Napoleon (2023) Review

It would have been strange to think of calling a movie on Napoleon "a toxic romance drama" before watching Ridley Scott's Napoleon. You might have even been forgiven for laughing calling it that. Funnily enough, for large parts of the movie, it is exactly that. Oh, and it takes creative liberties with historical fact multiple times. Saying that the 160-minute movie was "unexpected" is an understatement.

Ridley Scott is one of the most celebrated directors in the filmmaking world, with a career spanning over 45 years - from Blade Runner to Thelma & Louise to Gladiator to American Gangster, the man has experimented with most genres of cinema. Yet, historical drama (alongside science fiction) seems to be a recurring theme - his very first movie, The Duellists, was heavily based on the Napoleonic era.

Napoleon fittingly begins on a bloody note as young gunnery officer Napoleon Bonaparte (Joaquin Phoenix) watches French Queen Marie Antoinette sent to the guillotine in 1793. Supportive of the revolution, Napoleon quickly climbs through the ranks through exemplary leadership in war efforts - gaining access to the upper echelons of French society.

Events unfold at a furious pace, as Napoleon begins a toxic, co-dependent relationship with an older widow, Josephine de Beauharnais (Vanessa Kirby), and seeks to consolidate his standing within the ruling classes. Everything seems to be going well for the extremely popular and ambitious soldier, but nothing is forever as evidenced by history - and an ill-advised campaign in Russia slowly marks the decline of the warmongering Emperor of France.

Most people have heard of Napoleon, his military conquests, and of his inevitable defeat at Waterloo. The man changed the face of Europe, and his military conquests are studied to this day, and his eventual defeat at Waterloo has become immortalised in English parlance with the phrase "meeting your Waterloo".

Napoleon, the movie, however is less about his conquests and more about the person and his relationship with Josephine. That's not to say it doesn't show his military prowess - far from it - it just focuses more on the Napoleon-Josephine drama. And the duo, just like every teenage toxic romance out there, manufactures plenty of drama. Him cheating on her? Check. Her cheating on him? Check. Him deserting a military campaign in far-off Egypt to check on her alleged misdemeanours after her lukewarm responses to his passionate letters? Check. Her lying about whereabouts as she sneaks off behind his back? Check. Both making each other say they're nothing without the other? Check. Her lying about pregnancy? Check. Him wanting their marriage annulled because she could not give him an heir after his mother had him impregnate a mistress to check for fertility? Check. Both breaking down during said annulment and waxing lyrical about each other? Check. Him still insisting she keep the title of Empress and meeting her whenever he can, post his marriage to another younger woman - even remarking that he married her for her womb? Check. Her taking over the role of the passionate letter-writing post-divorce? Check. Him taking his newborn son to meet her? Check. Her voice appearing in his dreams as he is exiled to the island of Elba? Check. Him escaping to the mainland only to find out about her death? Check. The man's final words, even, were, "France. The Army. Josephine."

And this is where the movie excels. The film is less of a biography and more of a dramatic retelling of Napoleon's life, with his relationship with Josephine front and centre. Every scene featuring Napoleon and Josephine has tension, and you wait with bated breath to see what happens next. It's a constant "will they-won't they" back-and-forth (now I get why modern toxic romance dramas are such a guilty pleasure for a lot of people).

Napoleon's political entanglements (some absurdly comedic) and military campaigns are the other focus of the movie - with no effort being spared to display the scale of the Napoleonic Wars. The movie showcases him as an astute tactician best in its retelling of the Battle of Austerlitz - where he fought a combined Austrian and Russian alliance by initially baiting them to attack what looked like a weak French army and then forcing them to rout over a frozen lake (in reality there was no giant frozen lake at Austerlitz - just a few small frozen ponds) while bombarding them with his strong artillery.

All things being said, Napoleon is a surprising film - it drags on for a lot longer than it should have while also feeling rushed due to the historical timeline it features. The film's epic scale often clashes with its inordinate focus on his sometimes eccentric personal life - it feels like a clumsy mish-mash of two colliding plotlines. Ultimately, in wanting to be a larger-than-life spectacle, Napoleon ends up feeling bloated and historically inaccurate.

Joaquin Phoenix initially seems to be too old to play the young Napoleon, but grows into the role as the movie progresses. He looks more comfortable as a military commander than as a man infatuated with his wife - which is a large chunk of the movie, especially in its first half. Vanessa Kirby goes toe to toe with Phoenix, though we're not quite sure what to make of the pairing in terms of chemistry - it is passable.

With its spectacular visuals and top-notch production values, it feels strange to call the film dreary at points. Perhaps that is the intention, especially as we watch the downfall of Napoleon. But it feels like a jarring tonal shift - from grand romance, to comedic political engagements, to the dark blue and grey visuals of the last hour.

Napoleon is a movie trying to offer a more insightful view on Napoleon the man - in stark contrast to his portrayals as a military commander or emperor. While engaging at times, it feels a little too inconsistent, and a running time of over two and a half hours does it no favours. Watch it if you're a European history buff, but otherwise, this is an Apple Original film, so wait for it to hit Apple TV.