Napoleon
 

Conflicted. Terrible script, no plot which is somewhat forgivable as biography but there was no angle, not all that historically accurate, too long and too short at the same time, not Joaquin Phoenix's best acting though you can blame the character and script as much as anything for that. And it goes on. Surprised Ridley Scott put this together.

Battle scenes and imagery were top notch. Overall not worth seeing, really at all.

<iframe width="1280" height="720" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/LIsfMO5Jd_w" title="NAPOLEON - Official Trailer #2 (HD)" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Shaun- how about posting in the movie thread vs a new thread every time you see a movie?

I don't mostly because I'll get notifications of every single new post on that thread. I haven't looked at it much but it seems pretty random with 5 people posting mostly.

Kubrick wanted to do Napoleon. He'd spent years, maybe decades doing research, and if he'd survived it may have been next after Eyes Wide Shut. It would've been epic.

You should be a movie critic. The evaluation this evening on PBS was almost exactly the same as yours. Don't think we'll be seeing it.

Well that's disappointing. Was looking forward to it.

IMHO Phoenix is one of the best actors of our generation and him being in it is usually enough for me to go see it.

Plus they spelled it wrong ;)

No one can do it like Martin.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1700733215.jpg

Thanks for the review Shaun

My favorite movie with Joaquin Phoenix is 'U turn'
He plays 'TNT Dynamite'

Thanks Marv, these points were so glaringly obvious, I would expect every review will have them in common. And there was a lot more. The sex scenes, if that's what you can even call them, were laughably ludicrous and should have swept up on the cutting room floor.

With a bit of clarity and some coffee this morning, this was a really bad movie. Just one that was beautifully shot.



Completely agree, his range from Joker to C 'mon C'mon is a little mind-blowing. The thing is, this movie could have had any decent B list actor like Oscar Isaac could have done as good or better in the role, terrible script and all.

One thing that I was wondering throughout the movie what like Oppenheimer not being shown in Japan will Napoleon not be shown in France. I have a feeling there would be riots if it is.

What does this have to do with ice cream?

The data he found and created is housed somewhere. Voluminous including minutiae.

Shaun's reviews are excellent and welcomed. He sees more movies in a month than I see in years so I appreciate the insight.

Since I haven't been to a theater in at least a decade, I have a list of movies to watch when they hit streaming or DTV based his and other's reviews here.:cool:

+1 He had me at Alita: Battle Angel.

Thanks, Shaun.

Disappointing it’s so terrible. I suppose one must pick and choose from the many complexities surrounding Napoleon’s life. Ridley Scott chose wrong, apparently. I definitely won’t go anywhere to see it.

The problem is "Napoleon" so I wont be seeing it.

But I was brought up on a diet of anti-Napoleon propaganda courtesy of my UK/British based Australian education - The Brits still have a thing for him and predictably the French still admire him (maybe I should do some more reading about him?).

Also, Vanessa Kirby is a gorgeous lady but she was almost unrecognizable in the trailer.

We really like going to movies once in a while. We make it a "date", & the movie is a part of the activities and enjoyment we get out of it. You are probably a good distance from a place where there are theatres. We're only about 25 minutes from the nearest. My wife always likes to get pop cord and a drink as part of the "ritual."

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/-yjl7u0Afqg?si=MLnptPl4yVASVTo1" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen></iframe>


the duelists, maybe the best thing ridley scott ever did. every shot composed like an old masters painting. arguably the most realistic sword fights ever filmed. great acting great story.

I thought the movie was brilliant and disappointing. The guillotine, the 'whiff of grapeshot', political, and coup scenes were well done. The military battles were the best I've seen. The other story line was interesting and psychotic, yet misplaced in a movie with so much else to cover. Yet, Vanessa Kirby delivered, and I thought Joaquin Phoenix's acting was mesmorizing. I suspect it was just his and Ridley Scott's choice more than historical fact. Ridley said in an interview (shown below) that there has been 2,500 books about Napoleon since his death- "one book for every week." I don't know if Ridley would have done a series, but that would have been more suitable, IMO. Ridley virtually coined the "Director's Cut" concept, and there is supposed to be a 4 hour version of this movie coming to Apple TV later on. I think time will look kindly on Napoleon, as it has on Blade Runner.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/dlkBuEdXBRc?si=9sYws8X0nDTiJ2rv" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen></iframe>

https://media.giphy.com/media/2zAIUAT11SkMg/giphy.gif

I'm disappointed... I thought this thread was gonna be about ice cream.

When you watch PBS make sure you have avocado toast!

I would rather have my gums deep cleaned .

I have had that done...not fun!
The dentist called it 'root planing' to ease my fear.:)

I saw it yesterday. I agree w/ most of the sentiments here. Could have been so much better, but it wasn't.

Went with the family yesterday.. Shaun sums it up perfectly

There were a few things that I was hoping for in the movie and one thing that puzzled me. One of the things I was hoping to see was how Napoleon was able to feed his armies. And what puzzled me was the French cavalry's inability to break through what were essentially British "pike square" formations (with guns) in the Battle of Waterloo at the end of the movie. But the pike square was invented in the 14th century.

James Burke's Connections TV series in the late 70s easily ranks as one the top 5 most brilliant TV shows of all time. I strongly recommend taking 50 minutes out of your busy schedule and watch the entire show.

If you can't, jump to 9:30 or a little earlier for the pike square bit which then leads into how food was first bottled and pasteurized before Louis Pasteur.

And, but again, watch the whole thing, you absolutely have to jump to 46 minutes to watch the next few which would have to be the best timed best shot in all of live (in the moment of filming) television history.


Click unmute in upper left corner

<div style="position:relative;padding-bottom:56.25%;height:0;overflow:hidden;"> <iframe style="width:100%;height:100%;position:absolute;le ft:0px;top:0px;overflow:hidden" frameborder="0" type="text/html" src="https://www.dailymotion.com/embed/video/x68uf3j?autoplay=1" width="100%" height="100%" allowfullscreen title="Dailymotion Video Player" allow="autoplay"> </iframe> </div>

This video is not about the movie but Napoleon the man from the perspective of Robert Greene.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Greene_(American_author)

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Zy4-0CsQCtQ?si=8cLq1ApWIXzguo31" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen></iframe>