Ridley Scott as usual “doesn’t tell” those in France who attacked his Napoleon as not being faithful to historical truth. Two jokes, but vitriolic, from the director who at 85 years old doesn’t want to mince his words.
This was to be expected, given that it happened at Gladiator: also for Napoleon con Joaquin Phoenixin theaters from November 23, the director Ridley Scott was attacked for “historical freedoms” in his account of Bonaparte. The criticism this time came predictably from the France, where the particular approach with which an almost mythological figure was told made some people turn up their noses. But what did Scott respond to these barbs?
Ridley Scott on criticism of Napoleon: “Were you there? So what do you know?”
The BBC, probably amused by the more playful version of the eternal clash between England and Francewas quick to ask for comment Ridley Scott to the criticisms from beyond the Alps that rained down on him Napoleon. Judged anti-French and pro-Britishclumsy and above all not faithful to historical eventsthe film was defended by the eighty-five year old director with his ruthless and direct style, which arrogantly fuels the stereotype: “The French even dislike the French. The audience I showed it to in Paris loved it.” And as for the lack of historical accuracy, which Scott had already panned a few days ago with a “Get a life!“, he takes up the concept: “But why were you there? Ah, you weren’t there. So what do you know?”
Naturally a film like Napoleon (and the same was true for Gladiator) does not have the task of replacing a documentary: if its vision should certainly be associated with an effective study to understand history more objectively, objectivity is not owed to cinema and art, it is good to remember this. According to ours review of the film by Federico GironiNapoleon’s approach is also very unconventional…
Napoleon: review of Ridley Scott’s film with Joaquin Phoenix