Ridley Scott's ‘Napoleon Complex’
You’ve probably heard about the ‘Napoleon complex’. It often refers to men who feel insecure about their short height. The next time you hear this expression remember that this “complex” was invented by British propaganda, not by some man of science.
Napoleon’s sex life, the way he spoke, the origins of his family, his background, his career - no part of his personality was spared from the daggers of British propaganda. Everything about this Corsican genius had to be discredited since he posed a threat not only to Europe’s balance of power but to the British monarchy itself. Napoleon’s destiny embodied the Latin phrase sic parvis magna (greatness from the small beginnings) and for privileged British aristocrats this inspired an absolute horror.
‘Every coward can kick and hit a dead lion’ - says a Russian proverb, so we’ve to give some credit to the British propagandists, at least when they were calling Napoleon ‘The Corsican Ogre’ or ‘The Little Corporal’ they were ‘kicking’ a lion that was alive and could bite them back.
This cannot be said about Sir Ridley Scott since in his film about Napoleon he does exactly what the Russian proverb shames one to do. If Scott lived 200 years ago, he could have been an invaluable member of the British propaganda machine. His film would have been definitely approved by his superiors. After all, it depicts Napoleon as a weak, feeble-minded, capricious, unmannered ‘little corporal’ who seems to have no clue what’s he doing in politics, and who is obsessed as a child with his wife Josephine.
But, let’s focus on the basics. Let’s ignore history, authenticity, and accuracy, let’s throw all of this out of the window. After all, I do understand that it’s hard for a film director to be accurate about army formations and battle manoeuvres, but to be completely honest, Scott doesn’t even try to be accurate at all.
As I said, let’s ignore all of that and focus on the basics.
Character development.
Do you remember Maximus from Scott’s film Gladiator? Do you remember his journey from a military commander, turned to a slave, then a gladiator, and then an enemy to Commodus? Do you remember how you could feel what Maximus felt when you watched this film?
Nothing like this happens in Scott’s Napoleon. You don’t discover anything about how Napoleon felt or what he thought throughout this film. We don’t understand him at all since there is nothing to feel, empathise, or hate about his personality. In fact, there is only one scene in this film that gives us a glimpse into Napoleon’s mind.
At the beginning of the film, he is asked by his future wife Josephine to bring the sword of her husband who was executed during the revolution. Only a man with a high status of Napoleon could gain access to those swords. Napoleon agrees and when he enters a large room that stores hundreds of confiscated swords, he witnesses a total chaos. Nobody cared to mark or classify any of those swords. Napoleon doesn’t know which one belongs to Josephine’s deceased husband, so he takes a random sword and asks the clueless keeper: ‘Hasn’t anyone thought to organise these swords and attach names to each of them?’
This brief remark reveals how organised and disciplined was Napoleon’s mind, he needed mathematical precision in every step he took and every decision he made. This is what his biographer Ruth Scurr told me in an interview which you can listen to here if you wish.
Other than this brief scene, there’s nothing else that tells us about Napoleon’s way of thinking or his personality.
Okay, let’s then ask another question, is this a film about Josephine?
If yes, then why we don’t understand her either? We don’t know why she married Napoleon, why she cheated on him, but then wanted to stay with him. Was it because of the wealth? Maybe status? We don’t know. Scott’s characters don’t tell us anything other than that Napoleon was weird sexually and acted like a little boy. Why did he act like that? We don’t know, Ridley Scott doesn’t tell us.
I am not even talking about other remarkable characters that could have enriched this story if Ridley Scott cared to do his job properly. For example, the character of Talleyrand, who was an absolute genius in politics and diplomacy. He is portrayed as a simple lackey of Napoleon. Or, Napoleon’s mother Letizia, who in her lifetime saw her 7 children become rulers of different European countries. Wouldn’t it be fascinating to know what kind of a person could raise a man like Napoleon?
‘No form of art goes beyond ordinary consciousness as film does, straight to our emotions, deep into the twilight room of the soul.’ - said the great Ingmar Bergman. These words don’t apply to Scott’s Napoleon since our soul is left untouched by his film.
What’s shocking is that you come out of this film without any aftertaste at all. It’s neither repulsive nor impressive. It’s just shallow. It’s forgettable. One wonders why nobody in Ridley Scott’s team didn’t tell him about those failures.
We could have had a great film about Napoleon. In fact, the greatest film that was never made in cinematic history was about Napoleon. Its director was supposed to be the great Stanley Kubrick himself. It’s such a loss to all of us that Kubrick, who so meticulously researched Napoleon’s character, didn’t get the funding to make his version of the film. If only those millions that Scott wasted on his film could have been given to Kubrick instead… we could have had a masterpiece.
It seems that our age is allergic to great personalities. Modern artists are particularly repulsed by greatness. How else can we explain so many of their attacks on the masters of the past? But, still, one wonders how could the creator of a legendary film such as Gladiator fall so low with his film on Napoleon?
Maybe, Icarus has burnt his wings by flying too close to the sun.
Do you want to keep a journal?
I’ve been journaling for the past 15 years of my life. By saying this I mean that for the past decade and a half, I’ve been sitting down, consistently, every day, and writing my thoughts and ideas into my notebook.
If you would like to begin your journaling journey, but don’t know where to start, how to stay consistent, or which type of journaling suits you, consider subscribing to my Patreon page.
I’ve made several ‘Guided journaling’ videos, where we sit down and journal together, I give journaling tips based on science, and I share some very personal pieces of advice based on my own journey.
Although I know little about Napoleon, like you I was disappointed by this film. I think the main problem was its scope was too big. I couldn’t help feeling that, to do the subject justice, it would have been far better as a multi-series TV drama (‘The Crown’ meets ‘Game of Thrones’, so to speak). That said, the director’s cuts of Ridley Scott’s films are usually a considerable improvement, so we have that still to enjoy/endure. Perhaps this will allow some space to develop more of Napoleon’s character.
On the button, Vashik. Two and a half hours I will never get back. 😣