“Let him buy himself a life!” » Ridley Scott was not happy when the English historian Dan Snow criticized him for the factual errors of his Napoleon. We can imagine that he would not be much nicer to Patrice Gueniffey, a French historian who, in Point, accuses the film of being “woke” and “anti-French”. To clarify things, 20 minutes surveyed two other specialists in Army museum at the Invalides which offers, for the release of the film, a most fascinating journey on the emperor.
“Ridley Scott never pretended to make a documentary,” says Emilie Robbe, chief heritage curator. He sometimes compiled certain events to make the plot flow more smoothly. Her Napoleon, played by Joaquin Phoenix, is cinema, not a history lesson. » The man he shows is in fact very different from the very self-confident soldier to whom his writings and fiction have accustomed us.
A more human Napoleon
“The film reveals a more fragile aspect of Napoleon which seems to me to correspond to the truth,” believes the documentary studies manager. Gregory Spourdos. His anxious character at the time of battles is underlined by Ridley Scott, although the emperor did not boast of it in these writings. » However, the historian chokes up when he hears that the film was considered hostile to France. “I really don’t see why not. I was even surprised that a British filmmaker highlighted Napoleon to this extent. The Duke of Wellington, for example, is portrayed in a much more unsympathetic manner than he is. »
As for the “woke” aspect personalized by Joséphine, it is also perplexing. “Josephine certainly had an influence on Napoleon,” says Emilie Robbe, “but no one was in their bedroom to spy on their privacy or listen to what they said to each other, so that leaves room for the imagination. » This charismatic woman, played in the film by Vanessa Kirby, brings breaths of fresh air between two bellicose sequences.
The spirit more than the letter
Some inaccurate details still made Grégory Spourdos jump in his seat. “The battles did not unfold like what we see in the film, notably the drownings of thousands of soldiers at Austerlitz,” he comments. There is also no proof that Bonaparte attended the execution of Marie-Antoinette, but we understand that the director took this liberty to place it in the context of the Terror. » If Ridley Scott does not respect the story in the details, he still relies on reality, even if it means twisting it, in order to serve a story in which he respects the character and the Napoleonic legend.
“I recommend the film for a first approach to the life of Napoleon,” insists Grégory Spourdos. The Army Museum is here to expand the knowledge of curious viewers, because historical accuracy is our business. » We confirm that the visit, fun and informative, is worth a look and we also take the opportunity to point out to film buffs the excellent biography of the director, Ridley Scott, The Last Emperor of Hollywood, signed by Gilles Penso (ed. Ecranfantastique). Enough to be unbeatable in history as in cinema.