Joaquin Phoenix gives the absolute worst performance of his career as Napoleon Buonaparte, choosing to portray one of history’s most famously charismatic leaders, as a wooden cutout. No movie these days would be complete without Reddit/Marvel-tier quipped dialogue, and this screenplay provides it in spades. Many of the events that would naturally adapt to the big screen are skipped in favor of shots of Phoenix crawling under tables like some fucked up dog. No mention is made of Italy, and Spain and Haiti are skipped over as to avoid portraying the subject in any kind of negative light. Irresponsible and reactionary filmmaking shines through in a script that truly feels like it was written by chatgpt. The film concludes with him suddenly dying in a part that reminded me of the poochy “my planet needs me” bit. Do not waste your time. I was expecting a cheesy Hollywood retelling and it didn’t even do that, despite having more than enough source material to do so.

  • UlyssesT
    ·
    edit-2
    21 days ago

    deleted by creator

    • VILenin [he/him]
      ·
      1 year ago

      Well it did give us Reds. So what I’m saying is it’s ok when we do it. Most of the time it just gives us dumb bullshit from long-past-relevant prehistoric filmmakers trying to relive their glory days by making shitty mobster films and casting their prehistoric actor buddies and deaging them so they look like an affront-to-god experimental lab creature that looks 35 but acts 100.

      • oktherebuddy
        ·
        1 year ago

        idk why you had to unload a mag into Scorsese but his films all kick ass even (especially) the one with de-aged grandpa De Niro

        • pumpchilienthusiast [comrade/them, any]
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          nooo deaged grandpa deniro dont toe me death! careful, you might lose your balance, fall, break your hip, and slowly decline. nooo, grandpa denirooooo

          • oktherebuddy
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            yeah that scene sucked but it was basically irrelevant to the heart of the film, which is about how life keeps going and you grow old, seeing all the high drama and intrigue and murder you destroyed your entire life over be rendered meaningless because everyone involved just decays & dies of old age. It was almost a response to film itself and an argument against seeing your life through the lens of having some sort of plot.

      • UlyssesT
        ·
        edit-2
        21 days ago

        deleted by creator

        • Fishroot [none/use name]
          ·
          1 year ago

          What I say is bullshit is the "this visionary genius who has the most prominent name on this movie you like is implied to have singlehandedly made that movie and therefore unfettered control over an upcoming movie will surely be at least as good" belief that almost never goes as promised.

          so like Nolan?

          • UlyssesT
            ·
            edit-2
            21 days ago

            deleted by creator

              • UlyssesT
                ·
                edit-2
                21 days ago

                deleted by creator

              • Pastaguini [he/him]
                hexagon
                ·
                1 year ago

                This movie and Oppenheimer had a lot in common, although this made Oppenheimer look like a masterpiece. Both films suffer because they’re both so obsessed with their subjects that they claustrophobically center the entire movie on them instead of exploring the interesting worlds they inhabit.

                • Fishroot [none/use name]
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Oppenheimer is the ''I'm a genius but I'm stuck between 2 rocks'' -type movie. It is a movie made for NYC PMCs