So Pearl Harbour…
Comment on Ridley Scott's 4-hour Napoleon cut shelved indefinitely
ArgentRaven@lemmy.world 7 months agoIt’s two totally different movies mashed together. The first one is Napoleon being an amazing general and taking over. The second is Josephine and Napoleon’s love story.
The problem is, they had to cut out half of each movie to shoehorn in the plots from both, so neither is really well done. Why is Napoleon out in a position of leadership, and why is he so good at being a general? How did he get enough support to essentially take over and become emperor? No idea. Why did Josephine cheat on him, and did he cheat on her? Why did they stay together for so long? Where did she come from, how did she feel about suddenly becoming Empress? Did they start treating each other differently? Was an heir important to either of them personally, or was it a political requirement? Again, no idea.
This movie couldn’t figure out if it wanted to be military history, or a love story. Pick a lane!
boogetyboo@aussie.zone 7 months ago
CraigeryTheKid@lemm.ee 7 months ago
We just watched it as well, and as someone who only had BASIC knowledge of Napoleon, your comment is a very good summary.
So many jumps in the movie were not only time jumps of unknown time - but also jumps between good leader, bad leader, good lover, bad lover – and sometimes it was really hard to keep track. Also, Joaquin was very stoic and flat - was that good acting as Napoleon? Or him being Joaquin?
In the end, we are 2 very easy to please viewers, and our rating is “it was okay”.