Ridley Scott wants to vandalize history again (Napoleon)

[conon394]

I dunno R_V its historical fiction and I can see arguing the importance of confidant in Napoleon's life.

Its interesting to consider that Barbara Bush played the smiling first lady - but all accounts hse was a ruthless maneuverer and key person who built her husband's career

"from an interview with Richard Nixon. Someone asked him about Bush. He said that Bush was capable but boring. But Nixon also said that Barbara was super interesting because “she knows how to hate.”

Also be by your own time line Nappy seems to have poor success after he swapped brides.

[Roma_Victrix]

Also be by your own time line Nappy seems to have poor success after he swapped brides.

Causation and correlation?
Are we honestly arguing that Napoleon wouldn't have invaded Russia in 1812 if he hadn't divorced his first wife two years prior to that? LOL.
I'm sure Josephine provided some kind of stabilizing force in the life of Napoleon, but warfare is won by superior logistics, not the person who shares your bed at night.

[conon394]

Causation and correlation?
Are we honestly arguing that Napoleon wouldn't have invaded Russia in 1812 if he hadn't divorced his first wife two years prior to that? LOL.
I'm sure Josephine provided some kind of stabilizing force in the life of Napoleon, but warfare is won by superior logistics, not the person who shares your bed at night.

Come on you are overstating what I said. BUt also don't forget History is largely written by aristocratic men for aristocratic man until very lately and their interests unsuprislgly tend to make great men great men all by themselves.

Compare you can read Plutarch on Demosthenes and find out how he over came his speech impediment, his fear of extemporaneous speaking, became a excellent lawyer and recovered the money his uncles squandered or stole from him after his father died while hee was a minor. But nowhere does Plutarch mention his mother. The women who quite contrary to Athenian law and her dead husbands will refused to marry one of the Uncles and somehow retained possession of all her husbands core of farm land and thus had the money to raise and educate Demosthene and support his legal vendettas.

Do I think the whole balance of Wessex creating england turned on one danish raised saxon orphan from Northumbria? Like I said I generally take Ridley Scott to be exercising in historical fiction not a documentary. I agree its problematic because unlike say Hornblower or Sharpe he is not burying his characters in tangents to the main events where they are not per say altering history or the lead actors in it - no matter how cool etc.

If he want's make Josephene some sounding board, advisor or point of stability for him and does it well I can deal - again I am not cracking open my new 50 -100 dollar or more academic press book on Napoleon at 1000 pages and all the footnotes etc. I just thanking all the greater and lesser deities of theater that it is a non f-ing marvel blockbuster I can watch that both with and daughter said they go as well.

[Roma_Victrix]

If he want's make Josephene some sounding board, advisor or point of stability for him and does it well I can deal - again I am not cracking open my new 50 -100 dollar or more academic press book on Napoleon at 1000 pages and all the footnotes etc. I just thanking all the greater and lesser deities of theater that it is a non f-ing marvel blockbuster I can watch that both with and daughter said they go as well.

Ridley's new film not being yet another Marvel blockbuster is kind of a low bar, but you a bit right about that, at least it's not that or same old, same old (at the very least, a biopic on Napoleon in the form of a sweeping epic with huge production values hasn't been done in a long time, decades).

Also yes, the film can take some liberties with history, so long as it doesn't have anything ridiculous. Again, kind of a low bar to cross, though, and the movie doesn't really deserve accolades and the director a cookie as a reward for not including insane ahistorical stuff like dragons, unicorns, wizards, time travelers, and Empress Josephine's absence being the reason for Napoleon losing by invading Russia.

I'm sure the movie will be fun, even if it has its many flaws. Here is Ridley explaining why he made the film and his reasoning behind its decisions:

[conon394]

Also yes, the film can take some liberties with history, so long as it doesn't have anything ridiculous.

Well have to say clearly gladiator proves you wrong in that assertion.

[Roma_Victrix]

Well have to say clearly gladiator proves you wrong in that assertion.

Obviously Gladiator was not a historically accurate documentary on the reigns of Marcus Aurelius or Commodus, and had entirely fictional characters like Maximus and Lucius, but the fact that it had entirely fictional characters mixed into the story gives it a ton of leeway by default. That's not the case with Napoleon. Josephine is not a fictional character, she was a historical empress and first wife of Napoleon. As far as I know, Ridley's new film Napoleon does not contain fictional characters like Gladiator and is presented as a more accurate telling of Napoleon, his household, and his reign. In that regard it is more comparable to The Crown series or Hooper's film The King's Speech.

In other words, you don't seem to appreciate the difference between historical fiction and a historical drama.

[conon394]

In other words, you don't seem to appreciate the difference between historical fiction and a historical drama.

I do but I think franky they run a continuum. . And as far as I know we have no diary of either or both key figures to so since Scott is not making a documentary he has room to play with their relationship and how it might or might not be important. The obvious more important rejointed is rather "am I not entertained". I not going to Hollywood for a history lesson. I can leave that to books - which I do to a tune of a somewhat expensive level. Do you fume at the Spartacus because it often turns on romantic foursome of Spartacus his girl, Crassus and Spartacus's lancer? All of course made out of whole cloth.

[Kyriakos]

From the trailer I can tell this is going to be very bad
It's not practical either, with so many battles. The Alexander movie had three or four (don't recall if they even showed Chaeronea).

[mishkin]

The last thing I expected to find here was "too many battles (judging by the trailer)"

Correction, the last thing I would expect to read here is "Vanessa Kirby is too beautiful to play Josephine. Totally inacurate. That ruins the movie for me."

[conon394]

From the trailer I can tell this is going to be very bad
It's not practical either, with so many battles. The Alexander movie had three or four (don't recall if they even showed Chaeronea).

Why? Bad that is...

[Kyriakos]

I meant that an actual biopic of Napoleon would need to show a large number of battles. I certainly don't expect this movie (or any other 4 hour movie) to fit that many in

[mishkin]

Ah, ok. The trailer seems quite bellicose, but we shouldn't trust trailers too much. Surely he will try to combine action, drama, characters description, etc. in the best way he can.

[Lord Oda Nobunaga]

This doesn't seem like Napoleon. This is like if Commodus took his anti-manic medications and became a stoic African warlord who now charges into battle like general Butt Naked because he ate a child's heart with some brown brown and now thinks he is bullet proof.

What the heck is going on with his voice by the way? He sounds like they just kicked him in the cannon balls.

[Lord Oda Nobunaga]

From the still I thought he was asian

In Japan the two most popular foreign historical persons were actually George Washington and Napoleon. They had their own Japanese biographies in the 1800's. Just to show how well known they were, and how basically they were the only two foreigners that Japanese people could recognize, the two biographies sometimes came back to back in the same tome. Well everyone also knew the big nosed fat round eyed demon Matthew Perry but Friends wasn't well liked during the Edo Period.

Allegedly during the Qing Dynasty they worshipped Napoleon or they gave offerings to a bust of Napoleon. There doesn't seem to be much evidence except for a statement made by some Brit diplomat or something. What they actually knew about Napoleon in his own time or later is beyond me. Maybe they regarded Napoleon as an Emperor in the West, with themselves as ruling the East.

Not quite Asian but in Iran during the 1800's Napoleon was really popular. With Iranian scholars often lambasting the Qajar monarchs (presumably privately when the monarch wasn't around) by saying "why can't you be more like Napoleon?" and honestly this image might have aided the Pahlavi general turned monarch in seizing power from the Qajars.

[Kyriakos]

^There was a massive personality cult around Napoleon, likely aided by the ultimate disaster that Napoleon III brought about.
That said, similar cults existed in Germany following the 1870 war, and then died with the lost world war.
Some countries had "bonapartiste"-styled leaders, like Paraguay in that war which ended with half its male population killed :o

[Pinarius]

https://twitter.com/EduardHabsburg/s...97533142073521

[Pinarius]

[Lord Oda Nobunaga]

https://twitter.com/EduardHabsburg/s...97533142073521

Ironic that it is an inbred Hapsburg saying this. But still pretty hilarious commentary about this movie.

[Kyriakos]

History movie repeats itself as farce

[Lord Oda Nobunaga]

Nice meme!

There was a massive personality cult around Napoleon, likely aided by the ultimate disaster that Napoleon III brought about.
That said, similar cults existed in Germany following the 1870 war, and then died with the lost world war.
Some countries had "bonapartiste"-styled leaders, like Paraguay in that war which ended with half its male population killed :o

Napoleon III largely killed Bonapartism. The popularity of Napoleon comes from his own time and the aftermath which was rule by the Bourbons. Even usurper Louis-Philippe had to play up to Napoleon's legacy 15 years after Napoleon's downfall. I would say that Napoleon's popularity declined after 1870/71.