Napoleon
Napoleon
| 07 October 2002 (USA)
Napoleon Trailers

The year is 1816, and NAPOLEON, held prisoner by the British on the island of St. Helena, is telling the young English girl BETSY his life story.

Reviews
Hellen

I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much

... View More
ShangLuda

Admirable film.

... View More
Zlatica

One of the worst ways to make a cult movie is to set out to make a cult movie.

... View More
Scarlet

The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

... View More
davidjpeers

It is probably pointless recommending or not recommending this series as there are two types of people that are going to buy this: The Napoleon nuts like me and the period drama people. The latter will be in their element as the domestic sets are both lavish and authentic. There are also some remarkable likenesses such as Josephine, Murat and Caulencourt.On first viewing I was left a little cold. I thought that at last a substantial amount of time had been allocated to this, perhaps the greatest of all individual subjects. However, if there is one thing that any expert on the subject will tell you, it is that there is no way that you can even begin to condense this subject into 60 hours, let alone 6. The worst mistake that this film makes is attempting to replicate the battles themselves. The camera angles pan across large expanses revealing (at best) eight or nine hundred extras. All this whilst regular references are made to 20,000 losses on each side (Austerlitz, Eylau, Essling and especially Waterloo). Sometimes, it is almost laughable and cheapens the rest of the film. The makers would have been much better off by excluding any military action and just leaving it to innuendo – after all, Borodino is just referred to by Caulencourt when in Moscow conversing with Murat.. Thank God they didn't try to replicate that terrible battle! So, the plus points: Napoleon: At first I thought that Clavier was miles off the mark. If, like me you have seen and were bowled over by Rod Steiger's rendition in Waterloo then this will get some getting used to. After all, Napoleon is a red-blooded Corsican genius, capable of flying off the handle at any time, exhausting his counterparts and friends alike. Not in this version. Yet, Clavier has one saving grace. He introduces a measured, human approach that we know Napoleon had to have had from time to time. Almost schizophrenic some might say (Megalomania is the preferred terminology). I don't prefer his interpretation of Napoleon's to Steiger, but it is warmer if not necessarily more Corsican. If we could introduce this to Steiger's approach you may have the perfect Napoleon.The relationship between Napoleon and Josephine is also one of the better points of this series. Clavier's in-love out-of-love relationship is perfectly handled without the usual mushiness. Here is a relationship based on love, intensity, necessity and ultimately friendship and loss.Finally, Caulencourt is dealt with in some depth, as is Fauche, Murat and Talleyrand. But where is Berthier, Bessieres, Augereau, Davout and Ney (who suddenly appears towards the end despite his Russian campaign heroics)? Holes? Yes. But unless we get someone with $500,000,000 willing to approach this subject with the endeavour it deserves then we are left with this kind of product. So overall, not too bad. Vive l'Emperor!

... View More
pvdharten

Although quite lengthy, this documentary never became boring.Much to the credit of the script writers, there is an excellent balance between action scenes, political intrigue and romance. This all leads to a much better understanding of the character of Napoleon Bonaparte, although more credit could have been given to his constitutional and governance reforms which are still tangible for many European nations today.The original score and photography is of a very high standard, but what is even more important, I have rarely come across a movie in which the casting was this well tailored to the characters. Rather than putting famous names in all the lead roles, a true effort has been made to match the skills of the actor to the character in a fine, pan-European cast.Christian Clavier's accent is quite charming: I guess this is how we think Napoleon would have sounded, if he would have spoken English....

... View More
AJS218

On the plus side: the costumes and interiors are magnificent, Isabella Rossellini is good as Josephine, the historical events depicted are presented accurately, and the series gets better as it goes along (don't give up after the muddled first episode!).On the minus side: we never really get a feel for what Napoleon actually stood for or why and how he was such a military genius, the film dwells on his private life when it could be dealing with the huge social and political issues of the time, the actors playing some of the secondary characters are laughably bad (Murat, Ney, Marie-Louise), and one has to strain to hear the dialogue (due to the foreign accents, background noise and music).As for Christian Clavier, it's amazing how the comments on his performance stretch from "brilliant" to "trash." My own view is that he was off the mark as the younger Napoleon, but as the mature Napoleon had basically the right look and plenty of gravitas.A good contribution to the body of film about the Emperor but also full of flaws.

... View More
rowe-8

This mini wasn't bad but it could have been much better. The decision of using actors of many nationalities and language, even for French characters of a French mini, is a very odd decision. There are many scenes where it's painfully obvious that the actor was dubbed. I don't have anything against dubbing but going from French actors to dubbed actors was quite annoying.But the main problem was the character of Napoléon himself. The man was a conqueror and a dictator. Not the meanest dictator ever, but still someone who gave himself complete control of his country. Here, I feel they were trying to present Napoléon as a nice, misunderstood man. Sure, some scenes did show the massive ego of the man, and his lust for conquest, but it's as if those scenes were there by necessity, because they were historical event that had to be dealt with and there was no other explanation they could find. Usually, the following scenes showed us Bonaparte on a better, more likable angle, like those events were inconsequential. Being partisan is okay but you have to be more critical. It becomes even weirder when you think that Simoneau isn't French but Canadian, therefor should've had more distance with the subject.

... View More