IslandGuru Who payed the critics

Tedfoldol everything you have heard about this movie is true.

Solidrariol Am I Missing Something?

Ketrivie It isn't all that great, actually. Really cheesy and very predicable of how certain scenes are gonna turn play out. However, I guess that's the charm of it all, because I would consider this one of my guilty pleasures.

talkbaktalk This is the first Napoleon epic where the chief speaks with a French accent; that is good. HIs words are his, many of the events are accurate. Because his life was crowded with events, all detail is left out except the love interest of Josephine.This is a modern interpretation, so any glory of war is ruthlessly stamped out, to the point that great battles are always seen as useless slaughter with piles of corpses. Well, in part they are.If you're looking for any of La Gloire, a big part of the period, you'll look in vain. The people rarely cheer Napoleon. We know his soldiers often shouted "Vive L'Empereur" as he passed. Instead, in the film, they barely notice him on the battlefield.Isabel Rossellini as Josephine is seen too often, as (one of the) the women of his life. Murat stands in for all his Marshals, as a film can only pay so many actors. John Malkovich as Talleyrand is very good.An interesting and intelligent film. Clavier plays the part of Napoleon well, although in the interests of covering all his life, he is a bit one dimensional. If you thirst for battlefield tactics, and scenes of battle, you'll be disappointed. Only one battle is covered in any detail is Austerlitz, his finest victory.Napoleon was an extremely intelligent and relatively peaceful man. Most of the wars he fought were forced upon him by European nations in the pay of the English, who could not abide him. He was a better man than they were.

Gui1999 Detailing the life and times of Emperor Napoleon Bonaparte, Napoleon the four part mini-series is a stunning portrayal of one of Europe's greatest men. One minute we are in a tent somewhere in the olive fields of Italy the next we are in a ball watching Napoleon meet the beautiful Comtesse Walweska. Christian Clavier plays a fantastic Napoleon Bonaparte with that cunning and yet short tempered mind that the Emperor is so famous for. Isabella Rossellini does a good job at playing Josephine De Beauharnais and Marie Horbiger plays an equally good Marie-Louise matching the real Empress's personality well. Out of the three women however Alexandra Maria Lara played the strongest character as Comtesse Walweska, the enigma who in the latter stage of the series takes a prominent role. I found John Malkovich's portrayal of Charles-Maurice Talleyrand yet another fantastic performance. Napoleon's family was also represented with great representations of Caroline and of Murat Bonaparte. The role of Fouche was well represented by Gerard Depardieu. In total however I found the series too short, I thought it should have been double the size. The Peninsular Campaign is way to brief in the series and many of the battles are not accurately represented nor really showing Napoleon's real genius which was on the battlefield as well as at the drawing table. The 16 Marshals are badly represented with only a couple being mentioned and Marshal Ney 'The Fearless' is briefly added in at the end to fit the story line. Many of the key points of the era are missing from this otherwise stunning portrayal of one of Europe's Greatest Men.

cornel1801 This excellent Napoléon (2002) showed once again that to make a high level movie, we need for the following things: a very good script, a very good director, very good actors, a very good soundtrack, a very good image and generally, a very good crew. And this movie has it all. Only words of praise for Napoleon (2002) that France had to make it for the world cinematography. Some remarks: Christian Clavier has created an unchangeable Napoleon character. Napoléon (2002) was made with love, honesty, respect and put things in place that it deserves. A film that I highly recommend to be viewed and reviewed. Congratulations for the entire crew. Note: I highly recommend this film to American Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences's members, to watch it and maybe they'll understand how looks an excellent movie.

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.