Some of the mixed reviews so far -
The Guardian - 5/5 - "[Ridley] doesn’t withhold the old-fashioned pleasures of spectacle and excitement. Phoenix is the key to it all: a performance as robust as the glass of burgundy he knocks back: preening, brooding, seething and triumphing."
Ridley Scott dispenses with the symbolic weight attached to previous biopics in favour of a spectacle with a great star at its centre
www.theguardian.com
The Telegraph - 4/5 - "If, at 85, Ridley Scott has reached the final season of his filmmaking career, Napoleon is the ideal work of wintry grandeur to mark it."
The director’s 28th feature is a magnificent slab of dad cinema, with Phoenix a startling emperor and Vanessa Kirby brilliant as his wife
www.telegraph.co.uk
BBC - 4/5 - "It's easy to luxuriate in the dozens of stately homes, the hundreds of gorgeous period costumes, and the countless extras that Scott lays before us. Scene by scene, his proper, old-fashioned historical epic is terrific fun."
With spectacular battle scenes and plenty of pithy vignettes, Ridley Scott's latest – starring Joaquin Phoenix – is 'a proper, old-fashioned historical epic', writes Nicholas Barber.
www.bbc.com
Empire - 4/5 - "This is a historical epic which is constantly on the lookout for subtle ways to undercut historical epics."
Joaquin Phoenix plays the legendary French emperor. Read Empire's Napoleon review.
www.empireonline.com
The Hollywood Reporter - "That’s a lot for any audience to digest in a single sitting, and while Scott can be commended for his ambition, neither he nor Scarpa manage to build those many plot pieces into a fluid narrative."
David Scarpa’s screenplay covers three decades of European history as the military commander triumphs in the Revolutionary Wars and rises to Emperor of France, only to end his life in exile.
www.hollywoodreporter.com
The Independent - 4/5 - "Napoleon is a traditional, historical epic rendered in Scott’s own brawny, cannily modern style. David Scarpa’s script matches those ambitions, though it’s at its weakest when it bends to narrative convenience. "
This is a two-and-a-half-hour spectacle that translates brutal history through Scott’s brawny, cannily modern style
www.independent.co.uk
Variety - "The script takes on far more than audiences have asked for as it is, to the extent that “Napoleon” ultimately suffers from the same problem as its subject: The film’s ambitions are greater than the people demand, as Scott bites off more than he can manage."
Although the strange chemistry between Joaquin Phoenix and Vanessa Kirby intrigues, the Napoleon-Josephine relationship distracts from the main event.
variety.com
Screenrant - "like the man himself,
Napoleon is a confounding film, as exciting as it is plodding and as self-aware of its flaws as Napoleon was blind to his own."
Napoleon is Ridley Scott's latest epic.
screenrant.com
As per usual, the "reviews" don't really do their job in any meaningful way, they never say "why" something is good or bad (script, direction, acting etc) with examples and instead they just discuss the plot (this happened, then this, then this etc) whilst being filled with spoilers which seems to be an oxymoron for a film review i.e. something people might read before watching a film. From the mix of reviews I read, the reviews seem to be firmly split into two encampments, one group which (like myself) wants to see the Military genius and national Leader with less "love story", and another who wants more about the love story between Napoleon and his wife and less about his battles and, from the reviews it certainly seems like the first group are more positive about the film than the second group.
The only fairly universally accepted point in pretty much every review I've read is that, whilst opinions of Joaquin Phoenix's acting choices here vary, everyone absolutely loved Vanessa Kirby.
