Ridley Scott on Napoleon complaints from French critics: “the French don’t even like themselves”
Whoa, the British guy doesn't care if French critics like his movie about a famous French guy
Aux News ridley scott
Earlier this month, as part of a New Yorker profile, Napoleon director Ridley Scott suggested that anyone pointing out historical inaccuracies in his film should “get a life” (which seems fair, if bluntly stated, because that kind of very-online anti-fun/creativity “criticism” is exhausting and pretentious, and Scott shouldn’t feel obligated to engage with it), but Scott went a little harder in a recent chat with the BBC when specifically asked about French critics having issues with his movie about the famous French bastard.
French GQ, for example, apparently called the film “deeply clumsy, unnatural, and unintentionally funny, French newspaper Le Figaro comparing its versions of Napoleon and Josephine to Ken and Barbie, and Napoleon biographer Patrice Gueniffey calling it “very anti-French and very pro-British. Scott, who of course is British, shrugged off comments like that in typical Ridley Scott-style, arguing that, “the French don’t even like themselves.”
Funny, yes, but he also noted that when he screened the film for an audience in Paris “they loved it,” so this is apparently one of those “it’s not for the critics, it’s for the fans” movies, provided the critics are French people and the fans are French people who… perhaps take themselves less seriously? Either way, this all feels like a silly extension of the eternal feud between the British and the French, so maybe some French filmmaker should make a movie about an iconic-yet-problematic British historical figure, and everyone in the movie can just speak French and not even attempt English. Then someone can ask Ridley Scott about it and he’ll be like “I don’t care, shut up.”
Elsewhere in the chat, Scott weighs in on “movies are too long” discourse by saying that he made a conscious decision to keep Napoleon under three hours. He cites the “bum ache factor” from sitting too long and also the “Christ, we can’t eat for another hour” realization that people have, both of which he tried to avoid by making the film a brisk 150 minutes or so—at least until the director’s cut hits Apple TV+ at some point. “We’re not allowed to talk about,” he notes.
91 Comments
I want to see Luc Besson do an Admiral Nelson biopic.
French GQ responded to Scott’s comments by farting in his general direction.
Scott denies that his mother was a hamster, but is noticeably silent on the subject of his father smelling of elderberries.
That’s what he got when his country base on some strange woman lying in a pond distributin’ swords.
Biggus Dickus
Finally, Ridley Scott starts talking sense.
no other director has had a run of bad movies like ridley. It’s incredible. Nobody else would get to deliver that many bombs and still get hired. The reason it happens now of course is that he’s willing to soil his (ill-deserved imo) reputation as a big, epic historical filmmaker on cheap streaming junk like this
Yes, exactly. I think Scott had two or three good movies in him and the rest have been mediocre at best. He gets by on bluster and arrogance and “you’re no smart enough to understand my art”, not on what he produces.
the writers on “his films” are more important anyway
Alien, Blade Runner, Gladiator, Thelma and Louise, Black Hawk Down, are 5 great movies. There are some others that I would classify as very good at least. You should try IMDB.
I haven’t seen it, but The Last Duel was pretty well-liked, wasn’t it?
Nice
Marseille
Condom
We need something for the 21st century… a new director named Scott Ridley!
I am watching this movie for its historical accuracy; I’m watching it to recapture the magic of the moment of seeing Joaquin Phoenix absolutely murder in Gladiator because, as an elder millennial, nostalgia is the only thing providing meaning in my life now
ooh i bet Tom Cruise didn’t get to play Napoleon because he was too tall
“so maybe some French filmmaker should make a movie about an iconic-yet-problematic British historical figure”
Wellington is literally right there, AVClub.
“Luc Besson Presents: Wellington and the Parliament of a Thousand Lies”
God damn that’s a good title.
I was thinking Lord Nelson, but yours is better.
LORD. PALMERSTON.Punches Peon out
Is it too soon to do…
Apparently not. Steve Coogan already played him in the BBC two-parter: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt13355234/
The French are welcome to tap into the national Depardieu reserve for their go at Saville.
“the French don’t even like themselves.”
French GQ: Dammit, he’s right. Okay, fine, it’s the greatest movie of all time.
It’s pretty difficult to make a movie about French people when they repeatedly spawn during cutscenes.
If only Jerry Lewis had made this film.
“Le Jour où L’Empereur a Pleuré”
hahaha!
Yeah and only Germans should do films about Hitler.Sam Barsanti, your clickbaity ways are Discovery Reality Show quality at this stage.
I think they’re all sensing the coming Purge.
Ah we not doing this any more? Fine, I’ll do it: that kind of very-online anti-fun/creativity “criticism” is exhausting and pretentious, and Scott shouldn’t feel obligated to engage with it- The AV Club
I’m not saying that’s true, but the best film I’ve seen about Hitler, ‘Downfall’, was made by Germans.
“American movie makers !! Stay in your fucking lane and just make historical movies about Americans ..just pretend that the rest of the world doesn’t exist and that nothing of interest happened before 1492 …oh wait you mostly already have been doing that …er..ok carry on then”
You should watch more American movies, kiddo…
Time for a remake where we make Napoleon an American. It would do better international business, anyway—depicting him as some sort of foreigner from a country most of them have never been to just confuses audiences.
Only Gremlins should do films about Hilter?
No, just pythons.
Hitler drove an AMC Gremlin?
Jahwohl! The real “Peoples’ Car”!
I…want…that…
Odd that he asserts a desire to keep the picture under 3 hours considering his DC of Kingdom of Heaven, which is far superior to the theatrical cut, has a runtime of 194m.Unless he believes that bums can take 3+ hours of punishment when in the comfort of one’s own home.
I haven’t seen the film but the clips of Phoenix’s performance aren’t really driving me to do so. The stylistic choice of putting the work in on the troops, costuming, sets, etc. then have him deliver all his lines in a flat unaccented delivery is certainly… a choice.Maybe it works in context.
I definitely could not spend 150 minutes looking at Phoenix’s single, dour expression and listening to his truly awful monotone delivery. And don’t even get me started on why Phoenix is the only one with an American accent while everyone else in this movie about a France uses a British one.
I guess you could make some sort of a point about not trying to mimic a cultural accent you are not a member of, but couldn’t that then be avoided by simply, y’know, casting French performers? Or even just playing the “we were trying to avoid this conversation” rather than just randomly insulting French people?
The solution is obvious: do the whole film in mime.
Gallic Shrug
“Historical people all sounded British ..all of them ..Greeks , Egyptians, Romans, *British, Vikings, ..except the important, really good looking ones , who sound American.” Every Hollywood ‘historical’ movie ever.*(..except that ‘British’ just means an English accent ,either a posh RP one , or a gruff working class one …oh and possibly the occasional angry Scot , so everyone sounds like that , regardless of what part of Britain its actually set in)
Counterpoint: Enemy at the Gates, where the Russian characters had English accents and Ed Harris uses a Mid Atlantic American accent.
Damn forgot that one!
Wait… You’re telling me that Soviet submarine captains DON’T speak with a brogue?!
“Phoenix is the only one with an American accent while everyone else in this movie about a France uses a British one”Since Napoleon was not French it actually makes sense that the character speaks with a different accent than the native French speakers.
Napoleon reportedly spoke French with a weird accent (because it wasn’t his native language), so an American accent makes sense. It reminds me of an old British movie “Red Monarch” about Stalin where Stalin spoke with an Irish accent, symbolizing how he spoke Russian with a Georgian one.
What’s crazy is that in real life Lenin actually spoke English with an Irish accent, as that’s where his tutor came from.(Also The Death of Stalin had him (Stalin)having a cockney accent , while the rest of the Bureau had different regional English and American accents which worked really well , also its a really good film)
His default expression has definitely been “I’m moments away from killing myself” for a long time now. Cheer up, dude. Also Napoleon had panache and charisma.
Could be a stylistic choice to point out that Napoleon was Corsican and not a native French speaker.
French GQ, for example, apparently called the film “deeply clumsy, unnatural, and unintentionally funny, French newspaper Le Figaro comparing its versions of Napoleon and Josephine to Ken and Barbie, and Napoleon biographer Patrice Gueniffey calling it “very anti-French and very pro-British. Scott, who of course is British, shrugged off comments like that in typical Ridley Scott-style, arguing that, “the French don’t even like themselves.”…What is going on with the quotation marks here?
Gladiator was over 20 years ago, and people expect him to get *more* historically accurate with time?
And they completely left off the time we had to rescue Napoleon when he was stranded on Mars.
From the guy who saw Commodus, an emperor notorious for styling himself with long hair and a beard because he wanted to look like Hercules, and decided to throw a bowl cut and eyeliner on Joaquin Phoenix.
because that kind of very-online anti-fun/creativity “criticism” is exhausting and pretentious Sure, if you don’t give a rats ass about how presenting bad history for popular consumption affects current debate.Scott prompted some interesting responses on Reddit’s AskHistorians, not about his own movie but about others that have made it an awful lot harder for the actual historians out there to educate folks. It’s worth a read.
Well that was a rabbit hole.What day is it now?
I think it’s totally fair not to give a rats ass.
Either your anachronisms will inspire further research into what actually happened, or your audience is already so stupid as to get their education from Hollywood movies.
Either way, not the entertainment film maker’s responsibility.
I agree, we should never try to improve society at all.
I just wrote anachronisms can inspire further research, so arguably entertainment films can improve society. Surely more helpful than thoughtless sarcasm.
“very anti-French”
Were they expecting Napoleon to be the hero of the story?
Yes. In France Napoleon is seen as a globally positive figure.
Just google “does France consider Napoleon a hero” and it’s currently not so clear cut.
Which is weird. France is a republic now because they got *rid* of their kings and emperors, although it’s been a rough road — kingdom, first republic, first empire, back to kingdom, second republic, second empire, third republic, fascist state, fourth republic, and now fifth republic. So Napoleon, as great a general as he was (well, until invading Russia, silly, silly, man, but he was neither the first nor last to make that mistake), was an obstacle to France becoming a real democracy.
I was expecting a movie about flaky layers of puff pastry separating creamy luscious vanilla crème pâtissière all topped with a decadent chocolate frosting layer of feathered black and white design. What I received was … not that!
“Scott, who of course is British, shrugged off comments like that in typical Ridley Scott-style, arguing that, “the French don’t even like themselves.””Ah, yes, if there were ever a people notorious for their lack of self-regard, it’s the French.
Next they’ll be telling us Abe Lincoln didn’t hunt vampires.
Napoleon wasn’t even French! He was Corsican (who speak a language closer to Italian than French). It’s funny how these things work. Napoleon was Corsican, Stalin was Georgian, and Hitler was Austrian!
Corsica is part of France. In 1789 many people in France maybe the majority did not speak “French” which was originally the language of the region of Paris.
Most “not-French languages” in France like are arguably French dialects, even if they differ from Parisian French (yes, I know there is no real concrete distinction between dialects of related languages and completely separate languages other than the old quip that a language is a dialect that has its own navy). But some like Breton (basically a Welsh-like language), Catalan (somewhere between French and Spanish), and Corsican (basically an Italian dialect) are clearly not at all part of the “French language”, and it is frankly imperialism that the areas where they are spoken are not their own sovereign nations.
Corsica had only become de jure part of France the year before Napoleon was born. Genoa sold the rights to France because they could not recover Corsica themselves after 14 years of independence. Napoleon’s parents were part of the Corsican resistance. Napoleon himself did not start learning French in school until he was 10, and was notably bullied for his bad accent and worse spelling.French didn’t replace Italian as the official language of Corsica until well after Napoleon’s death.
Fuck sake AV Club, does the constant directionless snark and eyerolling smirking not get exhausting? Could you not just outright say what you sincerely think about something without drowning every sentence in smug irony to the point where it’s impossible to tell what you’re actually trying to say about the subject?
The answer is “no”.
Look, the man has a brand*, and he’s going to stick to it.
*Just because you have a brand doesn’t mean it works.
“drowning every sentence in smug irony to the point where it’s impossible to tell what you’re actually trying to say about the subject”- The A.V. Club
French GQ, for example, apparently called the film “deeply clumsy, unnatural, and unintentionally funny, French newspaper Le Figaro comparing its versions of Napoleon and Josephine to Ken and Barbie, and Napoleon biographer Patrice Gueniffey calling it “very anti-French and very pro-British. Scott, who of course is British, shrugged off comments like that in typical Ridley Scott-style, arguing that, “the French don’t even like themselves.”
I guess AV Club is rationing the quotation marks these days – austerity measures are tough! (the change in tense mid sentence is confounding too).
Yeah sort of gave up halfway through on that one.
The French (or many of them) still believe that Napoleon won at Waterloo. Or that Napoleon was somehow “robbed” of a deserved victory. I’m guessing Scott’s movie does not share that view. And sorry, but as much as I love the French (and don’t especially like Scott), but he’s right.
It was the damn referee! Wellington was clearly out of bounds and everyone in the stands could see it!
Seriously? Napoleon won at Waterloo? Were the Prussian cavalry the Napoleonic equivalent of Dominion Voting Systems?
If Napoleon won, then how do they explain why he had to go into exile, again?
Patrice Gueniffey just isn’t some “biographer”. I mean, he did write a biography. But he is one of the most well-known and well-respected historians of the period on either side of the Atlantic. Of course he is going to criticize the film’s inaccuracies and its pro-British message which is as old as Napoleon himself.
which seems fair, if bluntly stated, because that kind of very-online
anti-fun/creativity “criticism” is exhausting and pretentious, and Scott
shouldn’t feel obligated to engage with itSo The AV Club’s hottake this week is that historical accuracy in historical films if for extremely online people who need to touch grass?The Spanfeller Mandate worked out great for Jezebel, I’m sure it’ll do wonders for The AV Club.
All historical films are fiction… and if you want history go read a few books on the subject But people don’t care anymore about history, they want entertainment, short and sweet but then they are living in a fake world that has nothing to do with the real… and reality slowly become fiction too… Enjoy !