Skip to main content

Napoleon 2023 Review

 


Ridley Scott has made some incredible epics, Gladiator and Kingdom of Heaven are masterpieces. His skill in cinematography, memorable characters, and costumery is unmatched. Of late his motion picture making prowess has slipped, The Last Duel (2021) was rather drab and basically the same 30mins of footage shot three times with some variations. His attempts with the Alien prequels were not well receive, and now Napoleon has been shrouded in controversy as history buffs decry inaccuracies that Scott has had to defend in public. The truth is telling the turbulent life of a tyrant who has left his mark on France is no easy task, when you make someone as enigmatic, brutish, and megalomaniacal the protagonist the audience is bound to feel grim. With Gladiator you have a righteous Maximus who says “what we do in life echoes in eternity,” and Balian in Kingdom of Heaven says “its a Kingdom of conscience or nothing!” Both Maximus and Balian lose their wives, one to villainy and the other to tragedy, both lose their children, one to crucifixion and the other to miscarriage. Both Maximus and Balian are honorable men propelled on their paths by loss and who have virtuous mantras, “strength and honor,” and “what is man if he does not make the world better.” In contrast Napoleon is a man of ambition who in one scene blows women and children to pieces in a square, and who’s “thirst for gore,” (Napoleon, The Count of Monte Cristo 2002) seems insatiable. You see in his first battle when his poor battle stead is blown open at the chest and he is baptized in blood that he transforms from a French officer into man who will seek blood on almost every continent. Joaquin Phoenix does a impeccable job playing Bonaparte, however in Gladiator as Commodus playing a tyrant with mental illness worked because he was the antagonist, here he is protagonist and that causes problems for the portrayal, its hard to root for the anti-hero and tyrant. Where Ridley Scott succeeds is Napoleon and his love for Josephine, the legendary and tragic love story is the only soul this film has, for Napoleon is like a dark Hosea The Prophet, Josephine is Gomer who keeps being promiscuous, but you see despite their faults, the two have a bond that even survives a divorce that breaks Napoleon and Josephine’s hearts; Joaquin does a brilliant performance of Napoleon’s anguish as he weeps signing the divorce parchment, being forced into it because Josephine is barren and The Emperor must have heirs. And yet even when he has a legitimate son, he brings the child to Josephine and presents him to the mother he wish the heir had. Another striking scene is when Napoleon learns Josephine has died, and her letters  to him stolen by a Valet and sold. You see beyond the uniform, and statue like stoic expression as he falls apart having lost the love of his life. This is where the film shines, when the movie focuses on two beating hearts, a brute and a whore, who love each other. 


There are some incredible battle scenes, The Harbor siege was amazing as they storm the battlement and then blow up the ships in the port with canons.

Then the battle on ice against The Russians, as the canon balls act like paint brushes to open the ice like a canvas and bloody bodies fall in in swirls of red. It is these, the most gruesome battles where Scott lets you see the carnage and “thirst for gore,” that the film is strongest cinematically, for it shows war as it is, crimson fountains of inferno spurting from man and beast.  The other battles rely on too much pomp and shaky camera to truly captivate, The Battle of Waterloo was rather underwhelming, save one scene of British in a square of men being surrounded and cut at a living turret or tower by French calvary with sabers. 


The lessons of Napoleon for us Christians is how ambition and “the thirst for gore,” unmake the mightiest of men. Napoleon’s greatness like that of Alexander The Great, Julius Cesar, and others was short lived and we only have a marginal grasp of who they were. In contrast, Jesus Christ our Lord and The Apostles who did not raise the sword but “put away your sword, those who live by sword will die by the sword,” (Matthew 26:25) and who instead conquering the nations “made disciples of all nations,” (Matthew 28:19). The impact of the Son of God and his Apostles lasted because it was love based: love divine and love for mankind. Napoleon really only is memorable in his loving letters to Josephine. And had he let that be his treasure, as she truly was his treasure and been content then he would have not wasted time and so many lives in Russia’s Winter campaigns, and the Battle of Waterloo. Napoleon is a perfect opposite example of the Apostles, he chose his own fame, ambition, and power over his love for Josephine and in the end he died alone on St. Helena bereft of glory and his fame. In the end this world’s accolades rust, the laurels die, “What good will it be for someone to gain the whole world, yet forfeit their soul? Or what can anyone give in exchange for their soul?” (Matthew 16:26). Napoleon lost his soul, because like a binary star it was tied to Josephine’s soul, and he spent his time instead like comet trying to tame the nations like the vastness of space, and in end his victories were fleeting. Conquerors like Napoleon are remebered for shedding blood, Jesus our Lord for shedding his own blood to save us, “And through Jesus to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross,” (Colossians 1:20). Napoleon ended up exiled on Island of St. Helena, John the Apostle on Island of Patmos, but John wrote a book that has impacted billions maybe trillions of people, The Book of Revelation, while Napoleon’s Letters have been read directly by historians and Bonapartists. The men who changed the world the most bent the knee in prayer and did God’s Will, the men who rattled the world like Napoleon are remembered but who’s legacy is that so many died in their service. Jesus came to save souls, Napoleon carved souls and his thirst for gore is a stark contrast to gore of Golgatha, Jesus letting himself be mutilated to make us right before God, while Napoleon painted battlefield canvases with the corpses and blood of his men and his enemies. 


Names like Napoleon will be forgotten when The New Heaven and Earth come. It will not matter if your name is in annuls of history but if it is in Lamb’s Book of Life. Napoleon is a great reminder why we should rejoice that Jesus’ Kingdom is not of this world (John 18:36). That the madness of power grabs and men wanting a moment in sun will not feature in The Son’s New Heaven and Earth (Revelation 21:1-53). Napoleon the film is a apt reminder of futility of man, of us trying to achieve dominion on this Earth which is God’s Footstool (Matthew 5:35, Isaiah 66:1-9). For this reason the film can serve God’s purposes, to make clear to us how the “greatest of these is love,” (1 Corinthians 13:13) and that nothing matters but “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the greatest and first commandment. And the second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets..” (Matthew 22:37-40). That love not power and control satisfy, just as Napoleon was most satisfied in Josephine not his ego. If only Napoleon had known Christ, and had made a different choice, he may not have ended up in the annuls of history, but he would have had a more joyful life. Amen.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Israel’s Conquest of Canaan: The Nephilim and Giants

  Christianity Today asserts that the conquest of Canaan can be a “stumbling block” for believers. This probably is because of a foolish idea of comparing it to a modern conquest happening in our world. The truth is that God had Israel conquer Canaan because it was ruled by evil giants, “We saw the Nephilim there (the descendants of Anak come from the Nephilim). We seemed like grasshoppers in our own eyes, and we looked the same to them.” (Numbers 13:33). These are Anakim or Nephilim, the children of angels and human women, “When man began to multiply on the face of the land and daughters were born to them, the sons of God (angels) saw that the daughters of man were attractive. And they took as their wives any they chose. Then the LORD said, “My Spirit shall not abide in man forever, for he is flesh: his days shall be 120 years.” The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of man and they bore children to them. The...

Dispensationalism

John Nelson Darby (1800-1882) was a man who did two things, he took 70th week of the Book of Daniel and stretched out to the End Times, and he was the father of  Dispensationalism , a belief system that God dispenses different peoples with separate blessings and covenants. According to Darb'ys doctrine of Dispensationalism, God dispenses different covenants. There are total of seven dispensations that divide the history of man: I. Dispensation of Innocence (prior to the Fall, "Do not east of the Fruit of Good and Eve, Eden), II. Dispensation of Conscience ( You must assuage guilt and sin with blood sacrifices.) III. Dispensation of Human Government (Multiply and Subdue the world, example the Tower of Babel Gen 11:1-9, and Genesis 1:28). IV. Dispensation of the Promise (Dwell in Canaan, Jerusalem) V. Dispensation of the Law ("Obey the Law of Moses and the Prophets"). VI. Dispensation of Grace (The Church, Jesus Christ has come...

Jesus’ Name in Aramaic

There has been a trend to render Jesus’ name Hebrew, יֵשׁוּעַ , Yeshua. The problem is neither Christ nor his apostles, nor the Jews in 30-33 A.D. spoke Hebrew, they spoke Aramaic. A ramaic is the oldest language on earth and was the language Jesus spoke. In fact, the oldest Old Testament is the Septuagint a Greco translation around 132 B.C.E. (165 Years Before Christ)that was translated from Aramaic. The Masoretic Text, The Hebrew Old Testament most Bibles use, dates from 7th to 10th Century A.D. (Medieval Times).  This translation does not cross reference with the words of Christ in the New Testament which are Aramaic and Koine Greek.  If the Aramaic was what Jesus spoke, then by what name would have been called? Jesus’ name in Aramaic is Isho or Eesho, spelled ܝܫܘܥ . That is the name of our Lord in Aramaic! He would have heard his name in this dialect, “Hail Isho or Eesho!” as well as the Greek, Ἰ ησο ῦ ς , Iesous.  Aramaic is disappearing, only a few peop...