Movies Serious Movie Discussion

[Rimbaud82]

Hey, @Rimbaud82: I'm going to start teaching a new film history class next week, and in preparation while deciding which countries/time periods to cover and which films to set as screenings, I ran through a bunch of UK films. My plan was to screen In the Name of the Father (connecting England and Ireland) and Trainspotting (connecting England and Scotland). Ultimately, I decided instead that I'd do a week on French films (culminating in a students-turning-on-me-for-making-them-watch-triggering-shit focus on New French Extremism ) and that left me no room on the syllabus for a week on UK films. But still, I not only rewatched both In the Name of the Father and The Boxer - I still think that the latter is a bit flat, both DDL's performance and the story, but the former was even better this viewing, really compelling film and I love the father and son being in prison together - I also had a Bob Hoskins double-header.

I'd seen The Long Good Friday once before a million years ago, but watching it again, that's a hell of a film. In addition to seeing a young Helen Mirren and an even younger Pierce Brosnan (in his film debut), Hoskins is so good in that role. For me, it was shades of Edward G. Robinson in Little Caesar, the scrappy guy who dreams of the big time but whose biggest enemy has always been his ego and his insecurity. But there was a sweetness to him that Robinson didn't have. And I loved his and Mirren's relationship, they were really there for each other, and the best part was the way that, at different points in the film, one of the pair was losing their shit and the other one smacked them to get them back down to Earth. They're battle-hardened survivors and they're ride-or-die. It's the closest thing that I've seen to Steve McQueen and Ali MacGraw in The Getaway. And that, of course, makes the justly famous ending that much better.

Saw this tag when I was out doing something else, and then completely forgot to come back and reply. Apologies!

Pretty much agree with assessments though, In the Name of the Father is a solid story. What happened to Giuseppe Conlon is tragic and it's one of the hardest hitting elements of the film. Daniel Day-Lewis and Pete Postlethwaite both put in brilliant performances with excellent accents for the most part.

The Boxer I have always found a bit more....meh. It's not bad by any stretch, but I found it to be quite muddled, sort of caught half-way between a boxing melodrama and a political thriller. Obviously the intention was to show how the conflict impacted upon ordinary life, but it comes off a bit half-baked. It's also an especially strange choice of sport to tell this story given the real history of boxing during The Troubles, which was remarkably free from the kind of sectarian hatred which plagued other areas of Irish life, even other sports. Though the film does throw some homage to the real Holy Family boxing club. Daniel-Day Lewis was in fine fettle, pretty much picking up from his performance from In The Name of the Father. I found Emily Watson significantly less convincing, her accent was very poor which makes the whole performance seem contrived, whereas with DDL his accent - barring the odd slip here and there which is natural - feels very worn and lived in.

The Long Good Friday what's not to like, perfect script and so many good performances. Been a while since I have seen it to comment on it more.

If I'm suggesting films about The Troubles, then Hunger (2008) is the pick of the bunch for me. Also love Elephant (1989) for a rather unconvential TV film.

Ken Loach has a decent one called Hidden Agenda (1990), curious if you've seen it? Seems less known these days but has Brian Cox and Frances McDormand. It's a solid thriller, dealing with the murkiness of the intelligence war and British state terrorism.

 

[Bullitt68]

Pretty much agree with assessments though, In the Name of the Father is a solid story. What happened to Giuseppe Conlon is tragic and it's one of the hardest hitting elements of the film. Daniel Day-Lewis and Pete Postlethwaite both put in brilliant performances with excellent accents for the most part.

I've reached the week in the term when I decided to ditch the "problematic" and "triggering" New French Extremism films and go with my initial instinct to do a week on UK Cinema. (I'm sick of snowflakes complaining in their student feedback at the end of every term about the "intense" movies that I assign. Just learn about the UK this term and give me a break from the whining ) Over the weekend, the students will be watching In the Name of the Father and Trainspotting. And it was cool for me doing this particular lecture because in the past, in different film history courses that I've taught, I've always done the lecture on UK films around the time of the British New Wave and have never gone beyond the 1970s. But for this class, which has a scope of 1975 to the present, I got to talk about more contemporary films from the '80s and '90s. I talked about and showed an early chunk from Withnail & I, which was fun for me - and it warmed my heart that Richard E. Grant got a bunch of laughs - but then in order to properly set up the screening of In the Name of the Father, I not only talked about The Troubles, and I not only showed clips from The Long Good Friday, but I like showing clips from documentaries as a way to get the students into the time and place of a particular subject, and I found a cool documentary on Netflix about the Miami Showband. I imagine that you know all about that story, but I didn't, and aside from the great historical perspective and the footage that they had, that was a wild story to learn about.

Now we'll see next Tuesday what the students think of In the Name of the Father.

The Boxer I have always found a bit more....meh. It's not bad by any stretch, but I found it to be quite muddled, sort of caught half-way between a boxing melodrama and a political thriller. Obviously the intention was to show how the conflict impacted upon ordinary life, but it comes off a bit half-baked. It's also an especially strange choice of sport to tell this story given the real history of boxing during The Troubles, which was remarkably free from the kind of sectarian hatred which plagued other areas of Irish life, even other sports. Though the film does throw some homage to the real Holy Family boxing club. Daniel-Day Lewis was in fine fettle, pretty much picking up from his performance from In The Name of the Father. I found Emily Watson significantly less convincing, her accent was very poor which makes the whole performance seem contrived, whereas with DDL his accent - barring the odd slip here and there which is natural - feels very worn and lived in.

Agree with all of this.

The Long Good Friday what's not to like, perfect script and so many good performances. Been a while since I have seen it to comment on it more.

I'll have to watch each again in closer proximity to one another to officially decide, but if The Long Good Friday isn't my new pick for GOAT British crime film, it's second only to Get Carter, and I'm loving The Long Good Friday so much that I'm tempted to bump it up over Get Carter.

If I'm suggesting films about The Troubles, then Hunger (2008) is the pick of the bunch for me. Also love Elephant (1989) for a rather unconvential TV film.

90 minute lectures always bum me out because it feels like no time at all. I always joke with my students that even though none of them would wish this, I always wish my classes could be 7 hours long so that I could show them so much more cool shit than I have time to in 90 minutes. If I had more time, I would've definitely spent time on Hunger, but I just threw it out there for them if they end up interested in watching more films in the vein of In the Name of the Father. I myself would have to rewatch the TV film Elephant. I watched it once a long time ago in connection with Gus Van Sant's film, but I don't really remember it.

Ken Loach has a decent one called Hidden Agenda (1990), curious if you've seen it? Seems less known these days but has Brian Cox and Frances McDormand. It's a solid thriller, dealing with the murkiness of the intelligence war and British state terrorism.

Now this is one that's escaped me, but it's on the list. Thanks for the recommendation.

 

[moreorless87]

I'd seen The Long Good Friday once before a million years ago, but watching it again, that's a hell of a film. In addition to seeing a young Helen Mirren and an even younger Pierce Brosnan (in his film debut), Hoskins is so good in that role. For me, it was shades of Edward G. Robinson in Little Caesar, the scrappy guy who dreams of the big time but whose biggest enemy has always been his ego and his insecurity. But there was a sweetness to him that Robinson didn't have. And I loved his and Mirren's relationship, they were really there for each other, and the best part was the way that, at different points in the film, one of the pair was losing their shit and the other one smacked them to get them back down to Earth. They're battle-hardened survivors and they're ride-or-die. It's the closest thing that I've seen to Steve McQueen and Ali MacGraw in The Getaway. And that, of course, makes the justly famous ending that much better.

Then, I watched Mona Lisa for the first time. It's always great seeing Michael Caine in anything, but Hoskins knocked this one out of the park as well. Absolutely none of the hard edges or cunning of his crime kingpin from The Long Good Friday, but a lot more sweetness and vulnerability. Not an easy character to play, but Hoskins crushed it, and he definitely deserved his Oscar nomination. Being a Neil Jordan film, it's not that surprising that (a) sex is on the menu and (b) there is a twist at the end that guts the protagonist, but I enjoyed the way that he crafted such a multi-faceted female character in Simone, who made it so easy to understand Hoskins' character falling for her. My favorite part, though, was the montage with Hoskins looking for Simone's friend in various London sex clubs to the tune of Genesis' "In Too Deep"

I'd guess from a US perspective its a bit harder to see where these kinds of films were coming from as you don't get much exposure to TV series like The Sweeney and Minder but the cockney underworld was very in fashion around the late 70's and early 80's in the UK, 10-20 years before Guy Ritchie.

Those two almost seem to have reverse in rep, at the time Mona Lisa got more attension but since then really Long Good Friday has built up into being considered THE brit gangster film and one of the best examples of british funded cinema from the era(George Harrison's Handmade films like Time Bandits). I spose you could argue the twist in Mona Lisa has dated a bit but really I think the films attraction is more than that, a really good view of that kind of environment which shows the nastiness but doesn't make the women involved merely victims waiting to be rescued ala Pretty Woman. I do think Hoskins really brings a lot of charm to the role and the setup with Coltrane's wheeler dealer caravan is very fun.

Not as good as those two overall but I kind of mix(staring Mirren) of them is Hussy, first half of that I do really like as the same kind of pretty woman story without being too judgemental or white knighting, second half goes a bit crazy and ends up a bit more like an episode of the Sweeney with everything turned up to 11.

 

[Bullitt68]

I'd guess from a US perspective its a bit harder to see where these kinds of films were coming from as you don't get much exposure to TV series like The Sweeney and Minder but the cockney underworld was very in fashion around the late 70's and early 80's in the UK, 10-20 years before Guy Ritchie.

And ironically, I don't much care for Guy Ritchie. Maybe it's the annoying jocularity and frenzy, but his films have always been pretty off-putting. I was anticipating showing some of Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels and/or Snatch in my lecture, but while prepping for it, I couldn't even rewatch either all the way through. The only film of his that I can say I actually like is Wrath of Man. I haven't even been able to bring myself to try The Gentlemen despite knowing that it has an homage to The Long Good Friday.

Those two almost seem to have reverse in rep, at the time Mona Lisa got more attension but since then really Long Good Friday has built up into being considered THE brit gangster film and one of the best examples of british funded cinema from the era(George Harrison's Handmade films like Time Bandits). I spose you could argue the twist in Mona Lisa has dated a bit but really I think the films attraction is more than that, a really good view of that kind of environment which shows the nastiness but doesn't make the women involved merely victims waiting to be rescued ala Pretty Woman. I do think Hoskins really brings a lot of charm to the role and the setup with Coltrane's wheeler dealer caravan is very fun.

Well said.

Not as good as those two overall but I kind of mix(staring Mirren) of them is Hussy, first half of that I do really like as the same kind of pretty woman story without being too judgemental or white knighting, second half goes a bit crazy and ends up a bit more like an episode of the Sweeney with everything turned up to 11.

Nice, another recommendation that'd escaped me. I only know Matthew Chapman as the director of the bizarre Jennifer Jason Leigh '80s movie Heart of Midnight, which wasn't that good but which gets bonus points for being weird. Plus, I like John Shea, aka Lex Luthor from Lois & Clark: The New Adventures of Superman

 

[moreorless87]

And ironically, I don't much care for Guy Ritchie. Maybe it's the annoying jocularity and frenzy, but his films have always been pretty off-putting. I was anticipating showing some of Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels and/or Snatch in my lecture, but while prepping for it, I couldn't even rewatch either all the way through. The only film of his that I can say I actually like is Wrath of Man. I haven't even been able to bring myself to try The Gentlemen despite knowing that it has an homage to The Long Good Friday.

No I'd tend to agree with you, the first couple of films are just about ok I spose but its pretty thin entertainment and I think a rather cartoonish setting done by a couple of posh boys were as the earlier era of the 70's and 80's does I think feel a lot more genuine plus has more charm to it. I think you can feel a bit of Get Carter in Mona Lisa for example, most obviously with Cain but the nastiness is a bit more balanced with warmth.

Nice, another recommendation that'd escaped me. I only know Matthew Chapman as the director of the bizarre Jennifer Jason Leigh '80s movie Heart of Midnight, which wasn't that good but which gets bonus points for being weird. Plus, I like John Shea, aka Lex Luthor from Lois & Clark: The New Adventures of Superman

Its more "interesting" than the level of the others of the era being mentioned for me, mostly because Mirren and Shea are very good in it and the kind of seedy but not nasty gentlemans club atmosphere is well done with little stage numbers. Halfway though it shifts into a very different film, more of a ovetr the top crime drama with a load of much more larger than life characters and situations involved.

 

[Bullitt68]

Hey @Rimbaud82, I watched Hidden Agenda last night. Fascinating film in terms of the political content threaded through it, but a bit dull and anticlimactic in storytelling terms. The whole time watching it, I couldn't tell if it was supposed to be a whodunnit, a police procedural, a political thriller, or a crime drama, and by the end, it never really became any of them. It just felt very sloppy and poorly executed. But I thought that both Brian Cox and Frances McDormand turned in solid performances, Cox in particular, and the sequence with Cox being told how it is by his superiors was the best part of the film.

Now tonight I think I'm going to have a Helen Mirren double feature with Hussy and then The Cook, the Thief, His Wife & Her Lover. I'd also like to see Cal for the IRA plot but I still have to track that one down.

No I'd tend to agree with you, the first couple of films are just about ok I spose but its pretty thin entertainment and I think a rather cartoonish setting done by a couple of posh boys were as the earlier era of the 70's and 80's does I think feel a lot more genuine plus has more charm to it. I think you can feel a bit of Get Carter in Mona Lisa for example, most obviously with Cain but the nastiness is a bit more balanced with warmth.

QFT.

Its more "interesting" than the level of the others of the era being mentioned for me, mostly because Mirren and Shea are very good in it and the kind of seedy but not nasty gentlemans club atmosphere is well done with little stage numbers. Halfway though it shifts into a very different film, more of a ovetr the top crime drama with a load of much more larger than life characters and situations involved.

I'll be sure to post my thoughts once I watch it tonight.

 

[moreorless87]

Enys Men (2022)

With this excellent follow-up to Bait (2019), Mark Jenkin gives us a richly captivating and profoundly eerie film in the vein of the '70s folk horrors of ‘old, weird Britain’. Less Wicker Man (1973) and much more Penda’s Fen (1974). This cinematic inheritance is a very self-conscious one, which Enys Men leans into. As with Bait, Jenkin uses a vintage Bolex camera and shoots on 16mm which, combined with other unusual techniques, gives the film a deliberately old-fashioned feel. It wouldn’t feel out of place as a Ghost Story for Christmas episode either (Stigma from 1977 seems like a particular touchstone), but there are a whole host of influences from this decade.

Enys Men is set on a fictional Cornish island in the weeks before May Day, 1973. It follows an unnamed wildlife volunteer (played by the excellent Mary Woodvine) as she goes about her daily tasks. Every morning she trods the same journey to a nearby cliff edge, where she makes measurements on some rare local flowers. On the way home she superstitiously drops a stone down an old mineshaft. In the afternoons she scribbles her observations in a notebook and makes tea. In the evening she reads ‘A Blueprint For Survival’. The only other task she has is to tend to the generator outside. Utterly alone on the island, the days slip past with a monotony which takes on a ritualistic quality. “No change”, as she records in the notebook.

Yet it soon becomes apparent that there is something else lurking underneath this veneer of tranquility. The reassuring repetition of the Volunteers' routine is punctured by at-first small aberrations. Seemingly ordinary events like running out of teabags take on an unnerving significance. As the film moves forward the Volunteer begins to have strange visions (or are they visions?), some of which are seemingly connected to her own memories. It is unclear if she is simply haunted by her past, driven insane by the profound isolation, or if there is something more unsettling emanating from within the landscape itself. Enys Men means “stone island” in Cornish and an ancient standing stone can be seen from the Volunteers window...

With an almost Roeg-ian editing style the film collapses the distinctions between past, present and future and brings us into a world of the uncanny - the intersection of folklore, landscape and memory. While it is a kind of folk horror, it is not outright 'scary'. However, there is a pervasive sense of dread which suits the film very well. I absolutely think some people will find it irritatingly abstract. There are some clear themes of course, don't get me wrong, but the fractured style deliberately resists a superficial analysis. On the whole I thought it was excellent and one I have found that has stayed with me days after I left the cinema. I get the sense that it is one that will reward some rewatches.

Finally got to see this and I'm very impressed, I did worried Jenkin was going to be a one hit wonder and perhaps the "Lofi Bresson" style was going to be a bit of a gimmick that only worked once but it suits this film very well dispite being so different to Bait. What you could argue I spose is that its the atmospheric beach sections of Bait with the mysterious fisherman extended out to an entire film and I think that does actually sum up the atmosphere very well, Its a film very much based on the creating an atmosphere off of the landscape infused with a sense of history moreso than a horror.

It does have a healthy dose of Don't Look Now to it in style/theme mixed in with a bit of The Shining although it explains itself even less than either of those and I'm not sure is intended to have an exact reading of events, more a merging of memory,.history and the landscape. Watch the BFI bluray it does actually also I think bring in another influence with the children film from the 70's Haunters of the Deep, really I think what I'd call "Oliver Postgate Ennui" has had a pretty big influence on a lot of art of Gen X'ers who grew up with it, that kind of disconnected whimsy with a sense of decline and sadness to it.

 

[Rimbaud82]

Hey @Rimbaud82, I watched Hidden Agenda last night. Fascinating film in terms of the political content threaded through it, but a bit dull and anticlimactic in storytelling terms. The whole time watching it, I couldn't tell if it was supposed to be a whodunnit, a police procedural, a political thriller, or a crime drama, and by the end, it never really became any of them. It just felt very sloppy and poorly executed. But I thought that both Brian Cox and Frances McDormand turned in solid performances, Cox in particular, and the sequence with Cox being told how it is by his superiors was the best part of the film.

Completely forgot to reply to this. Maybe I was misremembering, but I definitely liked it on the whole. Perhaps as you say the political content was doing a lot of the heavy lifting.

 

[Rimbaud82]

Finally got to see this and I'm very impressed, I did worried Jenkin was going to be a one hit wonder and perhaps the "Lofi Bresson" style was going to be a bit of a gimmick that only worked once but it suits this film very well dispite being so different to Bait. What you could argue I spose is that its the atmospheric beach sections of Bait with the mysterious fisherman extended out to an entire film and I think that does actually sum up the atmosphere very well, Its a film very much based on the creating an atmosphere off of the landscape infused with a sense of history moreso than a horror.

It does have a healthy dose of Don't Look Now to it in style/theme mixed in with a bit of The Shining although it explains itself even less than either of those and I'm not sure is intended to have an exact reading of events, more a merging of memory,.history and the landscape. Watch the BFI bluray it does actually also I think bring in another influence with the children film from the 70's Haunters of the Deep, really I think what I'd call "Oliver Postgate Ennui" has had a pretty big influence on a lot of art of Gen X'ers who grew up with it, that kind of disconnected whimsy with a sense of decline and sadness to it.

Wholeheartedly agree with all of this! I must pick up the blu ray.

 

[Rimbaud82]

Pacifiction (2022)

Watched this last night, the latest from Albert Serra. Cahiers du cinéma’s best film of last year I’m told. Set in French Polynesia, the film follows the High Commissioner of the Republic (the senior French government official) as he deals with disquieting rumours on the island. Sightings of a submarine are believed to augur the return of nuclear testing (which the French government had previously conducted in the region between 1966 and 1996, with a gravely underestimated human impact).

While certainly more narratively driven than his previous films, Pacifiction is still a rather slow-burn. Well, that's putting it mildly. It doesn’t so much burn as drift. Over a punishing 165 minutes the film delivers a languid commentary on post-colonialism, geopolitics and armageddon. However, it’s not the tense political thriller you might expect given that description. It has a strange, uneasy tone, with more time spent in seedy “Tiki-themed” nightclubs than government council rooms.

Although the implications are grave, Pacifiction deals with its themes obliquely. The narrative meanders all over the place, featuring several confusing tangents and events which appear only loosely connected, if at all. If anything it struck me as profoundly allegorical - the inert viewer trapped in this confounding Tropical entanglement while powerful, unseen forces move off-stage. An unsettling lack of agency or authority.

The visuals are a strong-point, with precise blocking, impressive framing and colour-grading which lends this island paradise a kind of picture-perfect postcard falseness, which runs counter to the underlying seediness and to the overarching exploitation. Everything feels quite surreal.

Certainly an interesting film on the whole, one which is definitely worth watching if you have a stomach for these sorts of things. I’ve found myself reflecting on it a bit, but it did also feel a bit frustrating to watch at times. Not to mention ponderously long. I can’t say I loved it, nor was I absolutely blown-away. In a similar(ish) vein I found Fontana’s Azor much more impressive.

 

[Rimbaud82]

The Beasts (2022)

Was really really impressed with this Franco-Iberian thriller. The Beasts follows a French couple who have settled in a remote corner of Galicia. Painstakingly restoring abandoned farmhouses and practicing organic farming they have seemingly adopted this rural lifestyle in order to reconnect with a simpler, “more authentic” kind of living. If that makes them sound like a pair of annoying hippies, they are considerably more genuine and sympathetic than that.

Nonetheless, this is the main source of tension in the film. It may be their idyll, but these “Frenchies'' are newcomers to what is in fact a fairly depressed, poverty-stricken region. Younger Galicians leave for the big cities and towns at the first chance they get - and don’t come back. Those who are left are either too old or too poor to leave (or both). It is perhaps natural then that some locals might resent the implicit entitlement exhibited by these new immigrants, even if they do genuinely mean well.

When a Norwegian energy conglomerate makes an offer to buy land in the village in order to turn it into a wind farm, all the residents have an equal vote. Some are in favour of the immediate financial windfall it will provide while others - including the Frenchies - are opposed on environmental grounds. Though also on the grounds that the offer is perhaps not as good as it seems, offering minimal short term benefit in return for irrevocably destroying the traditional life of the village. But whose decision is it to make after all?

This development opens up these latent fault lines of xenophobia, class conflict, globalisation, and everything else which had previously remained buried within the village. The film builds this tension - almost unbearably, for what is in effect a rural drama - until this escalates to a point of no return. The way the film handles this is just perfect. Although we see things from a particular perspective, it avoids taking sides in an overly simplistic, reductive kind of way.

And it is precisely because we can identify with both ‘sides’ that the film is tinged with an even greater degree of pathos. It is a backcountry thriller which is as unsettling as it is thought-provoking. Highly recommended.

 

[HenryFlower]

poster for new Bi Gan scifi film looking fly as fuck

 

[Bullitt68]

IT'S FINALLY HAPPENING!!!!!!!

https://www.msn.com/en-us/movies/ne...42f6cd67531eaef48fe5&ocid=winp2fptaskbar&ei=5

In this largely irrelevant article detailing James Cameron's annoyance at test screenings of The Abyss, the end includes the humongous bombshell that the 4k restoration of The Abyss is complete and it will be coming out and will be streaming in a couple of months.

I've been waiting for this for so fucking long. I gave up hope that this would ever even happen with Cameron diving so deep (pun intended) into the Avatar universe. And now, out of nowhere, I see that article and learn that soon I'll be able to see one of my favorite films literally as never before.

 

[HenryFlower]

still have a ton of catching up to do now that festival films are finally starting to trickle down the pipeline in theaters/streaming/downloads/etcetera, but i gotta give a massive shout to one of the best flicks of this year: Red Rooms (Pascal Plante).

this one made my skin vibrate.

 

[Rimbaud82]

Napoleon (2023)

Incredibly disappointing. Napoleon is a bloated, muddled mess which races from one event of Napoleon’s life to the other without providing so much as a modicum of context or depth. Narratively it is extremely disjointed, and well...boring. The film tries to cover the entirety of his spectacular rise and fall in slightly more than two-and-a-half hours, whilst simultaneously trying to focus on the complex dynamics of his relationship with Josephine.

It jumps awkwardly from battle scenes to the bedroom; in the process completely failing to do justice to the politics underpinning the former or the real personalities involved with the latter. It looks spectacular in parts, but feels completely hollow both as a portrait of Napoleon and as the story of a love affair. Most of it is pure fiction.

Other than the rushed narrative, the main problem with the film is Ridley Scott’s risible, adolescent take on history in general and Napoleon in particular. If you are going to completely forego ‘historical accuracy’ (that chimera), the aim of a historical biopic is still to provide insight into the character and period. Napoleon utterly fails in this regard.

Scott’s “insight” is what exactly? That Napoleon was a boorish, petulant ‘simp’ who is somehow single-handedly responsible for the deaths of thousands? It’s an atrocious caricature of a fascinating historical figure, not to mention a narrative which fails to grapple in any meaningful way with these historical events.

It doesn't address why Napoleon was popular, or why the French people were overwhelmingly in favor of him becoming First Consul. We get no sense of Napoleon’s charisma, or the important socio-political consequences of his actions (both his achievements and failures). Nor indeed what made him such an effective military commander. Events just seem to happen.

I have nothing inherently against the idea of “deconstructing” Great Man history and demythologising Napoleon. Adam Zamoyski’s Napoleon: The Man behind the Myth is one of my favourites. It’s not that the film should have presented a hagiographical portrayal, it’s that Scott seemingly understands nothing of either the man or this period (or indeed history in general) and thus gives us a one-dimensional cartoon with some spectacular battle scenes in place of having anything genuinely interesting to say.

I will be somewhat curious to see the longer cut, but the problems run much deeper than a compressed running time and lie more with Scott’s brazen anti-intellectualism. Much as I love Joaquin Phoenix, he was a horrible miscast in this one due to his age.

 

[BisexualMMA]

Good news, he got the punani in his stocking.

 

[HenryFlower]

gosh, i always love a good ol’ fashioned @Rimbaud82 sighting

 

[Bullitt68]

Incredibly disappointing. Napoleon is a bloated, muddled mess which races from one event of Napoleon’s life to the other without providing so much as a modicum of context or depth. Narratively it is extremely disjointed, and well...boring. The film tries to cover the entirety of his spectacular rise and fall in slightly more than two-and-a-half hours, whilst simultaneously trying to focus on the complex dynamics of his relationship with Josephine.

It jumps awkwardly from battle scenes to the bedroom; in the process completely failing to do justice to the politics underpinning the former or the real personalities involved with the latter. It looks spectacular in parts, but feels completely hollow both as a portrait of Napoleon and as the story of a love affair. Most of it is pure fiction.

Other than the rushed narrative, the main problem with the film is Ridley Scott’s risible, adolescent take on history in general and Napoleon in particular. If you are going to completely forego ‘historical accuracy’ (that chimera), the aim of a historical biopic is still to provide insight into the character and period. Napoleon utterly fails in this regard.

Scott’s “insight” is what exactly? That Napoleon was a boorish, petulant ‘simp’ who is somehow single-handedly responsible for the deaths of thousands? It’s an atrocious caricature of a fascinating historical figure, not to mention a narrative which fails to grapple in any meaningful way with these historical events.

It doesn't address why Napoleon was popular, or why the French people were overwhelmingly in favor of him becoming First Consul. We get no sense of Napoleon’s charisma, or the important socio-political consequences of his actions (both his achievements and failures). Nor indeed what made him such an effective military commander. Events just seem to happen.

I have nothing inherently against the idea of “deconstructing” Great Man history and demythologising Napoleon. Adam Zamoyski’s Napoleon: The Man behind the Myth is one of my favourites. It’s not that the film should have presented a hagiographical portrayal, it’s that Scott seemingly understands nothing of either the man or this period (or indeed history in general) and thus gives us a one-dimensional cartoon with some spectacular battle scenes in place of having anything genuinely interesting to say.

I will be somewhat curious to see the longer cut, but the problems run much deeper than a compressed running time and lie more with Scott’s brazen anti-intellectualism. Much as I love Joaquin Phoenix, he was a horrible miscast in this one due to his age.

Couldn't agree more. In fact, I may have hated this movie even more than you because I wouldn't even credit any of the battle scenes. The only good battle sequence is the cannons on the ice scene, but the best part was lifted from Saving Private Ryan (and I even prefer the SWAT team getting tossed into the hotel pool in Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles). Literally everything about Napoleon was terrible IMO.

I've hated all the "big" films of 2023. Oppenheimer stunk, Killers of the Flower Moon was dreadful, Napoleon was awful, and you couldn't pay me to watch Maestro. I'm crossing my fingers so hard for Ferrari to be good.

Good news, he got the punani in his stocking.

 

[Rimbaud82]

Couldn't agree more. In fact, I may have hated this movie even more than you because I wouldn't even credit any of the battle scenes. The only good battle sequence is the cannons on the ice scene, but the best part was lifted from Saving Private Ryan (and I even prefer the SWAT team getting tossed into the hotel pool in Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles). Literally everything about Napoleon was terrible IMO.

I've hated all the "big" films of 2023. Oppenheimer stunk, Killers of the Flower Moon was dreadful, Napoleon was awful, and you couldn't pay me to watch Maestro. I'm crossing my fingers so hard for Ferrari to be good.

Maestro looks awful, haven't bothered. Ferrari was unfortunately very poor, didn't bother with a review but saw it in the cinema because a mate dragged me over Christmas.

 

[HenryFlower]

I've hated all the "big" films of 2023. Oppenheimer stunk, Killers of the Flower Moon was dreadful, Napoleon was awful, and you couldn't pay me to watch Maestro. I'm crossing my fingers so hard for Ferrari to be good.

so by big films, you mean films directed by one of the top 5 favorite directors of every film studies frat boy ever

also, my condolences on Oppie. ik it probably felt like a personal betrayal committed by your boy—your #1 road dog w/ a bullet—Chris Nolan. life might seem confusing, or even pointless, since watching Oppie, but trust me, these wounds will heal over time. (edit: i actually haven’t seen it yet myself, so i have no opinion of quality yet. will prob watch soon though because i downloaded it recently)

speaking of Nolan, have you posted your thoughts on Tenet here? if so, care to direct me there? the movie fascinates me, but i’m also convinced it very possibly might just straight up fucking suck. help me!