Top 10 Things Napoleon Gets Factually Right and Wrong
Vložit
- čas přidán 2. 06. 2024
- From the sublime to the ridiculous is but a step. Welcome to WatchMojo, and today we’re looking at both the most historically accurate and romanticized moments in Ridley Scott's Napoleon Bonaparte biopic. We guess we’ll give a spoiler alert, but can you really spoil history? Our countdown includes height, historical attacks, divorce and more! What are you going to do today, Napoleon? Leave your response in the comments, gosh! (Yes, we KNOW that's a different Napoleon :) ).
Check out these other right/wrong videos:
Top 20 Things Netflix's The Jeffrey Dahmer Story Got Factually Right and Wrong: • Top 20 Things Netflix'...
Top 10 Health Myths That Are COMPLETELY FALSE: • Top 10 Health Myths Th...
Top 10 Things Elvis (2022) Got Factually Right & Wrong: • Top 10 Things Elvis (2...
Become a channel member to get access to special perks:
/ @watchmojo
Don't forget to play our Live Trivia games at 3pm EST for a chance to win cash! The faster you answer, the more points you get!: www.watchmojo.com/play
Have your idea become a video!
wmojo.com/suggest
Subscribe for more great content!
wmojo.com/watchmojo-subscribe
Visit our shop for awesome merch!
shop.watchmojo.com/
Your trusted authority for Top 10 lists, reviews, tips and tricks, biographies, origins, and entertainment news
#napoleon #france #history #french #biopic #historical #historicalaccuracy #ridleyscott #joaquinphoenix - Zábava
Are you going to see Napoleon? Let us know in the comments.
For more content like this, click here: czcams.com/video/DeXQi_AoPxQ/video.html
Don't forget to play our Live Trivia (www.watchmojo.com/play) games at 3pm EST for a chance to win cash! The faster you answer, the more points you get!
I saw it and didn’t like it at all……
Too many inconsistencies. Phoenix’s age and acting were an issue too.
Too much battle series, not enough development of Napoleon’s character…
Because Phoenix is vegetarian, his hat was made of non leather…
It was great, more accurate than most historical movies and thus exceeded my expectations
Napoleon’s height was propaganda from the British. Just like Napoleon shooting the Sphinx nose, which is a myth too.
I wonder if the hat being shot off was inspired by the real story of a stray bullet taking a soldier's hat off as Napoleon was passing by on his horse. He looked down at the soldier and said "I bet you're glad you're not any taller!"
@@JedForge I don't know about this story, but I know of Victor Hugo's poem (whose father had a Napoleonic officer in Spain) "After the Battle":
My father, that hero with the gentle smile,
Followed by a single trooper he cherished above all,
For his great courage and towering stature,
Rode on horseback, on the evening after a battle,
Across a field covered with the dead as night fell.
In the shadows, he thought he heard a faint sound.
It was a Spanish soldier from the routed army
Dragging himself bloody along the edge of the road,
Gasping, broken, pallid, more than half-dead,
And saying, "Water! water, for pity's sake!"
My father, moved, handed to his loyal trooper
A flask of rum hanging from his saddle,
And said, "Here, give a drink to this poor wounded man."
Suddenly, just as the trooper, leaning down,
Was offering it to him, the man, some sort of Moor,
Seized a pistol he still clutched,
And aimed at my father's forehead, shouting, "Caramba!"
The shot passed so close that his hat fell off,
And the horse shied back.
"Give him a drink all the same," said my father.
just like this whole movie too lol .good for the french pussies who consume hollywood garbage movies like bigs lol.
He didn’t shoot the nose in the movie, unless it’s a blink-and-you’ll-miss-it moment. Also, he wasn’t especially short in the movie, the one time it rlly is noticed is when he steps up to the mummy and what’s wrong with a nod to an ongoing joke that he’s short? Could’ve been absolutely worse
@@wyattcole5452remember when he touched the mummy and then it began to tip.
I saw this as the transference of a curse.
Watch that particular scene and let me know what you think.
One of the worst things about the movie is that they cast Phoenix at the same age for different decades. So it looks like he's forty years old for decades. Throughout the movie.
Then don't watch it😂
@TribaLGear-ui8td Too late; i've been watched it ¿why you think I left the comment?
Everything about the movie looks dumb.
Never distracted me
@Tibbex Good to hear, I guess.
Napoleon & Wellington were actually the same age when they met at Waterloo. The actors portraying these historical figures have in fact a 20 year age difference.
Yes, but that wasn't the first time they had met. Both Wellington and Napoleon fought each other during the Peninsular Wars. The Lines of Torres Vedras were a set of fortifications built by the Anglo-Portuguese aliance, and it is still kept today, for it's historical importance. It is actually a really nice place to visit. There were several other battles in the Peninsular Wars that were important in cripling the French Army, such as the battle of Bussaco and the battle of Porto, but there are no evidences to place Napoleon or Wellington in those. They were both in the battles of Torres Vedras, though.
@@ruialmeida818Napoleon never visited Spain he left command to his brother instead
@@Charlie-ub8vj I stand corrected, although Wellington was here in Portugal. Junot was the commander of the 3 invasions. Lost all 3 of them :D
It is sad that most media disregards the peninsular wars, although they were crucial to weaken the Napoloenic Army, which was instrumental to Napoleon's ultimate defeat. But it is usual, as even for the age of discoveries, Portugal's importance tend to be overlooked, as most media centers arround England's empire, despite the fact that the Portuguese one predated the English empire in over a century, and it's time span is longer than the British one (British empire 1583 - 1997, Portuguese empire 1415 - 1999)
@@ruialmeida818 Junot was not the commander of the 3 invasions. 1st was Junot, 2nd was Soult, 3rd was Massena. Only the first was successful (temporarily). This is all covered in Portuguese grade school if you are portuguese you should know it better
@@MMorgattto I am Portuguese, albeit I'm probably older than you, so you probably took a different education reform. Also, elementary school was over 40 years ago, so, cut me some slack.
I laughed when I realized that every person had a British or a German accent, except Napoleon had an American accent. 😂
In real life, Napoleon had a very noticeable Corsican accent
@@Niaaalyeah, he was bullied as well for that if im not mistakeb
What makes the movie worst is that Napoleon life is already epic.
You just need to follow history…
You haven’t even seen it
@@murkyseb I go the very first day and the movie is shit as entertainment. Boring as hell and even fail as a romance.
Also a really bad Biopic and a horrible historical film…
The movie is epic as hell
@@deathsinger1192 yeah it is that's how you can tell they haven't even seen it
And that’s kinda why they did, sorry they didn’t include every shit between every battle, marital argument, political decision and foreign meeting
We need more historical movies. So tired of super hero crap
comics were continuing for 85 years and no one was tired until The Ultimates
Its not very historical
The Marvel Razzies-1-Morbius-On Rotten Tomatoes, the film has an approval rating of 15% based on 283 reviews, with an average rating of 3.8/10. The website's critics consensus reads, "Cursed with uninspired effects, rote performances, and a borderline nonsensical story, this dreary mess is a vein [sic] attempt to make Morbius happen."[112] It ranks as the 16th worst-reviewed superhero movie on the site.
2-Daredevil film-On review aggregation website Rotten Tomatoes 43% of critics gave the film positive feedback, based on 228 reviews, with an average rating of 5.2/10. The critical consensus reads, "While Ben Affleck fits the role and the story is sporadically interesting, Daredevil is ultimately a dull, brooding origin story that fails to bring anything new to the genre."
3-Howard The Duck-Howard the Duck received mainly negative reviews from critics. On Rotten Tomatoes, the film has an approval rating of 13%, based on 83 reviews, with an average rating of 3.8/10, making it the lowest-rated Lucasfilm production. The site's consensus states: "While it has its moments, Howard the Duck suffers from an uneven tone and mediocre performances."
4-Worst of Marvel-Fant4stic-On the review aggregator website Rotten Tomatoes, 9% of 263 critics' reviews are positive, with an average rating of 3.6/10. The website's consensus reads: "Dull and downbeat, this Fantastic Four proves a woefully misguided attempt to translate a classic comic series without the humor, joy, or colorful thrills that made it great."[1] As of 2023, it the lowest-rated film on Rotten Tomatoes out of all theatrical films based on Marvel Comics properties.
and The WORST of MCU-Inhumans-The review aggregator website Rotten Tomatoes reported an 11% approval rating, with an average rating of 3.70/10 based on 47 reviews. The website's consensus states, "Marvel's Inhumans sets a new low standard for the MCU with an unimaginative narrative, dull design work, weak characters, and disengaging soapy melodrama."Reviewing the season, Matt Liparota of Destructoid concluded, "Inhumans is a work with almost nothing of value for anyone. It's not even an interesting train wreck. It's just a boring, lifeless slog easily shooting to the top of the list of the worst things the MCU has produced in its near-decade of existence."
The DC Razzies-
Catwoman-On Rotten Tomatoes, the film has an approval rating of 8% based on 197 reviews, with an average rating of 3.2/10. The site's critical consensus reads: "Halle Berry is the lone bright spot, but even she can't save this laughable action thriller".
BvS-On review aggregator website Rotten Tomatoes the film has an approval rating of 29% based on 439 reviews and an average rating of 5/10. The website's critical consensus reads: "Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice smothers a potentially powerful story - and some of America's most iconic superheroes - in a grim whirlwind of effects-driven action."
@@SirsasthNigam.The Ultimates is when I started everything before that is history to me.
We need more historical movies that are not directed by Ridley Scott. I am thankful for the fact that he is in the twilight of his years, so he will never do this again.
napoleon was 5'6". he only appeared shorter because he preferred his personal guard to be tall.
I think for the time that was a decent height for a man, 200 years ago
Also, rumor says, his enemies kinda describe him having height complex. French and their gossips...
He was between 5'6 and 5'7 that was exactly average for the time.
Stalin was 5ft 2 inches, but wore special boots due to his webbed feet, which gave him another 3 inches.
He was 5'9.
No idea why they made Napoleon so weak and pathetic. Can’t shave without cutting himself. Can’t make it up the stairs without panting. Sniffs a mummy and acts like a weirdo and looks surprised when the mummy’s not alive. Throws food and tantrums and doesn’t know how to speak. Often looks confused and terrified. They say he’s a great man in the film but other than a few short scenes they don’t show it. Instead they hyperfocus and embellish his inadequacies. Little to no mention of the Napoleonic Code , how he altered all of history, no depiction of the fear monarchies had for him. No mention of the Spanish war which was really what wore his forces down for years and hurt him politically.
You get comedy, great cinematography, a cliff notes version of the revolution and his rise to power. No depth of detail in the military tactics and inventive techniques that propelled him but the film slows down and takes the time to have the audience laugh at a contrived bit about him being nervous about him having to have sex and needing more drinks. Which is fabricated.
It was visually good and interesting but it wasn’t Napoleon it was someone else. First clue that I should have known is the casting of Phoenix who excels at playing weird losers- not at playing great men.
If Phoenix played George Washington he’d probably make him a bed wetter with a lisp and terrified of women.
Just another example of pedowood demasculating histories biggest gigachad
I actually enjoyed this odd and awkward interpretation of napoleon. He was bullied for most of his young life and was hyper fixated on his relationship with his wife all his life. But despite being weird as hell, he personally lead his soldiers into combat, he loved his country, and he loved his toxic relationship. I also enjoyed that all his great achievements were also tinged a bit by a bit of awkwardness like when he tried to seize power from the government, only to be chased out and returned with his regiment.
It’s not a perfect movie, but it’s focus on his relationship and the strangeness of his incredible life is something you won’t get from other forms of media.
Glad you posted. I had this same takeaway. I think this how Scott wants the character portrayed, but I don’t know why…
The way he was portrayed, you wonder why anyone would ever follow him???
Lol, who hurt you?
One of the biggest things the movie leaves out Is Bernadotte actually switches sides joins forces with Prussia, Russia and England lets them his tactics and they defeat him at the battle of Leipzig in 1813 two years before waterloo.
Freemason power, english stuff
They left out so many things
Also they are talking about Belgium at the battle of Waterloo.
Belgium did not even exist by then. What a stupid mistake.
It's like they don't read ....wtf.
I've seen other historically inaccurate films, and although it does irritate me, I normally go just to see the spectacle
I concur,Napoleon had a epic/complex life,this should have been a trilogy w Euporean actors both young & old to represent the different stages of his life… I still plan to see the film bc l’m a history nerd and the battle scenes should be awesome…
According to the film, Napoleon had a climactic meeting with the Duke of Wellington! No! They never met.
The kind of videos I’m looking for when Hollywood does a biopic; I get answers on what is true and what is false on the silver screen. Thanks very much! 👏
I really wish this was historically accurate, that truly would've made a huge difference in this movie.
HOWEVER, Joaquin Phoenix keeps getting better and I find myself captivated no matter who he plays.
It had such potential. And FANTASTIC battle scenes. Also, it didn't feel like 2.5 hours in the theater and when its a bad movie it definitely does...
The movie says he took Italy without a fight. Guess the battle of Lodi was just a rumor.
This movie is a joke based on British war propaganda
I think it was entertaining, but also very inaccurate and misleading. Hence, why I am classifying it as historical fiction. Ridley Scott has a habit of making historical fiction movies, but usually he doesn’t focus on a real person. I think that is what angers the most people, because it is morally wrong to ruin a real persons reputation or misrepresent them.
Not having at least the battle of Lodi in the movie is bloody criminal, one of my favourite parts of napoleonic history is when he took over the army of Italy
rivoli ,arcole, battle of lodi and whole italian campaign was just brilliant. The Italian campaign where nepoleon turned the tide of a losing war in mare months
Even bigger than Lodi, were Arcole, where the Napoleonic legend was first created, and Rivoli, his first true Battlefield masterpiece
And Egypt, was an even worse part of the film, it was spectacular but quite wrong, they had a short time to show Egypt, they could have done quite a lot of things in those few minutes, but instead they show firing on pyramids, the unofficial starter of Egyptology firing on Egypt's most prized ancient possessions
“When it comes to world leaders, you are literally lowered the bar! I’ll rip your bones apart Bonaparte, turn your horse into glue! Welcome to the Battle of Waterloo part 2!” Napoleon Dynamite
Napoleon Bonaparte: Hey! I’m actually average height of the time!
😂😂
Nice ERB and Oversimplified references.
a crossover between 2 would be epic
Well Napoleon was definitely average height during his time.
But definitely small pee pee.
@@babalonkiebig one maybe
@@MistaTofMaine A man that rides a donkey in battle, struggles with women and has anger issues... definitely has small pee pee...
British propaganda said otherwise, so ....
@@OperatoreDelMiniCalcolatore Owned.
I have been teaching about Napoleon for over 20 years. He has an amazing life story, one that does not need to be embellished to make a great movie. Seems like they did a lot wrong in this movie. If anyone wants before the movie came out, I made a 10-minute video overview of Napoleon.
Link please?
@@weekendwarrior8334 Click on his handle/username. It's legit btw
It was done fairly well, I thought. Better than most historical movies at that scale
Link?
I think they should have shown more of his great battle victories like especially his first campaign in Italy after he got promoted.
I’m English, people really underestimate how powerful the Corsican was. Even Wellington visited Madame Taussuards where Napoleons carriage was after Waterloo and lent over his wax work to say ‘I beat you’.
Fact, a man of huge intelligence and knew how to direct it on the battle field!
the 4 hour cut that will be on apple tv+ will be the cut to watch.
However accurate or inaccurate, you cant deny the film was gorgeous, kudos to the production designers and cinematographers!
The production was good but the script? Yikes
@@sstrongman1667script was ok to me ,mediocre but not bad
Saw it lastnight it was amazing
@@Mecca188 I guess if you have no idea of what actually happened it might have been okay, but I thought it was slow even then.
Agreed!
If historical accuracy gets in the way of entertainment then Hollywood will throw it out of the window. Always have, always will.
But the real story is so good I don't understand why you would change it
@@leonpaelinckthere are other movies that have portrayed parts of Napolean's life and battles more realistically, however, this one was the most intimate. It seemed to be more of a character study taken from his and Jospehine's letters white also giving some historical background. It's a great movie about the vulnerabilities of Napolean.
Given previous movies and series that stuck to history AND were classics, they are not mutually exclusive
Once again, Hollywood neglect to account one of the most catastrophic campaigns from the Napoleonic wars, and that actively crippled the French army, and eventually led to Napolean's defeat in waterloo - the Anglo-Portuguese aliance and the Peninsular wars. For anyone that may be interested, please check the Battle of Porto, the Battle of Bussaco and the Lines of Torres Vedras, where the Napoleonic troops faced devestating defeats, although at a huge cost for Portuguese and English troops.
The fact that a film about Napoleon was made is, in its self, an achievement.
How?
How? There's many films about him lol
What we all miss is historical epics and historical fiction. Films like Amadeus, Barry Lyndon, Cleopatra, Ben-Hur, Gladiator and Braveheart. Even if not historically accurate, these films get people talking about events and reading up on historical figures.
"Historical fiction." That's not a real thing. Also, do you really believe that people watched Braveheart (a movie that was virtually fiction) went on to read a book about Wallace? That's a legit question to you. Please reply.
@@stucorbett I’m not gonna speak for all. But I was one who, while I didn’t read an entire book on that era, did spend a good amount of time (a few hours) reading through the true history. Who Wallace was, Longshanks, the Scottish and England relations at this time, what led to and what followed the true events that transpired. I know many who have done similar and all still appreciate the movie for the historical fiction piece of cinematic art it was, while also acknowledging that the true events it was loosely based on were just as, if not more, interesting.
When you use the phrase "historical fiction," you lose all credibility. @@yankeeclipper27
@@stucorbetthistorical fiction is its own literary genre. You think you’re being smart when you’re really just being condescending. What makes it worse is that you are wrong. Historical fiction is just a made up story that takes place in a real historical setting. Just because you’re not smart enough to understand that concept doesn’t mean real adults arent allowed to discuss it.
They shouldnt have marketed it as a biopic
I'd bet that Kubrick wouldn't have messed around with the history like this if he'd done his movie.
You can spoil history by twisting it to fit a narrative
Ain't that the truth! 👍
If you twist the narrative, it can't be considered historically accurate anymore
Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
@@Jeremiah_Rivers76Those who Don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it. In Hollywood however, if it is a hit, we are all doomed to them repeating it...
@@Jeremiah_Rivers76 did you intentionally quote that wrong or are you that confused?
After seeing the movie, this list should be top 20 things that they get factually wrong
The famous book "The Grudge of Monte Cristo" also cleverly uses the history of Napoleon.
The protagonist Dantès was framed as a member of the Napoleonic party and imprisoned in 1815 (Napoleon was planning a restoration at the time). Later, Napoleon really restored the throne, but failed in only three months, which gave the protagonist no chance to reverse the verdict.
The Count of Monte Cristo, you mean?
@@diptarkadatta2907 yeah
grudge?
And it was written by the son of Napoleon's black general(albeit a black general he later sidelined and gave no support to)
Love the background music
Thanks for the video, but you missed the biggest creative libertty of the film, Napoleon is seeing leading a cavalry charge (it's even on one of the release posters!) and this is something he never did.
The film has Napoleon in a cavalry charge at the Battle of Waterloo. This never happened.
As a Frenchman, its a disgrace to have made a movie so far from the truth historically....
This is a fantasy movie that Ridley Scott randomly named Napoleon… a totally disappointing disaster…
Things Napoleon gets right: winning battles.
Things Napoleon gets wrong: Invading Russia.
Yeah this was a massive error, the french Grande Armee has been decimated during this campaign.
These are the "little" things he did just in Italy: The modern penal code, the land registry, the introduction of divorce, civil marriage, legal equality between children (first-born and otherwise), the elimination of any disparity between male and female children, the modern will, the laws protecting adoption.
He "just" abolished feudalism and took us into modernity....
@@OperatoreDelMiniCalcolatore There is a reason the Napoleonic Code can be regarded as the forefather, I'd rather say the father of modern European government codes. It was that revolutionary. One of the only points I hate is that he reintroduced slavery but everything you mentioned? It wasn't something that was suddenly smoothly practiced just because it was now law (the old guard and the rich had their own ideas and as always ways around it, hello bribery and corruption) but without it we'd still be stuck with the feudal system. Oh, and he decriminalized (male) homosexuality. Same as above, did not remove how people saw or abused people with that inclination but as long as you were discreet and could not be caught in contempt of public indecency laws - love as you will (ok, hyperbole). The rumor of French men being weak sissy boys with a weak wrist - British anti-French propaganda with this as the source. I'd wished that a movie would at least touch on the Code, something that has so much influence on modern life, much more and much more interesting than who he married, but what did I expect coming from Hollywood? That they praise an arch-enemy of the English-speaking world for his intelligence and liberalism? Yeah, right.
Nice video 👍👍
the movies Waterloo 1970 was very Historically correct to the era and the Napoleon 2002 is a 4 part series on the life of napoleon both are very well made!!!
Dynamite joke at the end there, Rebecca. 😂
They should have gone the route of the Band of Brothers. Focused more on his Marshalls and enemy Generals in a Game of Thrones style.
A lot of missed opportunities. How he showed
1. his brilliance in Toulon (General O'Hara of Britain surrendered to both Washington during the War of American Independence and to Napoleon during the siege of Toulon)
2.his friendship with Robbspiere which got him to prison
3. His defence of Paris against counter revolutionaries under the order of the Directory
4. How he met his trusted aides in the Italian Campaign (future Marshalls)
5. His balancing of the Rhine and Italian Army
6. Politics and Brilliance of his Marshalls
7. His Napoleonic Code, which still has some influence in modern democracies.
8. How incompetent Generals lost him Spain (mostly due to looting)
9. How the Polish celebrated his Rise (Establishment of the Duchy of Warsaw)
10. How Blücher resented Napoleon vowing that he would avenge his loss at the Twin Battle of Jena-Auerstedt.
11. The betrayal of a certain Marshall Jean Baptiste Bernadotte (patriarch of the current Royal House of Sweden, yup the people that give out the Nobel Prize)
12. His last days on the Island of St. Helena and many more.
Austerlitz is incorrectly portrayed in the film: the Austrians fell through the ice during their retreat. Furthermore, their fellow soldiers helped most of them out of the water; not many drowned. It's absurd to think that an Austrian general would send his cavalry across a known river that was covered in ice.
If you watched the movie, you'd know that they were retreating in the movie.
@@zechs5079, in the movie it was the Russians who drowned, which is incorrect
No!? It was Russian(famously Russian artillery and their covering soldiers and horses that were drowned in Frozen lakes) Austrian cavalry did not cross the lakes at all, they held Soult's cavalry before withdrawing through the west of the lakes, from where majority of other Russian soldiers(those of dokhturov and langeron) had fled before
In fact, the entire scene is wrong as there was no mass rout through the ice, no infantry and cavalry would try to flee through a place they know they could be killed
Only the artillery, which would have been stuck in winter mud, tried to cross the ice and was thus drowned(most crews were saved only a dozen cannon and 200 horse were found still in the depths of the water)
I noticed a lot of historical inaccuracies but I still loved it tbh
There's a channel called History Buffs that analyses historical movies, historically. Just posted that they are going to answer to this film ASAP. It looks like they have a lot to say - and it isn't good things.
Regardless of these mistakes, I still think Napoleon is a phenomenal movie. The battles depicted in the movie were all very epic. I truly recommend watching it.
Needa watch dis
I’m actually surprised by how mad people seem to be about the movie like… is this your first time watching a Hollywood adaptation of literally *anything* ? 😂
I am Italian and I found the film almost an insult. Napoleon was recognized as being the greatest military strategist in history, but here he is represented as a man falling asleep in a chair. It made me shiver to see that of the four battles represented in the films, there are only two victories and two big defeats. This is little relevant to historical reality where Napoleon won 43 campaign battles out of 48 major battles in which he participated. This is double the rate of victory of Julius Caesar and this makes him one of the greatest leaders who ever existed. He had exceptional charisma and managed to defeat antinapoleonic continental alliances against him five times, defeating all kings of Europe. I feel sorry because this film is not up to Scott's standards. I say this thinking about the toxic relationship between Josephine and Napoleon. I say this because of the lack of the military strategy component that would have provided material for an entire TV series. I say this because the perspective is too English and above all, huge events are missing, some of which marked the destiny of the european continent (including the defeat of the Serenissima Republic of Venice, the defeat of the Holy Roman Empire which had stood for almost 1000 years, the invasion of Spain and its empire, of Poland, the conquest of the Netherlands, of Sweden, the defeat of the Pope, to name a few). And the sale of Louisiana to the United States of America I think it should have been represented too, in my honest opinion. He was the master of the continent, and the film really didn't show anything about it...
I was disappointed because Scott had made a film about Napoleon in 1977, called The Duellists, in which had shown how he understood the figure of Napoleon much better than he did in this last movie. I am shocked by the decline in the quality of his production. I did not expect an apology for Napoleon, because he committed many heinous crimes, for sure. However his divisive figure was painted here with an absolutely negative shadow and with too strong a historical judgment. He was a revolutionary man all of his life, and thanks to him the ideals of French Revolution spreaded across the world, causing the age of aristocracy to end and the Modern Age and the bourgeois world, in which we still live today, to begin.
@@Squagliafrittatathat's great to hear, or I'm sorry for what happened ❤
@@Squagliafrittata do you braveheart bro? do you amadeus bro? do you even 300 bro?
Apart from his name that movie gets nothing worthwhile correct
With more wrongs than rights, this movie isn’t worth watching, especially for educational value. Ridley Scott and Joaquin Phoenix blew it again!
Napolean film got 5 things wrong and 5 right , so its 50% true History
@@SirsasthNigam. If only 10 ideas were presented then you would be correct. Alas ... there was no way a single movie could do his story justice. A mini-series at the minimum (which rumor has it might be done by Spielberg). His Marshals and Generals are very important parts of his story and they were ignored. On the other hand, getting 5 things right makes it far more historically accurate than Braveheart! lol
Waterloo is incredibly overrated, especially by the British. The most important defeats of Napoleon was 1. his campaign in Russia, where he lost the flourishing of his army and never replaced this loss. 2. Battle of the Nations near Leipzig. It was a decisive battle after which he was sent to the island of Elba.
Even if Waterloo Napoleon won, he would never again be able to dominate Europe. Napoleon himself was no longer interested in fighting and wanted only peace.
Just say you're an anglophobe. Without Waterloo, he would have invaded Germany again. And from Germany, he would have slowly regained the rest of Europe. It did not have to happen instantly.
@@mcoeif Anglophobe? No way. I'm just saying what the reality was. France was exhausted by constant wars, and Napoleon himself, after escaping from the island of Elbe and taking over the government, asked the European powers for peace. He did not want war because he knew very well that he had little chance of success. Only the English have a constant tendency to exaggerate the importance of Waterloo. Britain played a significant role in the liberation of Spain, which was important, but it was the expedition to Russia that broke Napoleon's neck.
waterloo's influence is overrated the batlle of the nations was just as vital, the failure in spain in which the brits played a major role to be sure in the fighting and organizing although I think spain between the army and the guerrillas did the most damage overall and most of all the invasion of russia which broke the back of the french army it was never the same@@mcoeif
You have to put this movie in perspective. Ridley Scott is VERY British... this is the British view/caricature of Napoleon, not the actual historical view. I am sure Wellington and the British elite at the time of Napolean would have approved of this movie.
The British were saved by the Prussians at Waterloo. Both armies were able to join up, even though Napoleon had given orders to prevent this (with artillery). The Duke of Wellington was in full retreat, but he took all the credit.
Exactly
Wellington did not take credit!? In the 19th century, it was common knowledge that The Anglo allies and the prussians jointly won the battle and it was always quoted about wellington, i.e his relief when Bluchers army arrived to save his. It was only during world war 1 and 2 when Germany became an enemy that the narrative was twisted
Number one rule of Hollywood movies.
*Don't let facts or logic get in the way of a story*
Yeah but if you don’t shoot at the pyramids with cannons it doesn’t look as badass .. movie was tight
I remember reading about a saying that goes …
_”Napoleon’s hat on a battlefield is worth 50000 troops.”_
Omitted the losing Battle of Nations or Leipzig.
Been watching these reviews and reading the comments: “Films too long, film skip over historical events.”
Pick one! Can’t have both!
I enjoyed it. I didn’t watch it at first cuz of such bad reviews but I liked how they took their time explaining stuff even though it was a MOVIE
Fun facts: The painting in the thumbnail is actually Napoleon's propaganda and not how his crossing the Alps looked like. The nickname "Little Corporal" wasn't given to him because of his stature, but because of what he did in the Battle of Lodi, which his soldiers used the nickname as a term of affection. Well, yes, Napoleon was 5'2, but only because the French inches were longer than the English ones at the time.
Fun fact, Britain would have lost the battle of waterloo if the Prussians hadn't rescued them.
Utter rubbish, Wellington & Blucher had agreed mutual support before the battle, the Prussians should have been there a lot sooner, even the famed old guard couldnt break Wellingtons line
@@christopherdenniston9013 the old guard never attacked wellington's line?
I thought it was long debunked that it was the middle guard who attacked at last.
Fun fact, Britain is an island nation, we could have let you dickheads to sort your own shit out & just laughed 😅
Now imagine Ridley Scott making an epic film about Alexander the Great with Leonardo DiCaprio as the protagonist! Man that would literally be EPIC!
Why were there no accents
"He came from nothing, he conquered everything." Literally nothing about Napoleon's life before the military is in the film.
Go mr. little man. Never Give Up till the end of the day!! 😃✊🏻
Had a WONDERFUL time watching this movie! The sets and the fashion were my favorite parts of the movie. Thanks for the vid too, DEFENITALLY helps to understand the movie A LOT better.
It's not an accurate showing of the history of Napoleon, remember that.
@@garretth8224 No movie adaptation of historical events or people are
@@knightmare5097 Right. They have to take SOME liberties.
@@garretth8224 Thanks.
@davidslife989 They took waaaay too many liberties, and skipped a LOT of very iconic moments of his life. For examples, the political maneuvering that led to the wars, his strategic genius and iconic persona on the battlefield. If i didn't already know his story and accomplishments, I would never think he was the greatest military commander of all time, from watching this movie.
Can't wait for the Director's cut
I hated that they didn't even have the effort to make Napolean speak with a French accent in the film.
The napoleon dynamite at the end, nice
Billed as Napoleon - It should have been called Josephine
I might go watch it just to enjoy the spectacle. It probably as accurate as Braveheart but i want to be entertained. Hope the inaccuracies dont annoy me too much. Really could have been 3 movies
I'll wait until it comes out on streaming, but the trailers look promising for a positive review by critics.
I'm hoping Hulu gets it and prime as well. It looks good
The greatest caliph of them all
Can you do comic book origin of Marvel's A-Bomb?
I was originally VERY excited about this movie. Planned to go to see it at the theater, for the first time since Covid. However, after seeing previews, hearing reviews and what everyone is saying, i think I'll save my money and catch it on the flip side. Joaquin is a little too, idk, something, to play Napoleon anyway.
It was a very good movie.
@@zechs5079I've seen it in cinema and its not anywhere near a good movie. An absolute mockery of Napoleon and his legacy
@@danijel9997 Agreed 100%
The movie is a fucking dissappoint, so much hype but nowhere what I expected, I should have waited for the torrent on this one
Looks like an OSCAR winner 🏆 😊
An interesting factoid that I would have liked to see in the movie is that Josephine's Daughter married Napolean's nephew. The Emperor Napolean III was actually Josephine's grandson and NOT Napolean's
That’s probably he lost against the German coalition in 1870…😂jk
You mean Josephine's daughter married Napoleon's brother and gave birth to Napoleon's nephew
Hortense married Louis and gave birth to Napoleon III
Hortense did not marry her own child
I saw it and it was awesome
Napoleon's reforms significantly impacted the Jewish community in France and the territories under his influence. Here are the key aspects of these reforms:
Emancipation of Jews: Napoleon played a crucial role in the emancipation of Jews in France and the territories he conquered. Under his rule, Jews gained full civil rights, which was a major shift from their previous status in many parts of Europe where they faced severe restrictions and discrimination.
The Assembly of Jewish Notables and the Sanhedrin: In 1806, Napoleon convened an assembly of Jewish leaders, known as the Assembly of Jewish Notables, followed by the re-establishment of the Sanhedrin in 1807. These bodies were tasked with answering questions about Jewish allegiance to the state, their laws, and their willingness to integrate into French society.
Guidelines for Integration: The responses from these Jewish bodies affirmed the loyalty of Jews to the state and their willingness to adhere to its laws. They also addressed issues related to Jewish religious practices and their compatibility with being French citizens.
End of Special Taxes and the Ghettos: Napoleon abolished the special taxes that Jews had to pay and the ghettos where they were compelled to live in certain regions. This was a significant step towards their social and economic integration.
Regulation of Moneylending: To address widespread stereotypes and grievances about Jewish moneylending practices, Napoleon imposed regulations to integrate these activities more closely into the mainstream financial system and to protect borrowers.
Mixed Responses: While Napoleon's policies significantly improved the status of Jews, they were met with mixed responses. Some saw them as a pathway to equality and integration, while others viewed them as a means to control the Jewish community and force their assimilation.
Overall, Napoleon's reforms marked a turning point for Jewish communities in Europe, promoting their emancipation and integration into society while also challenging traditional Jewish life and practices. These reforms laid the foundation for the modernization and assimilation of the Jewish community in France and influenced similar developments in other parts of Europe.
Always a crazy history
The Napoleon phoenix played would never have amounted to much. 😂
Definitely gonna See it! Napoleón is great! 🔥🔥🔥🔥🇨🇵🇨🇵🇨🇵🇨🇵🇨🇵
1. technically Marie Antoinette's niece *Maria Amalia is the last Queen of France* as the wife of Charles X, the last King of France
(Maria Amalia's mother is Maria Carolina, Queen of Naples, referenced in "Downton Abbey")
2. Joséphine's -barren state- infertility was due to *being a Terror victim*
(Josephine had 2 children prior to incarceration)
3. it was *Marie Walewska* (the "patriot" " _epouse Polonaise_ ")'s pregnancy (though legally recognized under her first husband Colonna-Walewski) which finally convinced Napoleon's potency
4. people gossiped that Napoleon's losing streak *began after the divorce* , saying Joséphine was his Lady Luck
5. Joséphine actually got to meet Marie & her son Alexandre (future Foreign Minister under Napoleon III) at Malmaison a couple of times
6. Napoleon crowning himself was to impart on everyone (including himself)'s minds that *his authority as Emperor wasn't by divine right* ("by the grace of God" (Dei Gratia), i.e. God-given)
Moscow was already in flames when Napoleon arrived, and did not start at night as reflected in the movie.
Film should be named Josephine 😂😂😂
This was a hit piece on one of the greatest men in history
An epic masterpiece! “Napoleon” is consistently surprising partly because it doesn’t conform to the conventions of mainstream historical epics, which is especially true of its startling, adamantly unromanticized title character. (The movie also doesn’t always conform to the historical record, and some may take issue with the portrayal of the Battle of Austerlitz.) In the early scenes, Napoleon seems to be another of Phoenix’s taciturn, unnervingly volatile, enigmatically damaged, violent men. The difference is that this Napoleon, with his bloat, scowls and consuming needs, often resembles nothing as much as an angrily petulant baby, one whose cruelty and pathological vanity make the horror he unleashes unnervingly familiar. A truly great MUST SEE motion picture!
Ridley Scott didn't do Napoleon any justice in this film:
1) You saw none of the brilliance in his battle strategies that won him dozens of battles
2) He was basically a SIMP for Josephine in this movie
3) Joaquin Phoenix is definitely too old to play Napoleon unless this was a remake of the 1970 Waterloo movie
4) You learned nothing how Napoleon reformed the French Army to becoming the powerhouse that it was then
5) You don't learn anything about his great generals/Marshalls that helped him achieve so many victories (Nay/Murat/Davout/Lannes/etc.)
6) You randomly jump to events years & years later where unless you're a history buff, you'll get lost during this movie!
As a whole, let’s be honest; it was a historically accurate movie! 👏🏻 It was amazing!! ❤️🔥 Absolutely loved Napoleon. At least, Napoleon wasn’t played by a Black actor, lol. So that’s a huge win in today’s movie industry! No forced diversity and bullshit.
there was no snow at the battle of Austerlitz also
Interesting! After watching, it sounds like Napoleon had become a legend in his own mind, much like tRump in our time.
If you like this, I recommend a podcast about this, and other times of history. It's called Door-Key Podcast. Find it where you get your podcasts!
Wrong person to play him,as it was the wrong person to play Johnny Cash,and in the Gladiator as well
Ridley Scott did a better job of capturing the Napoleonic era with the Duellists.
Everyone in the movie also speak like an American also....zero French accents lmao
I do hope they make a movie on iron marshal davout. Napoleon appears a little overbooked by now
I mostly enjoyed the movie, though to add to the number 2 entry on this list, the soldier that shot the hole in Napoleon's hat is using a scoped rifle. While Isaac Newton is credited with being the first to make a scope made to mount to a firearm for the purpose of aiming, There were no rifles with mounted scopes at the Battle of Waterloo, or any other of Napoleon's battles. Plus the scope is clearly just a spy glass like Napoleon and all other Generals are using throughout the movie
0:10 oh my god 😂
I caught a small "screw up" all the scenes of Harley Race he is shown with NO tattoos
Narrator: The filmakers definitely tried to have their cake and eat it too
Marie Antoinette: Let them eat cake
I see what you did there 😉
The Battle of Waterloo was an embarrassment. Where was Château d'Hougoumont, La Haye Sainte, and Papelotte? Where was the charge of the Scots Greys? Why was Michel Ney wearing a beard? Why did they have Napoleon charge into the coalition line with the calvary when he had no business being there? What an awful film!!!
It would had been better if they had shown more campaigns instead of focusing so much in his love life
Can you spoil history this isn’t history 😂