"My God, Sir! So you have!"
There are three striking things about this superb film: Rod Steiger's electrifying, extraordinarily charismatic and career-defining performance as Napoleon, the incredible scope and accuracy of the battle scenes, and the fact that it was made in Brezhnev's Soviet Union with an international cast. That just seems bizarre.
Still, it's an extraordinary piece of cinema and one of the most accurate historical films ever made; even the dialogue is mostly documented from real life and I recognised a few of Wellington's. The only inaccuracies I could spot were the constant references to "Belgium" (not a country until 1830) and the slight musical reference to the modern German national anthem as Blucher's Prussians arrive to save the day. This is anachronistic; the tune existed at the time but it's lyrics were a paean to Emperor Franz of Austria, hardly a friend of Prussia. The Habsburgs were hardly friends of pan-German nationalism, which in any case wouldn't really become a thing until after the revolutions of 1848. Anyway, the film...
Steiger steals the show as Napoleon, a charismatic genius refusing to give in to the failing health of his body, but Christopher Plummer also deserves high praise for his unflappable and blunt Wellington, refusing permission to have Napoleon assassinated ahead of the battle as such things are Simply Not Done. The opening scenes are extraordinary, though: Napoleon rants and raves like Hitler in Downfall before finally abdicating, only to escape from Elba with but 1,000 troops and suede power again through sheer magnetic charisma. It's eyebrow-raising here to see a somewhat corpulent Orson Welles in a cameo as Louis XVIII.
This is a true epic in scope, both thematically and visually. If you haven't seen it.. sorry for the spoiler, but Napoleon loses. Sorry.
I don't deny this film is well made and Plummer and Steiger do the best with what they got (though Steiger probably gets too dramatic at times), but I honestly feel that is it. The film is not afraid to show the deaths of many men, but none of the deaths have much emotional resonance because they tend to befall characters we are not attached to – from a storytelling POV, it shows the weight of the situation, which is good (and a bold move as trying to make it anti-war), but while i praise the film for making bold choices in its violent moments and number of deaths … to me it comes across as simultaneously not so bold as no one you’re emotionally attached to gets killed – there’s no gut punch of a death, because I never got to know Thomas Picton, William Howe De Lancey, or James Hay, Lord Hay, which would have been fitting for a film of this tone and level of violence. Strangely, although they acknowledge Henry Paget, 2nd Earl of Uxbridge losing his leg, we never see him again. I also felt, considering we see the set up to the battle with Napoleon's return, an proper epilogue could even have sufficed, or just having Wellington and Uxbridge having a heart to heart, despite Uxbridge losing his leg, with Napoleon being exiled on St. Helena to live with the torment from seeing all of what his life has been leading up to being tossed away must've been devastating. It would be a torment to know that once again and this time, forever knew that his power was gone, and his life was bound to an island just as unimportant as him.. But alas no …It’s a shame, because the amount of work and research was well done, it is just that to me that you don't get to know the characters much to build attachments to them. Even more of a shame considering "Tora! Tora! Tora", a similar film which was made to be accurate as possible and tell it as was from both sides and presented the Americans and Japanese as real people, as the attack on Pearl Harbor happens, and trusted the audience to appreciate them as such.
ReplyDeleteI fear I recall little after nine years- it's a strange experience reading something written by one's past self about a mostly forgotten film! But interesting that you were struck by a lack of depth in characterisation, whereas I seemed to be happy, at least in the context of this film, without such things. I wonder if a second viewing would change my view?
ReplyDelete"Tora! Tora! Tora!" is definitely one I'll be blogging. Much as it always makes me think of a late '90s TV documentary by the late Alan Clark on the history of the Conservative Party called "Tory! Tory! Tory!".
Have you seen the 2002 miniseries Napoleon starring Christian Clavier? Not saying it doesn't have its problems but it actually tries to portray the man’s life from start to finish in a simple way.
ReplyDeleteI hadn't, but just looked it up on iMDb and it's on the longlist to watch and blog!
Delete