Rating: 2.5/5 stars

There are times when the only reason to see a movie is solely because of who is in the lead role. Despite some promise, not only does “Napoleon” lack a good lead performance, but also it lacks depth and character in the person it is trying to portray. Director Ridley Scott (“Alien”) has been hit-or-miss recently with his films and unfortunately, this one missed the mark.

The film focuses on Napoleon Bonaparte, a French emperor and military commander who led successful runs during the Revolutionary War, and his rise to power as well as his relationship to his wife, Empress Joséphine. Joaquin Phoenix (“Joker”) portrays Napoleon with Vanessa Kirby (“Pieces of a Woman”) playing Joséphine. Phoenix’s performance, while not bad, felt pretty limited and one-noted. That is not even considering the fact he was talking in his normal American accent while almost everyone else has an English accent—even if they are playing French people. Kirby on the other hand was pretty good. She did a great job showing Joséphine’s resentment and struggle to let go of Napoleon despite the way he treated her.

What would have made this film better is more attention to historical accuracy, which seemed to be an afterthought for the creators. For example, this film shows Joséphine’s affairs while with Napoleon, but never shows Napoleon’s affairs while with her. Even the battle at the icy lake, which was featured in the film’s trailers, was not portrayed correctly to be more stylish. For someone who did not know much about Napoleon beforehand, this movie had a golden opportunity to go more in-depth on the man, exploring more of his personality, motivations, and strategies as a war commander. The battles shown in the film were a highlight for sure. They had a great sense of scale, showing an enormous amount of soldiers across acres of land. So many soldiers are shown to be killed, which adds to how deadly these battles were and how much Napoleon did not care about said deaths. All that mattered was victory.

The length and tone of the film are an issue as well. There were a few times that felt like the end of the film, but it just kept going. And when it did end, it felt unintentionally comical, like some other scenes in the film. The film wants to take itself seriously, but then throws a “Family Guy”-style cutaway that feels out of place. Half of the movie is somewhat interesting and the other half is just throwing stuff at the wall, hoping it sticks. Ridley Scott likes releasing director’s cuts of his films and “Napoleon” seems primed for one with the amount of stuff it wants to show. It is probably better than whatever this was.

Overall, “Napoleon” has good elements, but is brought down by a bit of bloatedness, a varying tone, long length, a mediocre lead performance and lack of historical accuracy. All this film cares about is being as cool as possible: not to the audience, but to Ridley Scott and his strange idea of who Napoleon was as a prominent figure in history.

Image from Sony Pictures Entertainment via YouTube.com