordinary. A shame he decided not to be. Rupert Everett and Joaquin Phoenix in a scene from ‘Napoleon’

[ad_2]

Source link