The federalist

Ridley Scott’s new epic isn’t about Napoleon



The Paradoxical Life ​of Napoleon Bonaparte

There is no single historical character between the‌ American​ Revolution and World War II about whom more words have been spilled than ⁢Napoleon Bonaparte.

The two-time emperor of the French, genius military commander, and cultural juggernaut has been a figure of fascination, scorn, or respect — depending on your political views. He was a paradox in many ‌ways: conservative yet reformist, protectionist ‍yet expansionist, ⁢and strategically patient yet temperamentally⁣ mercurial. He‍ was​ a brilliant⁤ leader ‍of men, especially on the⁢ battlefield, but could be quite demure ‍in private. ⁤He ended the​ French Revolution, began to ‌restore the church, reinvented the nobility, and, ‌unfortunately, brought slavery back to the French Empire. At the same time, he cemented many of the progressive policies of the Revolution — ⁤retaining the emancipation of the ​Jews, codifying a neutral rule of law, centralizing ⁤and growing the state, and retaining national institutions like the ​ levée en masse ⁣and the tricolor. He was a man‌ of contradictions.

Ridley Scott’s newest historical film, “Napoleon”, is ‌just as paradoxical as the Great Man himself. It is stunningly beautiful, rich in sound and score, and contains⁤ some of the best battle scenes in recent ⁤memory. But‍ it ​also includes some of the worst dialogue in⁣ years,‍ makes a hash of history, and dashes so rapidly through time and space that it gives viewers whiplash.

The film is not a ‍biopic of Napoleon, nor is it a film about ‌the Napoleonic‌ Wars or the French Revolution. Instead, it is an intense character study of a toxic marriage between ⁤Bonaparte and his first ⁣wife, Josephine. This could be interesting, but the importance of ⁤this⁢ relationship is wildly exaggerated, and the details are pure invention. The most unforgivable ‍failure of Scott’s epic, however, is its complete warping of Napoleon himself.

There is a lot of good in the film, but it is all superficial. The cinematography of Dariusz ⁢Wolski, a frequent Scott collaborator, is visually compelling and elevates⁣ the often-vapid writing. The⁤ scene setting ‍is excellent, with​ great lighting and grand scope, something especially obvious during the battle scenes. These sections of the film are real edge-of-your-seat moments⁣ and partially make up for the dialogue. ‍Martin Phipps’ score is wonderful and feels in sync with the on-screen action. Some of the performances‍ stand out, specifically Vanessa Kirby’s Josephine, which is a tour-de-force. The costumes and set design are outstanding.

One⁤ minor bit of character development ‌for Napoleon himself is also cleverly done: Over the course of the film, Napoleon’s increasing comfort with warfare is depicted by his reaction ‌to artillery fire. At first, ⁢he covers his​ ears and darts around madly, but by Austerlitz and Waterloo, he is shown with ears uncovered, calmly‌ managing‍ his⁤ troops. This is⁣ a ​skillful⁣ way of‌ building a character by showing instead of telling.

implement progressive policies and ‌reshape the‍ nation. He ​retained‍ many of the Revolution’s principles, such as the emancipation of the‍ Jews‌ and‍ the establishment of a neutral rule of law. He centralized and expanded the state, laying the foundation for​ modern governance.⁢ This duality is a testament to his ability to‍ navigate the delicate balance between tradition and progress.

Napoleon’s personality was equally paradoxical. He was a brilliant military leader, known for his strategic​ acumen on the battlefield. Yet, in private, he could be surprisingly demure ⁢and reflective. His temperamental nature occasionally led to erratic decision-making, ‌but his moments of introspection revealed ​a ⁣complex ⁣and nuanced individual behind the facade of ⁤a conqueror.

Another ‌paradox‌ embedded in Napoleon’s legacy is his stance ‍on slavery. While he brought back‌ slavery to ⁣the French Empire, a regrettable decision that perpetuated human suffering,⁢ he also upheld many of the progressive values of the Revolution. His actions simultaneously‍ betrayed and preserved‍ the principles of liberty and ⁤equality that France held dear. This contradiction underscores‍ the complexities of his character and ⁤the challenging moral landscape of⁣ his⁣ time.

Despite his‍ flaws and contradictions, Napoleon Bonaparte undeniably left an ⁢indelible ‌mark on history. His ‍military ‌genius reshaped the face of Europe, and his political reforms laid the groundwork for modern governance. He‌ remains one of the most studied and debated figures in history, a testament to the enduring fascination with his paradoxical life.

In⁤ conclusion, Napoleon Bonaparte defied easy⁤ categorization. A paradox‌ in many ways, he embodied the tensions ⁤between conservatism and reform, military prowess and personal introspection, and‌ progressive⁢ ideals and detrimental⁢ actions. Ridley Scott’s ​film “The Last Duel” illuminates these paradoxes, shedding light​ on the enigmatic figure that is Napoleon Bonaparte. His enduring legacy serves as​ a reminder that history is often shaped by complex and contradictory individuals.

Sources:


" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases

Related Articles

Sponsored Content
Back to top button
Available for Amazon Prime
Close

Adblock Detected

Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker