Napoleon | Sony/Apple | November 22, 2023 | Joaquin Phoenix is Napoleon | Ridley Scott

[dudalb]

15 hours ago, Gavin Feng said:

french probably don't like it.

 

 

 

 

 

I am betting lots of invidious comparasions with the Abel Gance film in France.

[Hatebox]

21 minutes ago, Mojoguy said:

Scott needs to get with Apple or Netflix. They pay ridiculously well for flops... um movies.

This is an Apple Studios film 🙂

 

 

Edited November 15, 2023 by Hatebox

[dudalb]

20 hours ago, Mojoguy said:

So we are getting a gutted version of Napoleon in theaters? Will this cut of the movie even be good or understandable? This really brought down the hype for the movie for for me.

As someone who thought not a expert,knows a little about the Napoleonic era, I can tell you point blank 2 and half hours is not enough time to really tell the story of the rise of Napoleon, let alone his entire career.

I understand the film ends with Austeritz, his greatest victory and the height of his career, and makes no atttempt to carry the story through the end..Waterloo. it toook Gance 4 hours just to cover the rise of Napoleon.

I know I  might look like a hypocrite with my generally negative opinion to judging a movie by it's running time before it opens, but Napoleon is a special case.

And yeah, I see a four hour director's cut in the future.

Edited November 15, 2023 by dudalb

[Mojoguy]

5 minutes ago, Hatebox said:

This is an Apple Studios film 🙂

 

 

Good! Milk them hard, Ridley!

[dudalb]

6 minutes ago, Hatebox said:

This is an Apple Studios film 🙂

 

 

Hey, I will subscribe to Apple in January just for "Masters Of the AIr" the Speilberg/Hanks produced miniseries about the US Air Forces campaign against Nazi Germany, the sucessor to "Band Of Brothers" and "The Pacific" which was in limbo at HBO before Aplle picked it up.

[Firepower]

Shame critics nailed Rildey again, but he'll easily survive this, he can do massive flops every year for the rest of his life and still have 100-200 mln projects lined up, that's how he rolls most of his career. When some young director releases a huge flop, it kills his career forever, but for Ridley it's just Tuesday, very few directors are this invincible.

Edited November 15, 2023 by Firepower

[dudalb]

Just now, Firepower said:

Shame critics nailed Rildey again, but he'll easily survive this, he can do massive flops every year for the rest of his life and still have 100-200 mln projects in line, that's how he rolls most of his career. When some young director releases a huge flop, it kills his career forever, but for Ridley it's just Tuesday, very few directors are this invincible.

Ridely has made some pretty big hits in his time; he gets cut slack because of that.

A yuung director has a huge flop, he can't really point at a string of past sucesses like Scott can.

[dudalb]

Scott has sruvived not just flops but some out and out weak films; I give you "GI Jane". 

[Firepower]

21 minutes ago, dudalb said:

Ridely has made some pretty big hits in his time; he gets cut slack because of that.

A yuung director has a huge flop, he can't really point at a string of past sucesses like Scott can.

And yet many other well known directors with big hits behind their belt still don't survive this number of huge flops like it's nothing. John Mctiernan didn't survive his last flops, Oliver Stone didn't, Martin Brest didn't, Brian De Palma didn't and so on. The only comparable director here is Martin Scorsese, but every movie Marty releases is at least positively received on release, if not showered in glory, so it explains how he survived his worst years, but a lot of Ridley's films were poorly received on release, including Blade Runner and Kingdom of Heaven. Ridley releases a massive flop The Last Duel and they give him 2 more historical epics with near 200 mln budgets instantly, this is insane, it just never happens with most directors no matter how well known they are. Maybe having a big production company helps him too.

 

20 minutes ago, dudalb said:

Scott has sruvived not just flops but some out and out weak films; I give you "GI Jane". 

I like GI Jane, he's done worse films this last decade.

Edited November 15, 2023 by Firepower

[dudalb]

18 minutes ago, Firepower said:

And yet many other well known directors with big hits behind their belt still don't survive this number of huge flops like it's nothing. John Mctiernan didn't survive his last flops, Oliver Stone didn't, Martin Brest didn't, Brian De Palma didn't and so on. The only comparable director here is Martin Scorsese, but every movie Marty releases is at least positively received on release, if not showered in glory, so it explains how he survived his worst years, but a lot of Ridley's films were poorly received on release, including Blade Runner and Kingdom of Heaven. Ridley releases a massive flop The Last Duel and they give him 2 more historical epics with near 200 mln budgets instantly, this is insane, it just never happens with most directors no matter how well known they are. Maybe having a big production company helps him too.

 

I like GI Jane, he's done worse films this last decade.

I disliked GI Jane because it was so phony. The guy who made "BLack Hawk Down" shoud have known better.

Scott seems to be lucky in that he might have aflop or bad film, but he follows that up with a sucessful one. Problem with De Palma and Stone is they had a string of critical and box office failures. 

Edited November 15, 2023 by dudalb

[Firepower]

38 minutes ago, dudalb said:

I disliked GI Jane because it was so phony. The guy who made "BLack Hawk Down" shoud have known better.

Scott seems to be lucky in that he might have aflop or bad film, but he follows that up with a sucessful one. Problem with De Palma and Stone is they had a string of critical and box office failures. 

I don't know, if Napoleon flops, he's gonna have 5 bombs in a row, 99% of Hollywood directors wouldn't survive this and yet he'll probably gonna get another 100 mln+ budget for his western he's going to shoot in 4-5 months, I'm not sure he even follows if his new movie flopped at this point, he doesn't care, they'll give him money anyway because they always do.

Edited November 15, 2023 by Firepower

[Youngstar]

28 minutes ago, Firepower said:

I don't know, if Napoleon flops, he's gonna have 5 bombs in a row, 99% of Hollywood directors wouldn't survive this and yet he'll probably gonna get another 100 mln+ budget for his western he's going to shoot in 4-5 months, I'm not sure he even follows if his new movie flopped at this point, he doesn't care, they'll give him money anyway because they always do.

I mean I kinda understand it for Ridley Scott (But at some point that shouldn't make sense money wise anymore) I'm more curious how David O. Russell keeps getting money/ movies... But other filmakers make one flop and are basically never seen again.

[Firepower]

12 minutes ago, Youngstar said:

I mean I kinda understand it for Ridley Scott (But at some point that shouldn't make sense money wise anymore) I'm more curious how David O. Russell keeps getting money/ movies... But other filmakers make one flop and are basically never seen again.

O. Russell did another film only 7 years later after Joy didn't do well, so I think it affected him. Now his new movie is a huge flop, so who knows if he'll make another movie again, at least with 50+ mln budget.

Edited November 16, 2023 by Firepower

[Barnack]

32 minutes ago, Firepower said:

film only 7 years later after Joy didn't do well, so I think it affected him. 

That was a mix of giant streaming content war money project with Weinstein getting cancelled with metoo and Covid, not because Joy did only $100 millions. 

 

Is why the director that made 129 millions with half the budget the studio expected on the Fighter, 236 millions on SLP, 257 millions on American Hustle, Joy doing 101 millions, could keep doing movies after that ? A serious question ?

 

  

44 minutes ago, Youngstar said:

But other filmakers make one flop and are basically never seen again.

 

If true, director would 2 flop would not exist and their single flop would be their last one, that not really the case.

 

If we just look at movies currently playing you will see director with flop on their resume, Antoine Fuqua not woriking after King Arthur failure would be been quite the lost, Alexander Payne after Downsizing failure, obviously Scorsese, Coppola after Marie Antoinette, Chappie was not really a hit (too weak domestic). Eli Roth has been hit and miss (single hits could pay for a lot of those miss).

 

I imagine Slumberland was maybe quite the misfired (Netflix make things not obvious, but considering it is a 150millions project that I do not know about...), Francis Lawrence with his track record (both at the box office but also putting movie in the can without story and problems) will still find work.

 

Edited November 16, 2023 by Barnack

[Bob Train]

Top Critics: 7.8/10

All Critics: 6.9/10

 

Interesting...

[TomThomas]

 

Quote

 

Carla Hay

Culture Mix

 

The long-winded Napoleon is a film that acts as if epic battle scenes are enough to make a great war movie. Overrated director Ridley Scott continues his awful tendency of shaming female sexuality more than male sexuality. Napoleon has an American accent.

She's weirdo.

Edited November 16, 2023 by TomThomas

[TomThomas]

Julian Roman

MovieWeb

 

Napoleon baffles as a strangely plotted historical epic that provides no real insight or context into the central characters. A mostly British cast anglicizes Gallic culture with an unforgivable whitewashing of Napoleon's well-documented racism.

Full Review | Original Score: 2/5 | Nov 16, 2023

Another weirdo.

[dudalb]

Jesus, does race have to dragged into everything nowdays?

Anyway, the writer of that review does not know much about the Napoleonic period....and it shows.

All his tirades about the Brits ruining the film make me think the writer is Franch who will not forgive Britian for Traflagar and Waterloo...

Edited November 16, 2023 by dudalb

[TalismanRing]

On 11/15/2023 at 10:57 AM, Issac Newton said:

 

 

 

 

Phoenix/Scott bring out a refreshingly comic side to Napoleon

 

Is this something we were truly missing and wanting?

[dudalb]

2 hours ago, TalismanRing said:

 

 

Phoenix/Scott bring out a refreshingly comic side to Napoleon

 

Is this something we were truly missing and wanting?

Somehow I think the historical Napoloen was not exactly and bundle of laughs.