2023-11-17 23:35:35
by Stefano Montefiori
Historical truths changed: Napoleon did not see the queen die. And she often smiled, while in the film at the cinema now she never smiles. Protests from French historians
Napoleon and his massacres also embarrass his compatriots, who in fact celebrated the bicentenary of his death two years ago without too much triumphalism. But it’s one thing for a Frenchman to criticize the Emperor, and another if certain liberties are taken by an Anglo-American. The great director Ridley Scott, author of masterpieces such as The Duelists, Alien or Blade Runner but also of less successful works such as House of Gucci, provoked protests from French historians (and not only) for his Napoleon, presented as a world premiere two evenings ago in Paris.
an extraordinary film with scenes of battles destined to remain – for example the one on the ice of Austerlitz – but there is the problem that the French do not recognize their great course. Joaquin Phoenix who plays him is exceptional but never smiles, while even Madame de Stal, considered by Napoleon one of his four enemies together with Prussia, Russia and England, said that the Emperor was a man with a seductive smile.
Ridley Scott’s Napoleon instead resembles the Napoleon told by the Restoration, that is, by the victors gathered in the Congress of Vienna: a bloodthirsty and vulgar little man, a brute without political vision capable only of sending hundreds of thousands of men to the slaughter.
According to the French historian Patrice Gueniffey, author of the gigantic biography published by Gallimard in 2013, watching Ridley Scott’s film it is not clear how such a mediocre and obtuse character could conquer Europe. Then there is the problem of factual errors, excessive liberties with respect to historical truth: unlike what is seen in the film, Napoleon did not witness Marie Antoinette’s execution (she was in Toulon), he never had her bombed the pyramids of Egypt (indeed, he asked a group of scientists of the time to study them), and above all he was not overwhelmed by his wife’s superior intelligence.
Josephine (Vanessa Kirby) cheated on him, of course, but this is not enough to make her the free and brilliant personality capable of making history while remaining behind the scenes, as the film seems to suggest. Widespread woke temptation from which not even French productions are immune: a few months ago the widow of entrepreneur Bernard Tapie, Dominique, wanted to point out that she had never been the real thinker of the couple, as the Netflix series suggests. Dominque Tapie, who is alive, was able to deny it; Josphine de Beauharnais, died 16 December 1809, no.
Napoleon belittled, Wellington exalted: a very pro-British approach which, however, did not make a popular English historian more accommodating. Dan Snow published a video on TikTok to line up all the inaccuracies contained in the film (Napoleon did not conquer everything, not England, for example, a significant detail).
The 85-year-old Ridley Scott responded to Snow in the New Yorker with great succinctness: Get a life. The director did not want to spend any more time on the issue, but one can assume what his argument is, not without foundation: Napoleon is not a documentary, nor an educational work intended to be shown in schools. a film, a work of fiction.
Joaquin Phoenix, who plays Napoleon, explains it with these more diplomatic words: If you really want to understand who Napoleon was, perhaps it’s better for you to start reading and studying on your own. If you see the film, you will have a story told through Ridley’s eyes. Cinematic eyes, and British.
Corriere della Sera also on Whatsapp. It’s enough click here to subscribe to the channel and always be updated.
November 17, 2023 (changed November 17, 2023 | 10.35pm)
© ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
#Ridley #Scotts #blockbuster #takes #liberties #time.news