olihist
Joined Jun 2005
Welcome to the new profile
We're still working on updating some profile features. To see the badges, ratings breakdowns, and polls for this profile, please go to the previous version.
Reviews24
olihist's rating
When it comes to dramas, especially historical epics, it's hit-or-miss. Much depends on the story. Even if you have the best actors, their efforts will go to waste on a weak script. There simply won't be much for them to do. Much also depends on other elements that make a great film: editing/pacing, costuming/setting, special effects, and music. And last but not least for a historical epic: historical accuracy.
I'm not going to comment as much here on the historical accuracy of "Napoleon," because I'm not an expert on Napoleon or his many battles, and also because there'll be many others who will focus on this particular area. But that being said, getting the History right does matter when it comes to historical films, especially when it's about famous figures. If that fails, then it comes down to story.
Unfortunately in both cases, "Napoleon" falls short.
Historically - and this is often the case with Ridley Scott films, there are indeed numerous plot holes, inaccuracies, and anachronisms. I was especially disappointed with the Waterloo segment, which, like the battle scenes in general, was epic but felt rushed, with broad paint strokes amplified by generous use of CGI substituting for historical detail.
But story wise, this film struggles also.
Is it "Napoleon?" Or "Napoleon and Josephine: A Love Story?"
It felt more like the latter.
Overall, I still enjoyed "Napoleon." It's a decent film. But I've seen better historical films. It felt like this film, in trying to please everyone, was doing too much. And perhaps in doing so, it didn't fully please anyone.
Rating: 7/10.
I'm not going to comment as much here on the historical accuracy of "Napoleon," because I'm not an expert on Napoleon or his many battles, and also because there'll be many others who will focus on this particular area. But that being said, getting the History right does matter when it comes to historical films, especially when it's about famous figures. If that fails, then it comes down to story.
Unfortunately in both cases, "Napoleon" falls short.
Historically - and this is often the case with Ridley Scott films, there are indeed numerous plot holes, inaccuracies, and anachronisms. I was especially disappointed with the Waterloo segment, which, like the battle scenes in general, was epic but felt rushed, with broad paint strokes amplified by generous use of CGI substituting for historical detail.
But story wise, this film struggles also.
Is it "Napoleon?" Or "Napoleon and Josephine: A Love Story?"
It felt more like the latter.
Overall, I still enjoyed "Napoleon." It's a decent film. But I've seen better historical films. It felt like this film, in trying to please everyone, was doing too much. And perhaps in doing so, it didn't fully please anyone.
Rating: 7/10.
Ireland is a place that has always fascinated me from a young age. It is a place filled with history and culture, swirling with the passions and contradictions that history, in general, is only too filled with.
"Story of Ireland" is the BBC's version of Ireland's history. Like America's PBS, the BBC, through host Fergal Keane, tells a "warts and all" story of Ireland, filled with complex characters with equally complex, and often times contradictory, motivations.
Ireland is at once colonial and post colonial, its people today are divided on political, economic, and even cultural lines, struggling with a long and painful history of oppression and exploitation. They are increasingly globalist, in a world that has sadly become less so.
History, when taught right, helps develop greater empathy for one another, even those who we may otherwise and profoundly disagree with.
Far from being an idyllic oasis, Ireland has always been filled with loud and controversial meetings and goings, of peoples interacting, and often fighting, with one another. And like all other island peoples (including their next door neighbors), the Irish continue to voyage, filled with all the challenges, complexities, and possibilities that voyage entails.
Overall Rating: 8.5/10.
"Story of Ireland" is the BBC's version of Ireland's history. Like America's PBS, the BBC, through host Fergal Keane, tells a "warts and all" story of Ireland, filled with complex characters with equally complex, and often times contradictory, motivations.
Ireland is at once colonial and post colonial, its people today are divided on political, economic, and even cultural lines, struggling with a long and painful history of oppression and exploitation. They are increasingly globalist, in a world that has sadly become less so.
History, when taught right, helps develop greater empathy for one another, even those who we may otherwise and profoundly disagree with.
Far from being an idyllic oasis, Ireland has always been filled with loud and controversial meetings and goings, of peoples interacting, and often fighting, with one another. And like all other island peoples (including their next door neighbors), the Irish continue to voyage, filled with all the challenges, complexities, and possibilities that voyage entails.
Overall Rating: 8.5/10.
