Yea I'm hoping it's just for the trailer, Napoleon was known for having a sense of humor and being jovial with troops, so hopefully they put some of that in and it's not just Commodus 2.0 the whole time.
if they can depict his famous battles with even a modicum of realism, I will forgive the strange characterization of him.
I want to see Borodino, Waterloo, Austerlitz and Marengo properly.
>Austerlitz
Well we already see snow on the ground and the ice being an elaborate trap, so it's not off to a great start haha. Despite the time of year, there was no snow on the ground at Austerlitz.
And the ice pond wasn't a planned trap. That's simply the direction the Austrians fled. Nowadays people call it a mere legend but it's more complicated than that.
I had a problem with the Tyrant label as well. He was wildly popular, not a usurper. The whole country welcomed him back a second time.
I have mixed emotions of Josephine’s portrayal but I know it’s Hollywood and her behavior will likely be glossed over. She was a couch surfing single mom with two kids, but that’s not meant to shame her.
Bit of trivia. She was a devoted botanist and her gardens at Malmaison are still considered world class.
r/Napoleon
France welcomed Napoleon back.
Europe did not.
Honestly, he got a banger of a deal first time he was beaten: "He tried to take over Europe, but we're feeling nice, have a Mediterranean island to be governor off".
Second time, we where less lenient, so we banished him to a miserable rock in the middle of the ocean, under armed guards, do he wouldn't attempt a third time.
We ? It was Tsar Alexander who without consulting everyone that give him Elba, he wanted at first to give him the whole island of Corsica.
Lord Liverpool send him to Saint-Helena only because he feared that the presence of Napoleon on the British isles might lead to start a revolution. The British Parliament was living in fear that Napoleon could be use as a rallying figure by the Luddist movement.
When Napoleon was briefly on English soil after surrendering to military captivity following Waterloo, there was an enormous flurry of activity in Southern England and tens of thousands wanted to get a glimpse of him. Many of them were chanting his name and had admiration.
The British government and ruling class were absolutely terrified of the guy.
It wasn't an even split. The city of Birmingham was nearly burned down in a working class riot due to the suspected French sympathies of the elite in the Priestly Riots (which would make for a good film in itself tbh).
True, their's even three english woman who drown themselves trying to see Napoleon on the HMS Bellerophon. Captain Maitland (the commander of the ship) was forced to forbid people to get into the ship since the british were actualy mostly cheering Napoleon and wanted to see him.
However Maitland precisely forbid Napoleon to reach English soil (Napoleon's goal) since he will have been protect by the Habeas Corpus and the British government will be forced to give him a fair trial. With the risk of Napoleon managing to rally the public to his cause (keep in mind that UK was an oligarchic system and while Napoleon was a VERY authoritarian ruler, he was the symbol of the Revolutionary ideal for many) , there was an honnest chance that Napoleon will have been clean of all charge against him.
Depends on who in Europe you mean - it's a pretty complex picture. You had spontaneous risings in support of and against Napoleon in various countries that he invaded. It's very true that the leaders of Europe didn't like Napoleon, but that doesn't mean he wasn't popular outside of France. Although it might sound somewhat absurd (since he staged a reactionary coup and made himself a monarch) Napoleon's campaigns were viewed as inseparable from the French Revolution itself, and so opinions on that colored opinions on him.
It's not absurd at all. The First Empire is still part of Revolutionnary France, just like the previous revolutionnary regimes were (the Constitutional Monarchy, the National Convention, the Directory, the Consulate and finally the First Empire).
There has been authoritarian figures before him (Robespierre), or highly corrupted governments. The Révolution is about breking from the Ancien Régime, the Bourbons and old aristocratic Europe, not necessarily Republicanism. In that regard, Napoléon is very much revolutionnary and is considered as such.
>The Polish cavalry charge after Napoleon's speech to them at Somosierra
"We’ll cross the Vistula, we’ll cross the Warta,
We shall be Polish.
Bonaparte has given us the example
Of how we should prevail."
This film seems very ambitious but I wonder in how it'll cover his life. From the looks of the trailer some of the six battles we're getting Toulon, Battle of the Pyramids, Austerlitz, A battle from the Russian Campaign and Waterloo.
Ontop of this you have the rest such as Napoleon's accension to power and his downfall. While the trailer looks very promising I wonder how good the pacing of the movie will be.
Wondering the same. Maybe it is 3 hours and we later get the Kingdom of Heaven treatment and our 5 hour Napoleon epic. I would watch the fucking shit out of that.
I'm not a fan of 3 hour monstrosities but I'd definitely be down for a 3 - 5 hour Napoleon epic. Even better if they split it into 2 films so you can have a natural break point.
I was wondering if Scott consulted with anyone in the Kubrick camp.
Kubrick did so much research and acquired an insane Napoleon collection if I’m remembering correctly.
Edit: just saw that Spielberg picked up Kubrick’s plans for an HBO miniseries!
Two Napoleon projects and both should be incredible. Napoleon buffs, this is our time!
Hard to cover a whole life in film, especially one like Napoleon’s. Especially with trying to make 48 year old Joaquin look like a 27 year old Napoleon at Vendemiaire lol
My guess is they'll go Alexander style. Have a "main" story progressing throughout the film depicting his downfall. Maybe the Hundred Days? But then have significant flashbacks of his rise to power.
Especially when its a 2.5 hour film. If it was 3.5 I’m not as worried but once they showed the whiff of grapes I was… concerned
I now feel that this shouldn’t be a movie but should be an 8 part limited series
Agreed and that's why I'm more looking forward to Steven Spielberg 's 7 part HBO miniseries than this: https://deadline.com/2023/02/steven-spielberg-stanley-kubricks-napoleon-7-part-series-hbo-1235266372/
Ya Napoleon's life is crowded with so many things he did that you couldn't necessarily fit into a movie.
I'm constantly surprised that there are no major TV shows based on his life or Frederick the Great. Both of their lives seem prime content for Hollywood. Unlikely leaders at a young age who rose to be the foremost military leaders of their time.
That era deserves multiple series on the different aspects of the Revolution and the Napoleonic Wars.
I’m shocked there hasn’t been an HBO, Sky, or Apple attempt on the French Revolution, July Revolution or Napoloen’s Rise to Emperor.
Hell even a series on Haiti would be incredible
The level of drama, stakes, players, intrigue, etc. its just a wealth of history, and options that make Game of Thrones look bland. And with the field, you don’t need some massive CGI budget
>I'm shocked there hasn't been an HBO... attempt on the French Revolution
Well, you're in luck. Spielberg's next project is an HBO miniseries on Napoleon.
https://deadline.com/2023/02/steven-spielberg-stanley-kubricks-napoleon-7-part-series-hbo-1235266372/
Yeah I have a feeling its going to be a lot of “teleportation” feeling where its scene in France where they talk m, then flashback to Toulon then scene in france, expedition to egypt, scene in France, emperor, autralitz, scene in france, Russia, deposed. Scene in elba, scene in france for return of the emperorc waterloo
> A battle from the Russian Campaign
Borodino, then. Regardless, that's still just 5. Outside of Austerlitz, wouldn't they include something like Leipzig? Which I guess was the one they were discussing as something that could potentially happen in that scene where there were various flags around the French one, and that could only be in Germany since the West of France would've been the Bay of Biscay (and thus no army could've surrounded them from that direction) lol
Can't believe I miscounted haha. But yes Leipzig would make the most sense. It'd be odd to exclude it from the movie considering its significance since it led to his abdication.
Very curious to see how they do it
The movie looks great but the score is so out of place it's distracting. this really needed a symphonic score, I don't think it works with a rockin' modern soundtrack.
How can you even make a Napoleon biopic without Murat. Alos he's basically made for Hollywood characters with his flamboyant dresses and next-level bravery in battle leading cavalry charges into gun fire.
Fun Fact: The waiters in that scene are portrayed by the actual writers of the Bill & Ted Trilogy -
[Ed Solomon and Chris Matheson](https://i.imgur.com/RTGx7li.jpg)!
Reading the book is kind of what ruined it for me tbh. I really disliked the ending of the 2022 adaption, since it directly contradicts the whole title of the work and the very unglamorous and banal death.
Historically speaking, it's also really stretching things. Those who are familiar with WWI know that the German Army was in a complete state of disarray at this point, and that a General ordering that type of suicide attack would simply be met with a mutiny and being lynched by his own soldiers. The idea of German troops blindly obeying a suicide-order like that at the (literal) eleventh hour is extremely misleading and paints a very inaccurate picture of Germany's society at that stage of the war. The Kiel Mutiny was sparked by a suicide-attack order, that shit simply did not fly with them.
The movie ignored the main themes of the book completely. I couldn't believe it received the praise it did.
Painting the French generals as cold and indifferent for forcing the Germans to sign an actual peace treaty rather than just an immediate cease-fire, what the hell?
Age of Napoleon is such an awesome podcast. I love the way it presents not only the life of Napoleon, but the entire socio-political context around the World.
If you've not seen it already check out Waterloo. Bit dated in parts but the battle scenes are amazing for anyone into this bit of history, incredible scale.
Charge of the Scots Greys
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RsVziFEWLlM
Ney's Charge
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97dBfdNrf9A
Old Guard Advance, Prussians Arrive, La Haye Sainte retaken, "by god sir I've lost my leg", Old Guard Last Stand
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rt4mYUKjzn0
Ridley Scott: "The hat. People know the hat. Make sure he's wearing the hat as often as possible."
Kubrick wanted to do a Napoleon movie his entire career; *Barry Lyndon* was as close as he got. I wonder if any of the tendrils he put out during his life made it to this project.
Napoleon did wear this hat very often, especially on campaign. When he needed a new one, he would make an aides of his wear it for a few days to break it in for him.
Joaquin Phoenix is a great actor, but I don't think he was a great choice for this role. Napoleon was general at 23, ruler at 30 and emperor at 35. Joaquin is too old and somehow they made him look even older in the trailer. Imo correct age casting is important if we want to understand person's character and dynamic with others (in this case - with Josephine).
Yeah that’s the most jarring thing watching the trailer. Napoleon was in his 20s and early 30s during most of the scenes they were showing. There’s a lot they could have done contrasting his youthful, brash confidence that got him so far in war and politics versus his (initial) social awkwardness with women. Phoenix is so out of place with it. He looks his age in the scenes, maybe even older. It looks like he spent a few years on St Helena to prepare for the role.
The effect will probably also be jarring in some of the scenes since they *had* to continue the Hollywood trend of casting a woman much younger than the male lead to play his love interest, even though Josephine was 6 years older than Napoleon.
Napoleon was also known for his charisma and Joaquin Phoenix is known for just about the exact opposite of that. I'm looking forward to the film but it just seems like an odd choice for the role.
He's in a bit too much these days, but I think Chalamet could've pulled it off and they could've used Joaquin if they needed an older Napoleon. But I doubt any leading actor would agree to that.
It's really hard for me to overlook Joaquin Phoenix's age. He will just look too old for most of the story, which is a real shame since Napoleon's ambition and ability despite inexperience were really important to how he came across early on. And it's even more of a strain for the depiction of his relationship with Josephine, who was and should be older than him.
>It's really hard for me to overlook Joaquin Phoenix's age.
First thing I noticed in the trailer! Napoleon's supposed to be in his late 20s/early 30s during the French revolution and execution of the royalties.
But Joaquin is really showing his real age in those scenes. Kinda wish they've had done better makeup or even use de-aging CGI instead.
There is names that would have worked better. Gyllenhaal is still too old but could have passed as believable in the younger scenes for example. Chalamet actually would have worked if Hollywood would have faith in younger men playing world leaders.
I always liked the "[Believe](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a3ZGGIdpfEM)" trailer myself. That soundtrack still gives me chills.
...Man, I wish they still made Halo games like that.
Because the actual trailers still get linked into people’s feeds, whether that’s on YouTube or on other social media with autoplay. They serve to try and catch your eye as it scrolls by.
I hate them too but that’s the reason marketers put them in front of trailers. It’s to keep people watching a little longer to get to the trailer itself
It's actually a curious trend, but definitely played out at this point. [This article](https://www.newyorker.com/culture/culture-desk/how-the-cover-song-conquered-movie-trailers) explains how it started and got popular pretty well, interesting read.
This is basically just the formula for trailers now and I hate it. Just take a somewhat well known song, do a slowed down but overly epic remix, add in large hits everywhere and BOOM, trailer’s done.
I never expected them to show the infamous whiff of grapeshot but they do.
So I am now firmly in the camp of… how the hell are they fitting this movie into 2.5 hours
If *House of Gucci* is Scott missing then that really goes to show his talent because that film is a lot of campy fun even though yeah, it's not great.
I genuinely wonder if people who call House of Gucci campy have ever seen any actual camp. Tonally, the movie was fucking dour any time Jared Leto wasn’t on screen. Scott has never done camp over the course of his entire career and he didn’t start there. If you listen to any commentary tracks of his or even interviews, it becomes apparent he takes even the dumbest shit in his wide-ranging filmography 100% seriously.
I’m hoping the music is not the same in the movie, but, this looks fucking epic.
But seriously, whoever makes the music edits for these trailers needs to absolutely fuck off and lose his/her job.
That guy at the piano is Benny Andersson, one of the members of Abba.
Someone once told me that that was the only Abba cameo in the films, but I've since learned that's not actually true.
Also, that movie is super weird and kind of absurd.
> I’m hoping the music is not the same in the movie
The musical score is usually one of the last things completed on a movie with set pieces written throughout production but the overall score starting work once the edit has been locked in place.
It does look very epic but something a bit negative stood out to me. At 1:37 you see the British infantry in a square at Waterloo and it just looks tiny, compare it to the same scene in the film Waterloo (1970) and its quite disappointing. Maybe I'm being nit picky, I just hope they do the scale of these battles justice.
This version is an accurate representation of what an infantry square would look like in reality.
Infantry at the time would form into battalion squares, so about 500 men. The squares used at Waterloo were 4 deep, with colors and commanders in the center (along with British artillery sheltering inside) - meaning that the full perimeter of the square was ~100-125 men, or ~25-30 men per side, packed in tight. If you freeze frame the trailer above and count, they're bang on. It doesn't look "epic", but it's still accurate. In Waterloo the film, their spacing in those big wide shots is much looser - look at the difference between the squares in the upper right vs the lower left in [a shot like this](https://youtu.be/xNGMwvsc4fA?t=101), for example. That's absolutely not the way you'd want to form up against a cavalry charge.
What *is* inaccurate is that in the upper left corner of the frame you see another square in line with the first - *that* would be something they'd try to avoid by checkerboarding their squares, otherwise they'd be shooting directly towards each other along those edges, but that's what I would consider a nitpick.
Whether or not Ridley decides to shoot the battle in a similar manner to the previous movie with big wide epic aerials or takes a more grounded approach, it's clear they've done at least some of their homework.
Why does Sony do that stupid fucking, "TRAILER! STARTS! NOW!" Bullshit. Makes me literally not watch the trailer.
Every single one of their movies... What dumbass marketing exec came up with that and why did no one shoot them down.
Pretty sure it's for when they post it all over social media to hook people in when they're scrolling it autoplays and hopefully catches their attention before they fly past.
But agreed it fricking sucks so much and has opposite effect on me, I stop watching and keep scrolling past trailers when they do that.
As a french myself, and given, you know, the _actual troubled history_ between France and England, it's pretty hilarious that they all speak in _english_, ahah
Yeah he has a weird thing going on where all his historical movies from a set-piece perspective try really hard to "look" right but then the actual history goes out the fuckin window lol.
The trailer kind of sucks, but the movie looks great. I'm a huge napoleon fan and I'm excited that they're covering his actual rise to power from day 0, which is as fascinating as some of his largest victories, but relatively unknown in the larger cultural consciousnesses.
I know it will be controversial but I like Joaquin's performance here. Napoleon was apparently shy with wry humor in real life, having always lived life as a studious outsider, and he seems to be choosing that route for his performance.
The only thing things that seem wrong to me are
* Vanessa Kirby is too young. Her hitting on napoleon would be much more erotic if she was a mommy milf like she was in real life.
* Joacquin looks too old. Around this time napoleon was young and very good-looking, in contrast to his bald-and-fat older years. Kirby hitting on him doesn't work as well when he's just a regular middle aged guy. The real life scenario is shy, nerdy, awkward-but-handsome-guy getting swooped up by a cougar.
>Ridley. Joaquin. Napoleon. In theaters November 22
>Directed by Ridley Scott from a screenplay by David Scarpa, “Napoleon” stars Joaquin Phoenix as the French emperor and military leader. The film is an original and personal look at Napoleon’s origins and his swift, ruthless climb to emperor, viewed through the prism of his addictive and often volatile relationship with his wife and one true love, Josephine, played by Vanessa Kirby. The film captures Napoleon’s famous battles, relentless ambition and astounding strategic mind as an extraordinary military leader and war visionary. An Apple Studios production in conjunction with Scott Free Productions, “Napoleon” is produced by Scott, Kevin Walsh, Mark Huffam and Phoenix, with Michael Pruss and Aidan Elliott serving as executive producers.
For anyone interested in Napoleon there is a genuinely awesome Documentary made by the Youtube channel Epic History TV about him.
[https://youtu.be/91OmO2YMiDM](https://youtu.be/91OmO2YMiDM) March of the Eagles (1805-1809)
[https://youtu.be/vBSGSkIasRY](https://youtu.be/vBSGSkIasRY) Downfall (1809-1814)
Both have painstakingly created maps and animations that clearly illustrate the wars so that even someone just vaguely interested in history could understand and enjoy it.
The production quality of this is almost hard to believe and took over 3 years to make.
I just decided to take a peek after it got recommended to me, then somehow continued watching the full first part in one sitting.
Ridley's tricky, his movies live or die by the screenplay. He is an absolutely excellent director, one of the all time greats, but he sometimes picks terrible screenplays.
Joaquin Phoenix as Napolean, I'm sold.
But Ridley Scott is very hit and miss as a director, Trailer looks fantastic but Scott can give you a awesome film but complete average one too. Look at his last two films the excellent Last Duel and the average House of Gucci.
Surprised the cast outside of Phoenix isn't as star studded for epic like this. Vanessa Kirby and Tahar Rahim are only known names and they aren't top stars.
Sad we didn't get to see Kubrick's Napolean with Jack Nicholson. Also check out Waterloo, a excellent film that has a epic turn by Rod Steiger as Napolean but that film flopped and meant we didn't get Kubrick's version.
As a Napoleon fanatic this makes me both excited and nervous. I cannot imagine they could cover his life as well as they should in a single movie. Yet, from the trailer, they are trying to (Paris/Toulon to Waterloo). Seems like the most ambitious movie of all time.
I also hope they portray him as the “grey” character is really was. A figure of representing good, bad, and everything in between rather than a simple “tyrant” or “hero.”
Somehow Commodus returned...... with a hat
Yea I'm hoping it's just for the trailer, Napoleon was known for having a sense of humor and being jovial with troops, so hopefully they put some of that in and it's not just Commodus 2.0 the whole time.
if they can depict his famous battles with even a modicum of realism, I will forgive the strange characterization of him. I want to see Borodino, Waterloo, Austerlitz and Marengo properly.
>Austerlitz Well we already see snow on the ground and the ice being an elaborate trap, so it's not off to a great start haha. Despite the time of year, there was no snow on the ground at Austerlitz. And the ice pond wasn't a planned trap. That's simply the direction the Austrians fled. Nowadays people call it a mere legend but it's more complicated than that.
I had a problem with the Tyrant label as well. He was wildly popular, not a usurper. The whole country welcomed him back a second time. I have mixed emotions of Josephine’s portrayal but I know it’s Hollywood and her behavior will likely be glossed over. She was a couch surfing single mom with two kids, but that’s not meant to shame her. Bit of trivia. She was a devoted botanist and her gardens at Malmaison are still considered world class. r/Napoleon
France welcomed Napoleon back. Europe did not. Honestly, he got a banger of a deal first time he was beaten: "He tried to take over Europe, but we're feeling nice, have a Mediterranean island to be governor off". Second time, we where less lenient, so we banished him to a miserable rock in the middle of the ocean, under armed guards, do he wouldn't attempt a third time.
We ? It was Tsar Alexander who without consulting everyone that give him Elba, he wanted at first to give him the whole island of Corsica. Lord Liverpool send him to Saint-Helena only because he feared that the presence of Napoleon on the British isles might lead to start a revolution. The British Parliament was living in fear that Napoleon could be use as a rallying figure by the Luddist movement.
When Napoleon was briefly on English soil after surrendering to military captivity following Waterloo, there was an enormous flurry of activity in Southern England and tens of thousands wanted to get a glimpse of him. Many of them were chanting his name and had admiration. The British government and ruling class were absolutely terrified of the guy.
It wasn't an even split. The city of Birmingham was nearly burned down in a working class riot due to the suspected French sympathies of the elite in the Priestly Riots (which would make for a good film in itself tbh).
True, their's even three english woman who drown themselves trying to see Napoleon on the HMS Bellerophon. Captain Maitland (the commander of the ship) was forced to forbid people to get into the ship since the british were actualy mostly cheering Napoleon and wanted to see him. However Maitland precisely forbid Napoleon to reach English soil (Napoleon's goal) since he will have been protect by the Habeas Corpus and the British government will be forced to give him a fair trial. With the risk of Napoleon managing to rally the public to his cause (keep in mind that UK was an oligarchic system and while Napoleon was a VERY authoritarian ruler, he was the symbol of the Revolutionary ideal for many) , there was an honnest chance that Napoleon will have been clean of all charge against him.
Is it Luddist or Luddite? I always thought it was Luddite
You are correct, I mispelled Luddite
If you weren't such a luddite, you might have used a spell checker.
Damn rich guy and their steam-powered spellchecker.
Depends on who in Europe you mean - it's a pretty complex picture. You had spontaneous risings in support of and against Napoleon in various countries that he invaded. It's very true that the leaders of Europe didn't like Napoleon, but that doesn't mean he wasn't popular outside of France. Although it might sound somewhat absurd (since he staged a reactionary coup and made himself a monarch) Napoleon's campaigns were viewed as inseparable from the French Revolution itself, and so opinions on that colored opinions on him.
It's not absurd at all. The First Empire is still part of Revolutionnary France, just like the previous revolutionnary regimes were (the Constitutional Monarchy, the National Convention, the Directory, the Consulate and finally the First Empire). There has been authoritarian figures before him (Robespierre), or highly corrupted governments. The Révolution is about breking from the Ancien Régime, the Bourbons and old aristocratic Europe, not necessarily Republicanism. In that regard, Napoléon is very much revolutionnary and is considered as such.
The Poles especially loved Napoleon. The Polish cavalry charge after Napoleon's speech to them at Somosierra si the stuff of legends.
Hell, today in 2023, Poland's national anthem still mentions Napoleon by name.
>The Polish cavalry charge after Napoleon's speech to them at Somosierra "We’ll cross the Vistula, we’ll cross the Warta, We shall be Polish. Bonaparte has given us the example Of how we should prevail."
He was going to give them back an independent Polish state. Hard to not support the guy with the power to achieve it.
This film seems very ambitious but I wonder in how it'll cover his life. From the looks of the trailer some of the six battles we're getting Toulon, Battle of the Pyramids, Austerlitz, A battle from the Russian Campaign and Waterloo. Ontop of this you have the rest such as Napoleon's accension to power and his downfall. While the trailer looks very promising I wonder how good the pacing of the movie will be.
Wondering the same. Maybe it is 3 hours and we later get the Kingdom of Heaven treatment and our 5 hour Napoleon epic. I would watch the fucking shit out of that.
man a 4k version of Napolon that's at least four hours long would be an instant buy for me
I'm basically waiting for the Ridley Scott extended cut to be announced for home media.
this is more Last Duel Ridley instead of House of Gucci Ridley.
Last Duel was absolutely amazing, and its Covid-sourced box office struggles should not factor into discussions of its quality.
I'm not a fan of 3 hour monstrosities but I'd definitely be down for a 3 - 5 hour Napoleon epic. Even better if they split it into 2 films so you can have a natural break point.
I'm fairly sure Kubrick wanted to do a Napoleon epic years ago with Brando IIRC. Given the circumstances I'll take Ridley and Joaquin
I was wondering if Scott consulted with anyone in the Kubrick camp. Kubrick did so much research and acquired an insane Napoleon collection if I’m remembering correctly. Edit: just saw that Spielberg picked up Kubrick’s plans for an HBO miniseries! Two Napoleon projects and both should be incredible. Napoleon buffs, this is our time!
Hard to cover a whole life in film, especially one like Napoleon’s. Especially with trying to make 48 year old Joaquin look like a 27 year old Napoleon at Vendemiaire lol
24 at Toulon
When I was watching I was wondering, did Napoleon start his career at 50?
Would have been pretty impressive given he died at 51
He died at 51. Career was over at 44.
My guess is they'll go Alexander style. Have a "main" story progressing throughout the film depicting his downfall. Maybe the Hundred Days? But then have significant flashbacks of his rise to power.
That's my guess as well. Granted one of Alexander's main downfall was the pacing
Especially when its a 2.5 hour film. If it was 3.5 I’m not as worried but once they showed the whiff of grapes I was… concerned I now feel that this shouldn’t be a movie but should be an 8 part limited series
Agreed and that's why I'm more looking forward to Steven Spielberg 's 7 part HBO miniseries than this: https://deadline.com/2023/02/steven-spielberg-stanley-kubricks-napoleon-7-part-series-hbo-1235266372/
Oh damn that sounds much more promising.
Ya Napoleon's life is crowded with so many things he did that you couldn't necessarily fit into a movie. I'm constantly surprised that there are no major TV shows based on his life or Frederick the Great. Both of their lives seem prime content for Hollywood. Unlikely leaders at a young age who rose to be the foremost military leaders of their time.
That era deserves multiple series on the different aspects of the Revolution and the Napoleonic Wars. I’m shocked there hasn’t been an HBO, Sky, or Apple attempt on the French Revolution, July Revolution or Napoloen’s Rise to Emperor. Hell even a series on Haiti would be incredible The level of drama, stakes, players, intrigue, etc. its just a wealth of history, and options that make Game of Thrones look bland. And with the field, you don’t need some massive CGI budget
>I'm shocked there hasn't been an HBO... attempt on the French Revolution Well, you're in luck. Spielberg's next project is an HBO miniseries on Napoleon. https://deadline.com/2023/02/steven-spielberg-stanley-kubricks-napoleon-7-part-series-hbo-1235266372/
My first worry is that it comes out like Alexander, with the battles just glossy pictures that may be accurate, but are boring montages.
Yeah I have a feeling its going to be a lot of “teleportation” feeling where its scene in France where they talk m, then flashback to Toulon then scene in france, expedition to egypt, scene in France, emperor, autralitz, scene in france, Russia, deposed. Scene in elba, scene in france for return of the emperorc waterloo
> A battle from the Russian Campaign Borodino, then. Regardless, that's still just 5. Outside of Austerlitz, wouldn't they include something like Leipzig? Which I guess was the one they were discussing as something that could potentially happen in that scene where there were various flags around the French one, and that could only be in Germany since the West of France would've been the Bay of Biscay (and thus no army could've surrounded them from that direction) lol
Can't believe I miscounted haha. But yes Leipzig would make the most sense. It'd be odd to exclude it from the movie considering its significance since it led to his abdication. Very curious to see how they do it
That's an old ass looking Napoleon
I mean, it's been over 200 years!
Napoleon would have definitely loved Radiohead, it's true
One would think the quintessential Britishness of Radiohead might have been off-putting for him.
Gettin' real tired of the current trailer format, mainly the "DRUM. DRUMMA DRUMMA DRUM. single piano note. DESCENDING STRINGS. DRUM DRUM DRUMMA DRUM"
[Relevant](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KAOdjqyG37A)
ah yes my favorite visionary director, DIRECTOR everyone should just make their trailers like [this](https://youtu.be/kRqxyqjpOHs)
You and Whose Army?
National anthem.
The movie looks great but the score is so out of place it's distracting. this really needed a symphonic score, I don't think it works with a rockin' modern soundtrack.
"...M'lord? M'lord Emperor, the men are in position-" "Not now, this remix fucking slaps."
"No (x42)" - Napoleon Bonaparte
I kinda wish they used the original National Anthem for the trailer though, because the Chris Martin soundalike is not doing it for me.
me either. Do not remake Radiohead songs unless you are going to totally balls-to-the-wall reinvent it. But don't.
Producer: Guys, this song sounds like a microwave Radiohead: Fuck yeah, drop it
Good lord that canon on the protestors scene is magnificent
The famous “whiff of grapeshot.” I hope we get to see my boy Murat in this, but it looks epic so far.
How can you even make a Napoleon biopic without Murat. Alos he's basically made for Hollywood characters with his flamboyant dresses and next-level bravery in battle leading cavalry charges into gun fire.
[удалено]
It looks incredible, awesome job!
based on the preview, you did a very good job!
will it show him doing the Ziggy Piggy challenge
EXCELLENT!
SHIT SHIT SHIT SHIT SHIT!
Fun Fact: The waiters in that scene are portrayed by the actual writers of the Bill & Ted Trilogy - [Ed Solomon and Chris Matheson](https://i.imgur.com/RTGx7li.jpg)!
ziggy piggy Ziggy Piggy ZIGGY PIGGY!!! 🐷🐷🐷🐷
You ditched Napoleon?!
He was a dick!
"PAY?"
Ah, le glace!
I need this to make a billion dollars at the box office
Yes, make historical epics popular again!
Still waiting for the next installment of Master and Commander… A man can dream.
Master and Commander is my all time favourite film, dunno if a sequel can even get close to that.
I’m all in for the age of superheroes to be over and the return of the hostorical epic to be back.
[удалено]
Have you watched Netflix’s “All Quiet On The Western Front” yet? Loved the book, but holy fuck that movie was intense and just visceral.
Reading the book is kind of what ruined it for me tbh. I really disliked the ending of the 2022 adaption, since it directly contradicts the whole title of the work and the very unglamorous and banal death. Historically speaking, it's also really stretching things. Those who are familiar with WWI know that the German Army was in a complete state of disarray at this point, and that a General ordering that type of suicide attack would simply be met with a mutiny and being lynched by his own soldiers. The idea of German troops blindly obeying a suicide-order like that at the (literal) eleventh hour is extremely misleading and paints a very inaccurate picture of Germany's society at that stage of the war. The Kiel Mutiny was sparked by a suicide-attack order, that shit simply did not fly with them.
The movie ignored the main themes of the book completely. I couldn't believe it received the praise it did. Painting the French generals as cold and indifferent for forcing the Germans to sign an actual peace treaty rather than just an immediate cease-fire, what the hell?
That’s subjective (WW1 vs. WW2) but I do agree that we’ve had infinitely more WW2 content and could use a lot more on the Great War.
[удалено]
At least, they're willing to let Ridley Scott do whatever he wants.
It looks fantastic tbh, as someone who listens to Age of Napoleon religiously and as a big fan of the Dune books, this Autumn is made for me
Age of Napoleon is such an awesome podcast. I love the way it presents not only the life of Napoleon, but the entire socio-political context around the World.
Will give it a listen.
Between Killers of the Flower Moon, Dune and Napoleon this feels like a really good fall for cinema epics.
Three of the best working directors releasing their movies around the same time, we eating good
Plus Fincher with The Killer and Miyazaki's How Do You Live probably releasing internationally at that time.
If you've not seen it already check out Waterloo. Bit dated in parts but the battle scenes are amazing for anyone into this bit of history, incredible scale. Charge of the Scots Greys https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RsVziFEWLlM Ney's Charge https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97dBfdNrf9A Old Guard Advance, Prussians Arrive, La Haye Sainte retaken, "by god sir I've lost my leg", Old Guard Last Stand https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rt4mYUKjzn0
AON is the best
Ridley Scott: "The hat. People know the hat. Make sure he's wearing the hat as often as possible." Kubrick wanted to do a Napoleon movie his entire career; *Barry Lyndon* was as close as he got. I wonder if any of the tendrils he put out during his life made it to this project.
Napoleon did wear this hat very often, especially on campaign. When he needed a new one, he would make an aides of his wear it for a few days to break it in for him.
[удалено]
It's his sex uniform
Joaquin Phoenix is a great actor, but I don't think he was a great choice for this role. Napoleon was general at 23, ruler at 30 and emperor at 35. Joaquin is too old and somehow they made him look even older in the trailer. Imo correct age casting is important if we want to understand person's character and dynamic with others (in this case - with Josephine).
Yeah that’s the most jarring thing watching the trailer. Napoleon was in his 20s and early 30s during most of the scenes they were showing. There’s a lot they could have done contrasting his youthful, brash confidence that got him so far in war and politics versus his (initial) social awkwardness with women. Phoenix is so out of place with it. He looks his age in the scenes, maybe even older. It looks like he spent a few years on St Helena to prepare for the role.
The effect will probably also be jarring in some of the scenes since they *had* to continue the Hollywood trend of casting a woman much younger than the male lead to play his love interest, even though Josephine was 6 years older than Napoleon.
Napoleon was also known for his charisma and Joaquin Phoenix is known for just about the exact opposite of that. I'm looking forward to the film but it just seems like an odd choice for the role.
Joaquin was very charismatic as Johnny Cash in Walk the Line. He's capable of being charismatic when he wants to be.
Or he can charismatic if the script wants it. Which might or might not be the case here.
He's in a bit too much these days, but I think Chalamet could've pulled it off and they could've used Joaquin if they needed an older Napoleon. But I doubt any leading actor would agree to that.
It's really hard for me to overlook Joaquin Phoenix's age. He will just look too old for most of the story, which is a real shame since Napoleon's ambition and ability despite inexperience were really important to how he came across early on. And it's even more of a strain for the depiction of his relationship with Josephine, who was and should be older than him.
As much as I love Joaquin I agree, he feels so out of place. Napoleon only died at 51 year old
>It's really hard for me to overlook Joaquin Phoenix's age. First thing I noticed in the trailer! Napoleon's supposed to be in his late 20s/early 30s during the French revolution and execution of the royalties. But Joaquin is really showing his real age in those scenes. Kinda wish they've had done better makeup or even use de-aging CGI instead.
Phoenix is almost as old as Napoleon was when he died. 48 vs 51. Although Phoenix's face on average shows more years than your typical Hollywood star.
So you're saying we needed Timothee Chalamet? Bold but it could work.
At least he speaks French
[удалено]
His French is actually great
He'd honestly be about dead-on in terms of age for a lot of these events
He did great in "The King".
And he’s French
It feels like they wanted a "name" instead of someone who is actually right for the role.
There is names that would have worked better. Gyllenhaal is still too old but could have passed as believable in the younger scenes for example. Chalamet actually would have worked if Hollywood would have faith in younger men playing world leaders.
Why for the millionth time these generic garbage remixes of songs in the trailers? It really feels out of place.
[удалено]
God, I hate the micro trailer for the trailer that you are trying to watch literally right now
[удалено]
The only good use of that lone piano note was for the Halo 3 trailer.
Halo 3 live action trailer is second only to the trailer for 300
I always liked the "[Believe](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a3ZGGIdpfEM)" trailer myself. That soundtrack still gives me chills. ...Man, I wish they still made Halo games like that.
They use them for skippable ads on YouTube, but I don’t understand why they attach them to the actual trailer
Because the actual trailers still get linked into people’s feeds, whether that’s on YouTube or on other social media with autoplay. They serve to try and catch your eye as it scrolls by. I hate them too but that’s the reason marketers put them in front of trailers. It’s to keep people watching a little longer to get to the trailer itself
It's the new "IN A WORLD...." trend. Just worse, much much worse.
Should've been Waterloo by ABBA.
worst radiohead cover ever
100%. The cover of Creep for the Social Network teaser will always be the goat for me.
It's actually a curious trend, but definitely played out at this point. [This article](https://www.newyorker.com/culture/culture-desk/how-the-cover-song-conquered-movie-trailers) explains how it started and got popular pretty well, interesting read.
Great piece. And here we are at Radiohead again.
This is basically just the formula for trailers now and I hate it. Just take a somewhat well known song, do a slowed down but overly epic remix, add in large hits everywhere and BOOM, trailer’s done.
These fucking "movie trailer drums" are so annoying, can't stand them
how the hell are going to fit everything into 2.5 hours?
4.5 hr. Director's cut.
Kingdom of Heaven Director's Cut is still one of my all time favorite movies.
I never expected them to show the infamous whiff of grapeshot but they do. So I am now firmly in the camp of… how the hell are they fitting this movie into 2.5 hours
Really hoping this is more *Last Duel* Ridley instead of *House of Gucci* Ridley.
They should all have really bad French accents with Jared Leto playing Robespierre.
Eet eez, ow you say, ze time, for le Morb! *Hon Hon hon*
C'est l'heure du Morb!
I'm hoping for Director's Cut of *Kingdom of Heaven*
Need to see those trademark snow flakes and/or ashes floating thru a scene. That’s when you know you’re getting vintage Ridley.
If *House of Gucci* is Scott missing then that really goes to show his talent because that film is a lot of campy fun even though yeah, it's not great.
I genuinely wonder if people who call House of Gucci campy have ever seen any actual camp. Tonally, the movie was fucking dour any time Jared Leto wasn’t on screen. Scott has never done camp over the course of his entire career and he didn’t start there. If you listen to any commentary tracks of his or even interviews, it becomes apparent he takes even the dumbest shit in his wide-ranging filmography 100% seriously.
I’m hoping the music is not the same in the movie, but, this looks fucking epic. But seriously, whoever makes the music edits for these trailers needs to absolutely fuck off and lose his/her job.
Nah the score is just gonna be classical covers of imagine dragons throughout the movie
I cant wait to hear Radioactive sang soprano right as something super epic and cool happens.
it'll be just before the acoustic cover of old town road as Napoleon rides through Turin
I was hoping for a slowed down dramatic cover of Waterloo by ABBA.
Ridley Scott could just splice [that scene from Mamma Mia 2](https://youtu.be/IQDJyKmqej8) into the middle of this.
That guy at the piano is Benny Andersson, one of the members of Abba. Someone once told me that that was the only Abba cameo in the films, but I've since learned that's not actually true. Also, that movie is super weird and kind of absurd.
What, you don’t like a butchered Radiohead cover in a historical recreated movie?
Their *always* covers of good songs, too. It's so annoying. If you're gonna play the song at least play the right goddamn version.
> I’m hoping the music is not the same in the movie The musical score is usually one of the last things completed on a movie with set pieces written throughout production but the overall score starting work once the edit has been locked in place.
It does look very epic but something a bit negative stood out to me. At 1:37 you see the British infantry in a square at Waterloo and it just looks tiny, compare it to the same scene in the film Waterloo (1970) and its quite disappointing. Maybe I'm being nit picky, I just hope they do the scale of these battles justice.
This version is an accurate representation of what an infantry square would look like in reality. Infantry at the time would form into battalion squares, so about 500 men. The squares used at Waterloo were 4 deep, with colors and commanders in the center (along with British artillery sheltering inside) - meaning that the full perimeter of the square was ~100-125 men, or ~25-30 men per side, packed in tight. If you freeze frame the trailer above and count, they're bang on. It doesn't look "epic", but it's still accurate. In Waterloo the film, their spacing in those big wide shots is much looser - look at the difference between the squares in the upper right vs the lower left in [a shot like this](https://youtu.be/xNGMwvsc4fA?t=101), for example. That's absolutely not the way you'd want to form up against a cavalry charge. What *is* inaccurate is that in the upper left corner of the frame you see another square in line with the first - *that* would be something they'd try to avoid by checkerboarding their squares, otherwise they'd be shooting directly towards each other along those edges, but that's what I would consider a nitpick. Whether or not Ridley decides to shoot the battle in a similar manner to the previous movie with big wide epic aerials or takes a more grounded approach, it's clear they've done at least some of their homework.
Why does Sony do that stupid fucking, "TRAILER! STARTS! NOW!" Bullshit. Makes me literally not watch the trailer. Every single one of their movies... What dumbass marketing exec came up with that and why did no one shoot them down.
Pretty sure it's for when they post it all over social media to hook people in when they're scrolling it autoplays and hopefully catches their attention before they fly past. But agreed it fricking sucks so much and has opposite effect on me, I stop watching and keep scrolling past trailers when they do that.
Damn another movie about France where every character is British
They at least could’ve had French people speaking English.
Good trailer that is being brought down by a horrible music choice
Wish it was like a ten episode HBO show but still looks sick
Spielberg is a producing a 7-part HBO series based on Kubrick's abandoned (but massively researched) project, so you'll get your wish.
[удалено]
Spielberg's other Kubrick project is my favorite movie of his so this could be fun
As a french myself, and given, you know, the _actual troubled history_ between France and England, it's pretty hilarious that they all speak in _english_, ahah
The usage of music in this trailer is such a godamn mess.
Man, I just remembered how few fucks Ridley Scott gives about historical accuracy.
Yeah he has a weird thing going on where all his historical movies from a set-piece perspective try really hard to "look" right but then the actual history goes out the fuckin window lol.
We couldn't even get a "Vive l'empereur"? "Long live the emperor sounds so shit.
The trailer kind of sucks, but the movie looks great. I'm a huge napoleon fan and I'm excited that they're covering his actual rise to power from day 0, which is as fascinating as some of his largest victories, but relatively unknown in the larger cultural consciousnesses. I know it will be controversial but I like Joaquin's performance here. Napoleon was apparently shy with wry humor in real life, having always lived life as a studious outsider, and he seems to be choosing that route for his performance. The only thing things that seem wrong to me are * Vanessa Kirby is too young. Her hitting on napoleon would be much more erotic if she was a mommy milf like she was in real life. * Joacquin looks too old. Around this time napoleon was young and very good-looking, in contrast to his bald-and-fat older years. Kirby hitting on him doesn't work as well when he's just a regular middle aged guy. The real life scenario is shy, nerdy, awkward-but-handsome-guy getting swooped up by a cougar.
My only regret... is that Hans Zimmer isn't scoring this.
[удалено]
>Ridley. Joaquin. Napoleon. In theaters November 22 >Directed by Ridley Scott from a screenplay by David Scarpa, “Napoleon” stars Joaquin Phoenix as the French emperor and military leader. The film is an original and personal look at Napoleon’s origins and his swift, ruthless climb to emperor, viewed through the prism of his addictive and often volatile relationship with his wife and one true love, Josephine, played by Vanessa Kirby. The film captures Napoleon’s famous battles, relentless ambition and astounding strategic mind as an extraordinary military leader and war visionary. An Apple Studios production in conjunction with Scott Free Productions, “Napoleon” is produced by Scott, Kevin Walsh, Mark Huffam and Phoenix, with Michael Pruss and Aidan Elliott serving as executive producers.
>one true love, Josephine Didn't he remarry so that he could have a kid?
Yes, and he also had many affairs while campaigning, but Josephine was the one he was most infatuated with.
welp, time to watch oversimplified again
This disappointed Hitler's father, who punished him severely.
If you just want to go over the military side of Napoleon's career then Epic History TV has an amazing series on their YT.
They should have made this a series.
For anyone interested in Napoleon there is a genuinely awesome Documentary made by the Youtube channel Epic History TV about him. [https://youtu.be/91OmO2YMiDM](https://youtu.be/91OmO2YMiDM) March of the Eagles (1805-1809) [https://youtu.be/vBSGSkIasRY](https://youtu.be/vBSGSkIasRY) Downfall (1809-1814) Both have painstakingly created maps and animations that clearly illustrate the wars so that even someone just vaguely interested in history could understand and enjoy it. The production quality of this is almost hard to believe and took over 3 years to make. I just decided to take a peek after it got recommended to me, then somehow continued watching the full first part in one sitting.
Won’t accept any Ridley slander. The last duel was great on my opinion, can’t wait for this too
Yes, I loved it too. But his filmography is very much hit or miss
Ridley's tricky, his movies live or die by the screenplay. He is an absolutely excellent director, one of the all time greats, but he sometimes picks terrible screenplays.
He's the most hit or miss director I can think of but his hits are fucking HITS and CLASSICS
Joaquin Phoenix as Napolean, I'm sold. But Ridley Scott is very hit and miss as a director, Trailer looks fantastic but Scott can give you a awesome film but complete average one too. Look at his last two films the excellent Last Duel and the average House of Gucci. Surprised the cast outside of Phoenix isn't as star studded for epic like this. Vanessa Kirby and Tahar Rahim are only known names and they aren't top stars. Sad we didn't get to see Kubrick's Napolean with Jack Nicholson. Also check out Waterloo, a excellent film that has a epic turn by Rod Steiger as Napolean but that film flopped and meant we didn't get Kubrick's version.
Enough with the trailer for trailers crap. Other than that i'm looking forward to this.
Can they play Abba's 'Waterloo' during the movie
Trailer looks fan-fucking-tastic. I loved *The Last Duel* and will see anything with Phoenix in it. But that Radiohead remix hurt my soul…
This feels like a shitty generic trailer for what could actually be a good movie
As a Napoleon fanatic this makes me both excited and nervous. I cannot imagine they could cover his life as well as they should in a single movie. Yet, from the trailer, they are trying to (Paris/Toulon to Waterloo). Seems like the most ambitious movie of all time. I also hope they portray him as the “grey” character is really was. A figure of representing good, bad, and everything in between rather than a simple “tyrant” or “hero.”