Tag Archives: Kevin J. Walsh

CINEMA REVIEW: NAPOLEON (2023)

CINEMA REVIEW: NAPOLEON (2023)

Directed by Ridley Scott

Written by David Scarpa

Produced by: Ridley Scott, Kevin J. Walsh, Mark Huffam, and Joaquin Phoenix.

Main Cast: Joaquin Phoenix, Vanessa Kirby, Tahar Rahim, Rupert Everett, Ben Miles, Ludivine Sagnier, and more.

Cinematography by Dariusz Wolski



If you didn’t know, Napoleon I, was also called Napoleon Bonaparte. He was a French military general and statesman and played a key role in the French Revolution (1789–99), before serving as first consul of France (1799–1804). Napoleon was also the first emperor of France (1804–14/15) and given his many years of military campaigns in France and overseas, striving to build an empire for France, he is now widely considered one of the greatest generals in history. I don’t purport to be a history buff, but I was intrigued by the release of Ridley Scott’s latest directorial epic cinematic behemoth, Napoleon (2023). This almost-three-hour release comes to the screen courtesy of Sony and Apple TV with Joaquin Phoenix in the titular role.

Opening in 1793, a young, but up-and-coming army officer Napoleon witnesses Marie Antoinette get her head cut off at the guillotine, followed quickly by one of the many thrilling battle sequences in the film at the ‘Siege of Toulon.’ It was during this siege that young Napoleon first won fame when his strategy, forced the Anglo-Spanish fleet to withdraw. After which David Scarpa’s adaptation and Scott’s editing team rattle through the battles, romances, trials and decades of Napoleon’s life so breathlessly, as an audience member, I felt like this film was more of a “Now That’s What I Call Napoleon!” greatest hits package rather than a compellingly intense drama and study that really delves into the complex psychology of Napoleon’s character.



Ridley Scott, at 85 years old, brings his masterly cinematic experience to many explosive battle sequences in Egypt, Austria, France and throughout Europe. The stunning cinematography by Dariusz Wolski supports Scott’s vision and it is safe to say the production design and costumes are par excellence for this massively budgeted production. However expertly shot, edited and rendered on screen the battles are, they often feel rushed through at times, providing jarring punctuation to the central human focus of the film, the love story between Napoleon and Josephine (Vanessa Kirby). I feel like I would have preferred a deeper analysis of Napoleon’s military strategics and perhaps a more serious approach to his importance to France through his victories on the battlefield.

Vanessa Kirby, as Josephine, brought a class, elegance and intelligence to the role and gives a standout performance. Joaquin Phoenix, who is one of the finest actors around, however, gives us a misfiring characterization as Bonaparte. I just felt it was too knowing and flippant throughout. I am not averse to humour in serious dramas, but I just did not warm at all to his portrayal. Scott’s director of Phoenix plus Scarpa’s screenplay only touch the surface of Napoleon’s character. I mean here is a historical figure who has an incredible series of chapters in his life, but there is no major journey or arc in his story. At times I even felt there was ridicule for Napoleon, but if you wish to critique him, then why not make him more dangerous, a monster even. Especially given his predilection and desire for war and sending thousands of lives to their tragic end.

Like I say, Scott and his amazing creative team deliver a greatest “hits” of Napoleon’s life and some spectacular cinematic moments. But quite often I was bored and questioning why I should care about any of the characters on screen. Scott and his screenwriter have been stung by criticisms of historical inaccuracies. That doesn’t bother Scott at all and would not bother me if such changes enhanced the drama. Yet, the compression of certain scenarios seem to be more for pacing reasons. Lastly, there is apparently a four-hour directorial cut of the film so perhaps that contains more depth, emotion and psychological analysis of Napoleon, rather than the paper-thin filmic treatise delivered here.

Mark: 7 out of 11


CINEMA REVIEW: HOUSE OF GUCCI (2021)

CINEMA REVIEW: HOUSE OF GUCCI (2021)

Directed by: Ridley Scott

Screenplay by: Becky Johnston, Roberto Bentivegna

Based on: The House of Gucci: A Sensational Story of Murder, Madness, Glamour, and Greed by Sara Gay Forden

Produced by: Ridley Scott, Giannina Scott, Kevin J. Walsh, Mark Huffam

Cast: Lady Gaga, Adam Driver, Jared Leto, Jeremy Irons, Salma Hayek, Al Pacino etc.

Cinematography: Dariusz Wolski

*** MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS***



I’m not a fan of fashion. I wear clothes obviously and like to be smart and clean. Yet, the idea of believing one’s garments, shoes and accessories mean you are important, superior or worthy of adulation sickens me to be honest. However, fashion is a multi-billionaire industry and I get that people of variant social standing love it as a cultural phenomena. People either own or aspire to own over-valued garments and objects to inflate their ego or sense of importance is beyond me. Then again, I passionately enjoy watching human beings kick a ball into a net, so everyone has irrational passions. C’est la vie!

I didn’t go to see House of Gucci (2021) to look at the clothes though. My interest in this star-studded, big budget crime drama directed by the legend, Ridley Scott, was more because I did not know anything about the lives and personalities within the Gucci empire. Who would have thought that a wealthy family unit could have turned out so poisoned by greed and envy?

Covering a period of twenty or so years from the late 1970s into the 1990s, the story is structured around the relationship between Patrizia Reggiani (Lady Gaga) and Maurizio Gucci (Adam Driver). They fall passionately is lust, much to the chagrin of his spiteful father (Jeremy Irons) and marry against his will. Patrizia genuinely loves the sensitive Maurizio, but also has green eyes for the Gucci empire and the power that can bring. As her desire for influence in the family business grows, then so does cracks in their marriage. Crumbling relationships, business chicanery and family treachery dominate the narrative, all coming to a head with tragic results.



As a morality tale about how greed corrupts and drives human beings toward unnecessary tragedy, The House of Gucci (2021) is certainly worth a watch. Is there a sense the Gucci family were cursed by there wealth. Perhaps? But the film and screenplay as a whole present this theme without really drawing them out to full dramatic effect. However, the cast are absolutely fantastic throughout with Al Pacino, Adam Driver, and Lady Gaga on particularly exceptional form. Jared Leto dominates many scenes with his bald head, extra weight and screechy voice. While entertaining, the director could have reigned Leto in slightly to extract more pathos from the sad clown that is represented in Paulo Gucci.

I had a few issues with The House of Gucci (2021) inasmuch as it felt incomplete. At times it was as though I was watching a test screening version. The transitions between years were often confusing. What year is it, Ridley? Adam Driver’s arc from likeable young academic to selfish adulterer was rushed and unearned. I got the evocation of a Fredo and Michael Corleone dynamic between Maurizio and Paulo, but this really could have been developed further. The cinematography was grey and dull with the natural lighting style working against the expected colour and vibrancy of the 1980s era. I also wondered if the film had been graded?

While watching The House of Gucci (2021) I just kept thinking of more superior crime and gangster films. It is also mildly disrespectful to a genius like Ridley Scott to say Martin Scorsese would have knocked this story out of the park. I truly felt, while Lady Gaga was excellent in her role, her character could have been written and given a voice-over up there with that of Henry Hill’s. Nonetheless, I still enjoyed the film but wonder if there is a director’s cut out there which doesn’t feel rush released. Or even the possibility HBO or Showtime may adapt it into a longer drama series in time. Yet, does one want to spend more time with such avaricious and vain characters? Depends who is telling the story I guess.

Mark: 7.5 out of 11