By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Firstly, it's a film, it has to sell tickets and hopefully be entertaining; it's not a documentary. I'm speaking as someone who would go to a documentary on Napoleonic war and has read a few books on it - a blockbuster in my local multiplex is just not that beast.
Secondly, while I agree with his basic point about how wars are usually won, just occasionally there were decisive battles. In 1066, if William gets an arrow in the eye instead of Harold then he loses. We can be sure of the because the sources tell us that halfway through the Normans thought he had got killed and started to run away, until he proved he was still alive. William loses and the war is over - we also know that, because that was what happened to the Norwegians at Stamford Bridge (not that one) a few days earlier.
In the case of Napoleon, a lot of his success did come from winning battles, that was his thing. The limitations of that did for him in Russia, and before that in Egypt, but you can't deny that, for example, Prussia was destroyed as a military power in two battles on one day in 1806, and only came back because Russia won in 1812.
It's not a documentary is a line I say all the time. If you want history read a book.
I really worry about cross generational media literacy, where a film includes a shot that is obviously a short hand to telescope time to show he took Egypt and everyone's like "ERR THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN" yeah it's a film not a 47 year long literal retelling
Some on this thread may find this interesting. It's an interesting channel, he reads first hand accounts from chronicles and diaries of soldiers, priests etc who have witnessed historical events.
Stupid movie it was much more about Ridley Scott and Joachim Phoenix trying to win an Oscar than it was about Napoleon.It was a very inaccurate and bad portrayal of one of the most interesting men in history.
I believe Scott's next project is already underway. Casting has begun for a tell all about the Duke of Wellington. I hear it's going to get pretty hairy at closing time.
Also anyone whose ever studied historiography knows that "accuracy" is a weird fetishisation of a type of history removed from context and critique rather than something to be strived for
I liked the comment that ABBA's version of Waterloo is more accurate.
F.....g outstanding Bosh!!
Austerlutz great scene, but no actual lake there! NB wasn't in Paris when Marie Antoinette had her head guillotined.
I've seen the three big films recently, and 'Napoleon' isn't as good as 'Oppenheimer', but historical accuracies aside, it's nowhere near being as rubbish as 'Killers of the Flower Moon'!
Scorsese irrespective of his age, needs a slap for 'KotFM' and whereas I'd recommend avoidance of that film, I'd merely say you'll miss nothing if you don't see 'N'.
'Always In Motion' by John Honney available on amazon.co.uk
The Critical Drinker's review was pretty much what others have posted.
My favourite story on historical accuracy is Sir Anthony Hopkins said when playing Lt.Colonel John Frost in 'A Bridge too Far' the late Major General Frost was there for the filming and Hopkins asked "How was it?" or something like that. Frost replied "Very good except one doesn't/didn't run under fire"
Colonel Vandeleur was in Michael Caine's tenk during the ambush scene of XXX corps and he said it was just like being back there.
[Post edited 6 Dec 2023 8:34]
My fave is from David Niven.
When he was about to lead an attack during WW2 he claims he told the troops "I know this is going to be tough, but just remember, you only have to do it once; I'll have to do it again in Hollywood with Errol Flynn"
Austerlutz great scene, but no actual lake there! NB wasn't in Paris when Marie Antoinette had her head guillotined.
I've seen the three big films recently, and 'Napoleon' isn't as good as 'Oppenheimer', but historical accuracies aside, it's nowhere near being as rubbish as 'Killers of the Flower Moon'!
Scorsese irrespective of his age, needs a slap for 'KotFM' and whereas I'd recommend avoidance of that film, I'd merely say you'll miss nothing if you don't see 'N'.
"Austerlutz great scene, but no actual lake there!"
"Napoleon ordered up 25 cannon to smash the ice on Lake Satschen. As it broke up, it tipped thousands of Russians into the freezing water beneath; no one is sure how many drowned, but around 2,000 is a likely figure."
"Napoleon ordered up 25 cannon to smash the ice on Lake Satschen. As it broke up, it tipped thousands of Russians into the freezing water beneath; no one is sure how many drowned, but around 2,000 is a likely figure."
Black stumps for teeth, but he liked the 'zigzag'.
Listened to the 2 episodes on him by the wonderful 'the rest is history'.
So did I, thanks to your recommendation of that pod.
It's utterly superb - I've already listened to the series on Captain Cook, on Napoleon, on The Aztecs, on Ireland and now listening to the series on JFK.
"The opposite of love, after all, is not hate, but indifference."
So did I, thanks to your recommendation of that pod.
It's utterly superb - I've already listened to the series on Captain Cook, on Napoleon, on The Aztecs, on Ireland and now listening to the series on JFK.
Not saying the 'Rest is History' is poor, far from it. They do churn them out and as a result, I wish they'd get on with it more and, thus, reduce the lenght their many pods go on for.
However, the RIH is night and day better than Dan Snow's pod, which is more an infomercial with him also plugging subscriptions.
'Always In Motion' by John Honney available on amazon.co.uk
Suggest no greater lakes, rather a series of ponds, and that only two bodies were found.
So, one of us has access to dodgy history.
It's a tough one isn't it? Britannica (which is possibly better researched than a couole of film reviews) - https://www.britannica.com/event/Battle-of-Austerlitz also goes down the line of the French artillery shooting the ice at Satschan with "many" of the fugitives drowning.
Nobody really knows because the (variously) pond/ponds/lake was/were drained after the battle, there was no body count and it is not possible to tell how deep it was.
What the research does suggest is that the French did fire cannons on those retreating, that some were on iced water and that some drowned.
So did I, thanks to your recommendation of that pod.
It's utterly superb - I've already listened to the series on Captain Cook, on Napoleon, on The Aztecs, on Ireland and now listening to the series on JFK.
The Aztecs series was fantastic, I've gone out and bought a couple of the books on the back of it (not Sandbrook's kids book!). Other favourites are 1970s New York, even American podcasters I listen to rave about it, the series on the Cathars, another real surprise, and "worst parties in history".
On the subject of Napoleon, did anyone else play "Campaign" in the 70s.? My brother and I were board game freaks, and this was probably our favourite, though I can hardly remember a thing about it, other than we used to be particularly competitive about Smolensk.
The Aztecs series was fantastic, I've gone out and bought a couple of the books on the back of it (not Sandbrook's kids book!). Other favourites are 1970s New York, even American podcasters I listen to rave about it, the series on the Cathars, another real surprise, and "worst parties in history".
On the subject of Napoleon, did anyone else play "Campaign" in the 70s.? My brother and I were board game freaks, and this was probably our favourite, though I can hardly remember a thing about it, other than we used to be particularly competitive about Smolensk.
Had completely forgotten Campaign, but yes, we had it. My older brothers were both big on the Napoleonic Wars, I think the BBC "War and Peace" had an influence on them, it was after my bedtime so I didn't see it until decades later. (Pretty decent actually, a young Anthony Hopkins starring.)
The history boardgame I remember better was Kingmaker, which gave me a lifelong knowledge of English castles so that I can often still tell if there's going to be a castle in some small village I'm about to drive through. (Irritatingly though, it had Douglas on the Isle of Man a a castle for the Stanleys, where there is none, instead of Castle Rushen or Peel which both exist and are pretty good sites if you're a castle fan.)
Had completely forgotten Campaign, but yes, we had it. My older brothers were both big on the Napoleonic Wars, I think the BBC "War and Peace" had an influence on them, it was after my bedtime so I didn't see it until decades later. (Pretty decent actually, a young Anthony Hopkins starring.)
The history boardgame I remember better was Kingmaker, which gave me a lifelong knowledge of English castles so that I can often still tell if there's going to be a castle in some small village I'm about to drive through. (Irritatingly though, it had Douglas on the Isle of Man a a castle for the Stanleys, where there is none, instead of Castle Rushen or Peel which both exist and are pretty good sites if you're a castle fan.)
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
