""Napoleon" Director's Cut" Topic

Surely we need a thread on the newly released Director's Cut of Sir Ridley Scott's "Napoleon"
An extra 40-odd minutes for you all to moan about.

No thanks – not enough of a masochist

Why do they keep punishing us???

There's MORE??!!! What did I ever do to Ridley Scott?

OFM, as they say in the services "The Floggings Will Continue Until Morale Improves."

No director could fix that mess

Thanks for the warning….

Will not be looking for it,
but thanks for the warning.

Ridley Scott is just prepping for the sequel: Napoleon meets Alien meets Blade Runner

I'm curious only because Kingdom of Heaven is meh but the director's cut is excellent. A significant improvement. Maybe he's a miracle worker with more time to play with

By what I heard it is mostly more of Josephine.
Definitely what the film needed more of. Right.

still waiting to rent it for cheap, just to see the uniforms and follow along

The thing with "Kingdom of Heaven" is that not only were some of the added scenes really good but they included some important story elements, particularly with regard to Balian. One reviewer noted, "The added 45 minutes in the director's cut are like pieces missing from a beautiful but incomplete puzzle."

With "Napoleon" I'm not quite sure what significant elements Scott could add to tell a fuller imagining of the life of the Corsican Ogre. Perhaps his pioneering use of hot air balloons in the famed aerial bombardment that subdued Madrid? Or his legendary visit to North America where he attempted to unite the First Nations in a pan-tribal confederacy to thwart the British and Americans?

As I understand it there is a bit more about Josephine etc.. but it now includes scenes about Marengo and the Cadoudal plot to blow up Napoleon on the way to the opera. I am tempted to watch just for those but my wife has warned me not to rant again about what a mess this film is!

Best left forgotten in the dustbin of film history….it is rubbish and no amount of extra rubbish will make it less so…mind you….I did hear that the extra 48 hours (!) Contains the Battle of the Somme and the Medway….

vis a vis 'Kingdom of Heaven' I am curious as to how any extended version could inject life into the performance of Orlando Bloom. Perhaps it merely allowed more time for the paint to dry

There are sections added before and immediately after Liam Neeson shows up that fill in huge gaps in Balian's backstory. His parentage isn't some hush-hush mystery and he has a fraught relationship with his father's family (the local seigneurs). In fact, the knight who leads the armed party that attacks them in the forest is his cousin. The priest he murdered is his half-brother and there is also more exposition about his wife's suicide. He is also a veteran of several campaigns (in or around France), which is how he a) knows how to build siege machines and b) isn't completely gormless in his first battle in the Holy Land.

None of which makes Orlando a younger Gary Oldman, but I think it does point to a deliberate choice to play Balian as a man who has already been beaten down by life pretty badly. And to be fair he's inevitably going to be hardpressed to keep up with Neeson, Irons, and Norton, even when the latter is wearing a mask the entire time.

Does the extra 40 minutes make it less awful?

Actually – I don't care, I wasted enough time the first time I watched it.

Nothing could save that .

Too many times "extended director's cut" means they want you to pay for the same thing twice.

You know, it's one nice thing about the passage of time. Bad stuff is eventually buried. The day will come when people will still watch The Duellists, Alien and Blade Runner, but only a handful of fanatics will even remember that he also did a Napoleon bio.

Remember his good stuff. Heaven knows we all create enough junk in the course of our lives.

Well said RP.

worst film ever shortly followed by Alexander

I so wanted this to be a worthwhile movie, but everything I read about it, even this elongated cut, makes me worry it would just be an enraging disappointment. Not unlike "Alexander."

At least Alexander depicted the major battles reasonably, given the sources. No anachronistic trenches or cries of 'Over the top, lads!' IIRC, one of the historical advisors was an expert on the Macedonian army and was rewarded by being allowed to ride as one of the Companions in a cavalry charge.

I've not watched the extended version but have been informed it includes Marengo and Borodino. I'd love to know the reasoning behind leaving out two of the most important actions of the Napoleonic period in the shorter version? I watched the shorter version with relatives who had the requirements needed to view it, but if I get the chance I'll watch the extended version. Like it or not, at least someone has actually made a Napoleonic period film rather than another boring Zombie or end of the world saga.

"…at least someone has actually made a Napoleonic period film rather than another boring Zombie or end of the world saga."

Gazzola, you say that for all the world as though newbies won't come up to a Napoleonics game at GenCon and ask where the trench lines are. And if you tell him there were no such, that's just your opinion. He's seen them, after all.

Years ago I asked a Philosophy PhD what courses I should encourage younger colleagues to take to sort out how they knew what was and was not true. She punted on me. Evidently that's not part of modern education.

Robert – are you by chance a Zombie fan? LOL