Historian claims 'only 38 minutes' of Ridley Scott's Napoleon movie is accurate

[Boiler 45,727]

I was so disappointed as I was looking forward to this and we ended up with Hollywood History.

 

I never can understand why they make stuff up, I understand you have to simplify, and some stuff is debatable, but blatant obvious fibs? In this case your audience will be those who have an understanding of the period, who are not going to be happy with Napoleon leading a cavalry charge at Waterloo and those who have no idea and are wondering what is going on.

 

I think the actress who played Josephine is 12 years younger than Joaquin and looks it, not older, and Napoleon was 24 at Toulon. 

 

Ahh well. It does make me wonder if many of the people who see this will believe it is basically factual.

 

The Little Corporal reference was a British propaganda thing both to his stature which was not that out of average for the time and his status. And the average UK male is not 5ft 10, doing that conversion in my head from metric, thank you Napoleon, just under 5ft 9. I was interested that they used Imperial and not metric.

 

 

 

[yuna628 9,687]

There is only one Napoleon to me.

 

 

 

But yes, I've read some really bad things about this film, which is a real disappointment. Still will probably see it eventually, I want to know how good the costuming is.

Edited November 30, 2023 by yuna628

[TBoneTX 45,580]

16 minutes ago, yuna628 said:

costuming

When I see the word "costumer," it's usually a misspelling of "customer" by our highly educated younger generation.

[Boiler 45,727]

The colours look washed out to me, I always think of vibrancy in this period.