Review: OverEdited ‘Napoleon Cant Conquer Its Shortcomings
After the near-billion-dollar success of Christopher Nolan's Oppenheimer , Ridley Scott enters the awards season race with the acclaimed biopic Napoleon. But with the 4-hour, 10-minute broadcast version on Apple TV+, this heavily edited 2-hour, 38-minute Napoleon theater can't make up for its shortcomings.
Financially, with a $200 million budget, Napoleon needed a successful theatrical run to recoup costs at the box office. While this is a movie from a studio that doesn't care about ticket sales and all that, the same can be said of Apple Studios' Venom Killer, which has since grossed $146 million worldwide. In a separate article today – five weeks after its release – I explained why I wanted to look at the box office from different angles, including the financial aspect of theaters as the main engine of films.
At $20 million, Napoleon won't surpass Disney's animated dream this long weekend, but it has a chance to do a little better, both domestically and internationally. I wouldn't be surprised if it was around $25-30 million, though I expect it to be around $20-25 million now.
More from Forbes Review: 'The Killer' is a slow thriller from Mark Hughes .Long-term prospects are good if Napoleon gets good audience response and can do well next week in the holiday and awards season spotlight. While I think Oppenheimer will dominate the Oscar nominations (and probably win a bunch of awards, including Best Picture, Best Director, and Best Actor, as well as Best Supporting Actor, Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Art Direction, etc.), I think Napoleon will also be in some conversation, although mostly offline. He might face long odds in higher categories. But the fact is that he will benefit from any noise and certainly any criticism.
However, the film would not achieve nearly the level of success that Oppenheimer would have liked. The film does not expect to reach these numbers, although in terms of the total budget it needs more than Nolan's films. I would be shocked if it reached $300 million. Of course, I expect something around $200-250 million on the cards, unless the global figure is higher than expected.
This is a strange film to review for many reasons. While it's painfully obvious that I've only seen half of the movie, I had no idea that the full version would be on Apple TV later this year. The film is structured in such a way that you feel you are only seeing the backbone of the story, there is no connective tissue and most of the large scale fight sequences are casually interspersed with historical references to riches and romantic relationships.
Check out 5 more FORBES films on the 60th anniversary of JFK's assassination by Mark HughesI knew I was watching a war and I understood its unique role in the rise and fall of Napoleon, but the choices of what to present and how to present it seemed unexamined when it was out of the larger battle has been removed. Rich context. What I think (I always know what's missing because I've seen the movie) is shown in the finished image.
Why do we watch this or that fight? What exactly are we supposed to feel more than just watching a big, large-scale, action-packed, realistic fight sequence?
The scale and visuals are amazing, but to be honest, I'm tired of watching a movie or TV show where two giant armies clash because it has so little to do with what's in the movie. History. And only now it shows stereotypically big fights.
Napoleon made it better. If you like these types of action sequences, you'll find some things here to like. But outside of their exact technical place in the timeline of events, they feel disconnected from the rest of the film. Otherwise, the film is a cheesy comedy that deconstructs a well-known historical romance but only highlights its highlights, with the leads occasionally underperforming.
More from Forbes The "Hunger Games" prequel is a failed franchise set in 2023 by Mark Hughes .A situation is created, only to disappear completely after a few minutes, undermining whatever tension and crisis the story has. Again, I think the 4 hour 10 minute version on Apple TV contains the original conclusion and more exploration leading up to the sequel, but that doesn't save the theatrical version from being rushed. Change of direction. Costs
The engine that drives the story is Napoleon's relationship with Josephine, who finds himself in a series of encounters and partings that are both disturbing (often deliberately) and hilarious. Aside from some Charlie Chaplin stories, Phoenix's portrayal of love is sassy, fun and funny. He is bold and arrogant when thinking or executing war plans. In any context, Phoenix displays a willful lack of self-awareness that makes his character, historical accuracy or not, entertaining and well-acted.
Vanessa Kirby elevates an underdeveloped character by evoking the weariness of a woman she knows through endless power struggles and the ups and downs of her fortune. He spends most of his time in scenes where Josephine is in tears, gasping in shock and swinging between bitter and low. His rule over Napoleon has been described as very narrow and mainly the exercise of his will, usually with a sense of humor. Otherwise, it becomes a prop in this over-edited version of the film, with no room to act on events or develop a deeper plot.
If there is nothing to make those moments part of life and time, if it is a matter of "it happened, it happened", then only the simple fruit of the story can survive. Although the film is 2 hours and 38 minutes long, it is often enough to explain everything necessary for the story.
MORE FROM FORBES 'Killers of the Flower Moon' is unfortunately the big budget of 2023, Mark HughesIf it was the political motivation and love story with Josephine, the battlefield condemnation was kept to a minimum to focus the story on the "home front" and maximize time for personal relationships and day-to-day leadership, then I'd say . It will be satar. There would have been better results and the story seemed more coherent, even if it was cut by more than half of what it was supposed to be.
Likewise, a film that focuses on Napoleon in battle and his rise to victory and fall to defeat challenges the nature of war in a number of ways, including events surrounding marriages, coronations, and death in exile in France. Shut down and focus more on the fight.
But combining the two requires simplifying both approaches so that neither works properly and loses the connections needed to work simultaneously. This is really disappointing because there is enough information to explain what is missing and how to fix (and probably did) many things that were not done in this theatrical version.
That's not to say I don't love editing more than half of the 4-hour, 10-minute Napoleon historical site, which includes half a dozen epic battle scenes and plenty of absurd romantic comedy. Not to mention various issues of power struggle and loss of power. (I mean, spoiler alert, but isn't it too much?)
More from Forbes Will 'Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom' Beat the 2023 Box Office Curse? By Mark HughesI think this exercise shows why a director like Ridley Scott's greatest strength in working with Apple Studios is his ability and power to realize this kind of creative vision, unfettered by working hours and market demands. Parallel interest. This can be counterproductive for cinema (and require excessive editing).
Yes, I understand that Scott wants a theatrical release and that Apple wants to be more successful in theaters. Not to mention that the theatrical release helped promote the film exclusively on the streaming service for several weeks, making the film eligible for awards consideration.
But most of this is due to an internal bias that thinks movies that aren't playing in theaters aren't as serious or high quality and may not be "real" movies (as charged). Finished). , more than once and by many famous directors). I disagree, and I think it might be worth more to someone like Scott today: he has a deep understanding of theatrical releases and studios' decades-long desire for quality versions of their films. Great role. My role in reassessing the consultant film : to simply allow him to make the film the way he wants and release it as an incredible 4 hour full piece.
It's finally a negative review, which makes me sad , because I had high hopes for Napoleon . But the bottom line is that I got a taste of what I hope Scott has to say in his 4+ hour edition, so I'll probably be back here again to express his love for the AppleTV+ version . That was the case with AppleTV+. The consultant's director's adjustment.
Napoleon is disintegrated and reduced to a smaller version of himself, which is not what he intended. I can appreciate some things and I can say nothing is really "bad", but a lot of them have lost steam and feel like a series of short and well-made clips that never fit together. It has very little to say.
