I watched several clips. youtube wants 24 bucks to rent it. Ill wait till the price comes down. but the clips looked entertaining. thats what it is, entertainment. so, anything else I can explain for you today? or are you done. sorry if your butt-hurt
That's exactly what I thought of the movie when I watched it. I don't know a ton about the history and just the general stuff, and I didn't expect the most historically accurate piece (a movie simply isn't long enough). I did expect to be thoroughly entertained and entertained I was.
I may be wrong but this is quite some time after the outbreak of the revolution. The shortage mostly had died down as it was only for a year or two due to bad weather.
If I may be allowed to count the inaccuracies of this scene: 1. Marie Antoinette was taken to Execution Square sitting backwards in the tumbril; 2. She wore a white dress; 3. Her hair had been cut short before being placed on the tumbril; 4. Her hands were bound when she was placed on the tumbril; 5. She stumbled while mounting the stairs, bumping into Chief Executioner Charles-Henri Sanson, and apologized, to which Sanson replied with 'Courage, Madam.'; 6. No one was EVER executed by kneeling and having their head placed in the lunette; they were always strapped to the bascule, and then slid into position; 7. She was the first person executed that day, so no blood would have been on the blade yet; 8. Napoleon was in his early 20's when he witnessed the execution, and not the age that Joaquin Phoenix appears as in the scene. (If anyone can spot anything else wrong with this scene, please comment!)
It’s an overall fantastic start to this movie from how masterfully directed it is and how beautifully stylized the movie opens as and is throughout! The movie IS fantastically well directed purely from the visuals, sound design, music, tone, atmosphere, art direction, and gorgeous cinematography throughout! And that’s easily a fact right there!
When Napoleon heard the news that Louis the 16th was executed, he said "Such is the reward of kings", but when he heard the news that Marie Antoinette was executed, he said "What a horror!". Such contrast.
Never thought a barely 4-minute-long opening could get so many things wrong about one of the most well-known events in modern European history. For those who don't know, it is well documented that people at the execution of Marie-Antoinette were calm, grave, and solemn, unlike during her husband's execution. And Napoleon was obviously not here - he was not even serving in the military nor on the continent during most of that period. For anyone interested in the history of Revolutionary France (excluding the Napoleon part), I recommend a two-part movie made in 1989 for the 200th anniversary of the Revolution called 'The French Revolution: Years of Hope & Years of Rage.' It is much better and accurate than most recent (and foreign) depictions of that era.
First scene and already mistakes.... it is proved that the audience was silent and, after the death of the Queen, left the place still in silence. Plus, Marie-Antoinette accidentally walked on her hangman's foot and apologized... "I am sorry, mister." So he responded "Be couragous, madame".
@@empereurdugrandaveyron6477 For sure. But movies can also respect the real history and some movies could not be called "biographie" or "historic movies" when they do not respect the reality.
Even the first second of the movie was innacurate lol because the year displayed was 1789 which was the year the royal family left Versailles, The Storming of the Bastile and the March of the Parisian women but she was not executed until 4 years later
1. Marie Antoinette wore a white dress. 2. Her hair was cut short. 3. She had on a white cap 4. She was placed on a board to restrain her with her hands bound. 5. And Finally!! She apologized for stepping on the executioners foot. And he replied to her "Show courage madame" The director of this film didn't do much research.
Ya, the fact that she was just walking around without a cap and with long hair and in a what appeared to be velvet dress that would have required an expensive dye really threw me for a loop. Though I do appreciate that it showed her as being dignified till the end.
Notice in the beginning, how Marie Antoinette desperately tries to protect her children from a vicious mob. That’s one accuracy in the depiction. She stated that her enemies were, “all those who would bring harm to my children.” The night before her death she wrote on the back of her prayer book, “My God have pity on me! My eyes have no more tears left to weep for you my poor children. Adieu, adieu.” 😢♥️🙏 (They accused her of disgusting things, but that was orchestrated. These quotes give some truthful insight of her character.)
*FunFact* France didn't stop using the Gullitine until 1977😳. Naturally Manchester United stopping Liverpool from winning the treble that very year. Put a stop to this 😏😉
Interesting fun fact: Legendary actor Christopher Lee witnessed the last public guillotine execution ever held in France, the execution of convicted serial killer Eugen Weidmann on June 17, 1939. He was 17 years old. And then nearly 50 years later, he portrayed headsman Charles-Henri Sanson in a 1989 French TV drama about the French Revolution. Talk about ironic.
Napoleon was 24 years old when Marie Antoinette was executed. Joaquin Phoenix is 48 and looks 60-- way too old to play the part. His miscasting ruins this movie.
a film without any historical accuracy. Napoleon portrayed as a kind of clown always in heat. This scene then... I want to draw a veil of compassion over this scene. Queen Marie Antoinette went to the scaffold in the absolute silence of the crowd. She tripped on the last step and apologized to the executioner who held her up. Napoleon himself said of her: "A woman who had nothing but honors without power, a foreign princess, the most sacred of hostages, to drag her from the throne to the gallows, through all sorts of outrages, there is something worse in that of regicide". Ridley Scott, once again as in "Gladiator", misrepresents and rewrites history in the absurd idea of making his work more spectacular. My rating for this film is 2.5 out of 10
Full version: “If it is not a subject of remorse, it must at least be a very great subject of regret for all French hearts that the crime committed in the person of this unfortunate queen. There is a big difference between this death and that of Louis XVI, although, certainly, he did not deserve his misfortune. This is the condition of kings, their life belongs to everyone; it is only they who cannot dispose of it; an assassination, a conspiracy, a cannon shot, these are their chances; Caesar and Henry IV were assassinated, the Alexander of the Greeks would have been assassinated if he had lived longer. But a woman who had nothing but honors without power, a foreign princess, the most sacred of hostages, dragging her from a throne to the scaffold through all kinds of outrages! There is something even worse than regicide there! » Nicolas François Mollien relates Napoleon's remarks on the execution of the deposed queen (taken from the Memoirs of a Minister of the Public Treasury 1780-1815)
The whole square, place de la Revolution went into complete silence ...you only see the Queen executed once in a lifetime. The screams started once the head was shown
As inaccurate as this entire opening scene is, without historical context, I love the way she holds her head high while being jeered at and being pummeled by spoiled food. Then you see her facade break as she realizes the end is just seconds away. I've always been a Marie Antoinette apologist. She was a victim of circumstance and her death served only as a symbol. Yes, you just beheaded her. Did that make food suddenly appear on your table, were your ragged clothes suddenly made new, were your ill and starving children made healthy again? It would only take 10 years for the monarchy to be restored and this was all for naught.
@@ivangomez123 And when professional historians, especially French ones, spoke about it to Scott, he just shrugs and would say "French people even hate themselves" Its possible I might be a bit wrong but he did say something like that. Very arrogant and that made me loose respect for this once talented film-maker
@opfer88 your pathetic nonsense are just revolutionary propaganda which by the way, as time progressed their lies were revealed just as much as their madness and stupidity! she didn't cry, she showed dignity, even had witnesses for it, she apologized to the executioner for accidentally stepping on his feet and there's also a last letter written by her to princess Elisabeth (guess who was the person who kept the letter and didn't allow it to be sent to Elisabeth and was instead kept in the hands of those in power for centuries) and your ridiculous words about her being treated well in her entire life! well, being neglected because of being the youngest child in a family with more than 10 kids, being queen of a racist country who never took her seriously as queen and never let go of her origins, being assaulted by everyone, in all ways for years, accused of things you never did or was even aware of, not having the right to have your own privacy and personal boundaries(which revolutionaries behaved much on this part) having your son being taken from you and be abused, being accused of incest and...if all of this sounds like being treated well, you're a lunatic! just like every other of those revolutionaries
Well, the drawing of her on a wheelcart showed she wore a sort of sleeping cap and her hair cut. I guess her hair was cut in the prison before she was being taken to the gallow. But the filmmakers failed to look at how she would look on way to gallow. Poor show!
*Fun fact:* Irish actress Catherine Walker portrays "Marie-Antoinette" here, but also played "Madame de Maintenon" in the 2015-2018 TV series "Versailles".
Historically false, Napoleon never witnessed the execution of Queen Marie Antoinette since he was not in Paris. He had been in the South of France since July, participating from September to December in the siege of Toulon. I would never let an English director make a film about a historical figure like Napoleon.
Let me put your mind at ease - what you’re watching is called a ‘film’. It’s a series of moving images assembled to form a motion picture piece of entertainment. It is not fact, it is not documentary, it is only a film.
Napoleon movie- Made by a British director. Already knew it was going to be a disaster. Was proven correct. The 2002 miniseries is ten times better than this bullshit.
Marie Antoinette's hair was cut prior to her execution, and she also was forced to wear white. Also she had a priest with her in the cart in real life and idk if they actually threw food at her, shit they might have though because of how unfairly hated she was. I do wanna watch this movie for sure though. I get that it is just a movie and not a documentary but it is fun knowing the real history of what happened too. Napoleon actually married marie Antoinette's great niece after him and Josephine split.
What's weirder is the film gets this right later on. When Napoleon first meets Josephine she has shaved hair, wears just her white undergown, and a red necklace. This was a real style and statement made by many women who barely escaped the Guillotine, they were cosplaying how their relatives and friends would've looked when they went to the chop.
Ngl, as bad as this movie apparently is, this scene was kind of badass. I love the inclusion of Edith Piaf's rendition of "Ça Ira ("It'll Be Fine")," a popular song during the French Revolution that literally calls for aristocrats (i.e. the old, wealthy nobility) to be hung from lampposts.
Historically inaccurate. She was separated from her children long before her execution. She road sitting backwards with her hands already tied and hair cut
The sad part is Marie Antoinette never knew what became of her son, Louis. Rumors did spread that he died from health failure or too much beaten down by his captor. Others claimed that he had forgotten that he was a prince and lived peacefully among the French commoners. Only her daughter had lived and was given to Hasburg by her uncle as Madame Royale is her name as the last true princess of France.
@@Dusty338 Determined to get all the bad takes in, are we? If you love feudalism so much you are welcome to go live in a peasant's hovel and perform menial labor for your masters in as servile a manner as you like.
I didn't rate this movie at all. A man that conquered most of Europe having fought so many famous battles, along with being a military genius, and the focus is on him lovemaking with Josephine numerous times. Such a wasted opportunity.
Thomas Jefferson told the French they needed to execute the aristocracy. He gave them the idea that the nobility needed to removed for the good of France. But like everything the French do is overdone and the children were also executed along with their parents. That was the Reign of Terror! Viva Le Roi
I know that Marie Antoinette had her flaws, but seriously no person deserves to die that way. Edit:Guys I know it's painless and quick. But I meant to die knowing that people would be cheering to see your bloody corpse, it's still a terrible way to die knowing that people are happy that your gone.
Where is the pain? That blade cut the spinal cord automatically, and the brain not only cannot process pain, but also the individual is dead. I mean, she had her flaws and they killed her with a painless method instead of hanging her.
The only parts of the movie that I liked were the opening rendition of Ça ira and the set design. It’s ridiculous that the guy who wrote this movie literally read a short biography on Napoleon for the extent of his research into this film and did nothing else.
Imagine making a movie based on one of the most important events and individuals in human history and somehow managing to get like 95% of it wrong. Did the historical advisors for this movie just not get involved or did they lie on their resumes?
The comment section: Europeans: complaining this movie is inaccurate Americans: deffending it by telling this is just a fictionalized history, not an actual documentary Asians: "paris olympics!"
They're not implying that Marie Antoinette was executed in 1789, right? Because the major event of that year was the storming of the Bastille and it was a couple of years and several major events later that first the king and then the queen got their height adjusted down. O yeah, and they also cut her hair before transporting her to the guillotine, so that it wouldn't get in the way like it does here.
This song was chanted by the people of Paris during the French revolution when the monarchy was overthrown, and later on guillotined. It was sort of the the national anthem of the people when they revolted against King Louis XVI and Marie-Antoinette.
Ah! Ça ira ! Ça ira ! Ça ira ! Les aristocrates à la lanterne ! Ah! Ça ira ! Ça ira ! Ça ira ! Les aristocrates, on les pendra !
V'la trois cents ans qu'ils nous promettent Qu'on va nous accorder du pain. ( Ça ira ! Ça ira ! Ça ira ) V'là trois cents ans qu'ils donnent des fêtes Et qu'ils entretiennent des catins ! ( Ça ira ! Ça ira ! Ça ira ) V'là trois cents ans qu'on nous écrase Assez de mensonges et de phrases ! (Ça ira) On ne veut plus mourir de faim ! (mourir de faim) Ah! Ça ira ! Ça ira ! Ça ira ! Les aristocrates à la lanterne ! Ah! Ça ira ! Ça ira ! Ça ira ! Les aristocrates, on les pendra ! Voilà trois cents ans qu'ils font la guerre Au son des fifres et des tambours ( Ça ira ! Ça ira ! Ça ira ) En nous laissant crever de misère. Ça ne pouvait pas durer toujours... ( Ça ira ! Ça ira ! Ça ira ) Voilà trois cent ans qu'ils prennent nos hommes Qu'ils nous traitent comme des bêtes de somme. (Ca ira) Ça ne pouvait pas durer toujours ! (durer toujours) Ah! Ça ira ! Ça ira ! Ça ira ! Les aristocrates à la lanterne ! Ah! Ça ira ! Ça ira ! Ça ira ! Les aristocrates, on les pendra ! Le châtiment pour vous s'apprête Car le peuple reprend ses droits. ( Ça ira ! Ça ira ! Ça ira ) Vous vous êtes bien payé nos têtes, C'en est fini, messieurs les rois ! ( Ça ira ! Ça ira ! Ça ira ) Il faut plus compter sur les nôtres : On va s'offrir maintenant les vôtres, Car c'est nous qui faisons la loi ! (qui faisons la loi) Ah! Ça ira ! Ça ira ! Ça ira ! Les aristocrates à la lanterne ! Ah! Ça ira ! Ça ira ! Ça ira ! Les aristocrates, on les pendra ! Ah! Ça ira ! Ça ira ! Ça ira ! Les aristocrates à la lanterne ! Ah! Ça ira ! Ça ira ! Ça ira ! Les aristocrates, on les pendra ! Ah! Ça ira ! Ça ira ! Ça ira ! Les aristocrates à la lanterne ! Ah! Ça ira ! Ça ira ! Ça ira ! Les aristocrates, on les pendraaaaaaaaa !!!!! In English: Ah! It will be fine! It will be fine! It will be fine! The aristocrats to the lantern Ah! It will be fine! It will be fine! It will be fine! The aristocrats we will hang them!
It's been three hundred years they promise us That we will be allowed some bread. It's been three hundred years that they throw parties. And they maintain their whores It's been three hundred years that they crush us Enough lies and phrases! We do not want to starve to death anymore !!! Ah! It will be fine! It will be fine! It will be fine! The aristocrats to the lantern Ah! It will be fine! It will be fine! It will be fine! The aristocrats we will hang them!
For three hundred years they make war To the sound of fifes and drums Leaving us to die of misery. It could not last forever. It's been three hundred years that they take our men that they treat us like beasts of burden. It could not last forever! Ah! It will be fine! It will be fine! It will be fine! The aristocrats to the lantern. Ah! It will be fine! It will be fine! It will be fine! The aristocrats we will hang them!
The punishment for you is near, Because the people reasserts itself. You're took us for fools long enough It's over, gentlemen kings! You must not rely on our own people anymore We will now take you people. Because it is we who make the law! Ah! It will be fine! It will be fine! It will be fine! The aristocrats to the lantern Ah! It will be fine! It will be fine! It will be fine! The aristocrats we will hang them! Ah! It will be fine! It will be fine! It will be fine! The aristocrats to the lantern Ah! It will be fine! It will be fine! It will be fine! The aristocrats we will hang them! Ah! It will be fine! It will be fine! It will be fine! The aristocrats to the lantern Ah! It will be fine! It will be fine! It will be fine! The aristocrats we will hang THEM!
What like when he did gladiator none of the gladiators were fat nor was there advertisements in the arena. No was commodus killed in the arena but in his bath. Or the fact the crowds hated him when in fact they loved him. Or was balian of iblen in kingdom of heaven yound when the real o e was around 50 and disliked by Baldwin None of his movies are historically accurate bit instead use real life names for an entertaining story. If you want to watch a documentary then ridley Scott movie are not that
@@nicholassorrenson5073 Exactamente. You say it very good, its a Ridley Scott movie. Despite what my colleagues say, I enjoyed this movie but making a movie about the french emperor in a two hour and half movie thats a challenge.
Listen, yes, it's inaccurate, but I don't think the scene is meant to be intended as an actual objective event taking place within the narrative of the film. Rather, I see it as more akin to a dream sequence; Napoleon imagines seeing these events, or we see him see them because of the symbolic value.
Thats awfully easy for you to say. This isn’t one of your idiotic marvel comic films. This Hollywood abomination is using the names and likenesses of real people and real lives. Toying with history is never a good thing. Although it is typically American, so I should not be surprised.
Nonsense! By changing factual events in movies about historical events, it's capable of misleading, and misinforming people about the past, that which has created our current societies. It's shameful. George Orwell wouldn't be surprised at how this effort to rewrite history has become wildly successful.
I can buy that to an extent, but this film takes huge liberties with history. I understand movies need to entertain but it's possible to be both historical accurate to a degree and entertain. a good example of this is "Master in commander far side of the world" ,"the death of Stalin" and "Apollo 13"
@@Ham-Man-Hammy actually, no. Many members of the crowd were interviewed after the execution. One man who saw it summed it up well “the jaded had courage” She met her fate much like the king. With dignity.
For me it is not the historical inaccuracies but why? Why does a film about Napoleon begin with the execution of Marie Antoinette? Apart from the historical Napoleon not having a hand in it, the opening does not effectively establish Napoleon as a character by giving the audience insight into his motivations and general psyche. Scott could have used this scene to bridged onto Napoleon reflecting on the Regin of Terror (which he disapproved of in private) and his personal ambitions. Alternatively, Scott could have opened with the storming of the Bastille, of which Napoleon was a helpless observer (instead of the execution) and used Napoleon's actual journal entries about the incident to accomplish the aforementioned.
Because most people have heard of Marie Antoinette, but I suspect relatively few know what the Bastille even was or what it represents. Not that I'm excusing the movie - it sucks. There are a half dozen better ways to represent the excesses of the Revolution and Terror - especially in a way that contextualizes Napoleon's rise to power. People followed or put up with Napoleon to such extreme limits because after that, ANY order was preferable to the abyss they had experienced. Kind of reminds me of movies and shows about the Tudors when they mention NOTHING about the War of The Roses. Tudor absolutism was accepted by the majority of English because they had a living memory of what the alternative was. Same with Napoleon.
Ridley scott a spiteful brit alas, this trainwreck had me in total disbelief as how could a man of the stature of Bonaparte be displayed in such rancid manner. The fact that they spent 200 million on this trash heap is so pathetic. English truly know how to bring down even their own achievements not withstanding those of their foes.
If I'm going to watch a movie about history....it should be accurate, and if it cannot be entirely accurate...at least make a significant effort. Way too much PC and Narrative in much of the content we see from Hollywood today about the past. I simply have decided to tune it all out, but the younger people no doubt watch this stuff and believe it actually happened the way it's presented.
I have seen the name of the historian to whose research the “accuracy” of this opening scene is attributed. Were I he, I should create a disclaimer. Last night, I watched a film in which Buckingham Palace comes to us via green screen. Couldn’t “Napoléon” have done better with La Place de la Révolution? It took MA’s tumbril an hour to get there from the Conciergerie (which was not adorned with marble statuary). MA was close to her 38th birthday when she was executed, though we all understand that she’d certainly aged considerably beyond her years. She was ill, could not see well, had been through unimaginable horrors, and was in need of medical procedures unavailable in 1793. I am no monarchist, but I must object to the lack of dignity afforded this unfortunate lady here. I’m picking on things that most viewers will ignore. Nonetheless, Henri Sanson- the son of Charles-Henri Sanson - guillotined MA. Henri was not a dour or deliberately frightening older man, no offense to the actor who portrays him. Henri was the same age as Antoine Saint-Just; both were born in 1767. In the fall of 1793, Henri was in his mid-twenties. From what I have researched, a heavy cloth cord seems generally to have been used in tying victims’ wrists; there is a bundle of it allegedly extant, but don’t take that one to the bank. I’ve seen a photo, but such is by no means any sort of definitive “proof.” I need a lot more time in Paris! Like the unrealistic portrayals of MA and Henri Sanson, the guillotine herself is also misrepresented. A rusty, bloody blade? And I have no idea at all as to what’s being done with that lunette. As my late friend and email pal Hilary Mantel words a comment regarding whichever Sanson was in charge of an execution, “His was an honorable profession.” Let us respect that idea. I’m a longtime researcher, writer, and professor. And I’m distantly related to one or two revolutionaries who were busy from 1789 until the spring and summer of 1794. Perhaps I speak for them. But in this day of graphic novels brought to life by human actors, I honestly expected a much finer product from Mr. Scott, whose work I deeply admire.
Thank you for your extremely well-informed post. Can you suggest a starter book on the French Revolution? I love history but have always shied away from diving into the FR--it just seems so huge and complicated and dark.(Jesus, it's so depressing.)
@@NYCBlonde If you have any interest in audiobooks or podcasts, I highly recommend the Revolutions Podcast, and its section on the French Revolution. It's very well researched and presented.
Historically, there is so much wrong with this scene. But hey, its Ridley Scott, the guy who always asks "Were You There?" Well, no, but a hell of a lot of others were-& recounted it for posterity. But Ridley's never let the facts get in the way of a dramatic movie scene. Which basically accounts for so much of this movie as a wild tale of fiction-not what actually happened.
Lots of people in the comments are complaining that Joaquin Phoenix was in his late 40s when Napeoleon was in his early 20s when he witnessed the execution. So that doesn’t mean he’s couldn’t play at different age. What’s wrong with that? He’s not playing a teenager, because he’s too old
Phoenix was miscast, unfortunately. Not only Napoleon but also his generals were, like, half the age of most enemy generals. The young and wild, the rebels of Europe. And with Phoenix being (and looking! - he somehow manages to look older in the movie than he does in real life?) older than the actress playing Josephine, this completely reversed their roles. The age difference had huge importance in their relationship.
I feel like they went into the French Revolution stuff more than they needed to in the beginning of the movie. Even a 5 hour movie would be hard to do justice to Napoleon's life. I would be better to stick to the stuff most directly relating to Napoleon, especially since he wasn't even there in real life.
This movie is so bad and so historically inaccurate that it deserves to be watched in screener quality on an iPhone 3GS at 7 AM on a crowded train with $5 headphones
If you want to be totally inaccurate, at least include spacecraft and lasers. I would totally watch a movie with Napoleon fighting an alien invasion using nothing but his brilliant strategy... and lasers.
@@poling1990 so it’s a “choice” for all Americans to be armed to the teeth and for horrendous mass killings to continually occur as a result? I get that in 1776 it made sense for people of a new country to be armed with flintlock muskets that took about 30 seconds to reload… but machine guns?!
BS. When Marie Antoinette was executed, Napoleon commanded the artillery during the siege of Toulon. Seems that this move has some historical discrepancies.
No mate, I asked Ridley about that. Apparently Napoleon caught the early morning flight to CDG, watched the execution and then flew back that afternoon. I wasn’t there but I guess Ridley might have been so well just have to take his word for it.🤪
I think she has been grossly misrepresented throughout history....dragged away from her family when basically a child, in a loveless marriage during a phenomenally turbulent period in France....my heart breaks for her.
I'm a big Marie Antoinette fan of her fairytale , but Hollywood movies made her seem like a saint and she tried to help some But she was never meant to be a queen and was never taught to be one but her mother and fate chose her to be one. But she was a terrible queen.
She was absolutely taught to be a queen. Her father was the Austrian emperor! She may not have deserved execution, but she was not some innocent lamb either. She and her husband plotted with the Austrians/Prussians to invade and restore the absolute monarchy.
@@DaveFisher-cq2dr I know, but it was quite a joke from me because this whole movie is one big historical innaccuracy and it's funny you're focusing on one point.
This movie has all the building blocks it needs to be at least a fun Hollywood romp. It just needs some tender loving care in the editors room. A little snip here, a trim here, a remix there... This can be fixed.
Tbh I don’t think that’s the problem. It’s how they went about telling the whole story and how they made Napolean look. I think maybe it could’ve used more of the battles and politics perhaps but certainly nothing needed to be cut imo. They just went about it wrong, portrayed things the wrong way and the acting and directing isn’t good to how it should be
@@protector_of_the_realms My approach is, there's no such thing as an unsalvageable movie with over 6 hours of processed material. People are gonna not like the movie because they don't want to like the movie. The goal is to make the movie as enjoyable for those who want to like it as possible. ;)
Tengo entendido que María Antonieta subio al cadalzo con el cabello previamente cortado para facilitar a la cuchilla hacer su trabajo. Aquí la muestran con la cabellera a pleno. Un detalle.
I understand that Ridley Scott is a filmmaker and was trying to set the "tone" for his film with this scene, but the cost of that was truth - this depiction of Marie Antoinette and her final moments are totally false.
It's an incredible thing when the desperate need for change overpowers the fear of death, and the masses truly just take things into their own hands. Ofc the French Revolution ended up turning into somewhat of a fustercluck for everyone, but my point remains.
This is a movie, it's entertainment, and it served it's purpose. I'm not gonna bitch about historical inaccuracies, because I wasn't there, but if anyone was, please, I'm all ears.
maybe it would be less entertaining. I don't know if they really shot cannons at the Giza plateau, but that scene was scene entertaining and funny AF.And I say it again, it is a movie, something that is played in cinemas, you know places of entertainment. If I wanted historical accuracy, then i would pick a history book or watch a documentary.
Rotten food. But also, she was executed a full four years after the start of the revolution in 1789, longer after she was alleged to have told them to eat cake. There wasn't constant famine in France the whole time, not even with France getting into war with all its neighbours around this point.
Inaccuracies aside, that’s one hell of a way to start a movie lmao
I watched several clips. youtube wants 24 bucks to rent it. Ill wait till the price comes down. but the clips looked entertaining. thats what it is, entertainment. so, anything else I can explain for you today? or are you done. sorry if your butt-hurt
@@gordonmohr2268piracy is easier than you think
That's exactly what I thought of the movie when I watched it. I don't know a ton about the history and just the general stuff, and I didn't expect the most historically accurate piece (a movie simply isn't long enough). I did expect to be thoroughly entertained and entertained I was.
@@trolleybike63 especially the Austerlitz scene, on the lake with the canon ball.
I was in awe when I watched it in the theater
They wouldn’t have thrown food at her because they didn’t have any. They were starving.
It’s rotten
@@Ericcartman69420
do starving people let food rot?
I may be wrong but this is quite some time after the outbreak of the revolution. The shortage mostly had died down as it was only for a year or two due to bad weather.
@@six_idiots992 ain't that some shit? And they couldn't buy supply from countries they traded with
確かに
For having a food shortage, they really did throw a lot of food at her
Normally it would be rotten food that was no good to eat for two reasons: 1. it smelled bad so extra humiliation 2. It was not edible.
@@rammiine Yea, i figured :))
those food thrown at her are probably rotten
They were throwing rotten food at her while they were eating their cake, watching her losing her head...
Rotten or not the still choose not to eat. Apparently getting sick thrills from blood was more important than their own survival.
If I may be allowed to count the inaccuracies of this scene: 1. Marie Antoinette was taken to Execution Square sitting backwards in the tumbril; 2. She wore a white dress; 3. Her hair had been cut short before being placed on the tumbril; 4. Her hands were bound when she was placed on the tumbril; 5. She stumbled while mounting the stairs, bumping into Chief Executioner Charles-Henri Sanson, and apologized, to which Sanson replied with 'Courage, Madam.'; 6. No one was EVER executed by kneeling and having their head placed in the lunette; they were always strapped to the bascule, and then slid into position; 7. She was the first person executed that day, so no blood would have been on the blade yet; 8. Napoleon was in his early 20's when he witnessed the execution, and not the age that Joaquin Phoenix appears as in the scene. (If anyone can spot anything else wrong with this scene, please comment!)
He didn't witness the execution because at the time he was in Toulon.
Well said...In addition to Phoenix being woefully miscast as Napoleon, the resemblance to actual history is even worse.
Also Marie Antoinette had that little frilled cap on. The one you see in the Jaques Louis David sketch
Is that Edith Piaf singing in the background? That is so 1940s.
@@gotoalex100 do you know what song is that?
I've been looking for it.
You have to admit, the sound design in this opening scene is incredibly haunting. Reminds me of Blade Runner.
It’s an overall fantastic start to this movie from how masterfully directed it is and how beautifully stylized the movie opens as and is throughout! The movie IS fantastically well directed purely from the visuals, sound design, music, tone, atmosphere, art direction, and gorgeous cinematography throughout! And that’s easily a fact right there!
When Napoleon heard the news that Louis the 16th was executed, he said "Such is the reward of kings", but when he heard the news that Marie Antoinette was executed, he said "What a horror!". Such contrast.
This is one of the most well documented events of the 18th century and they still managed to get it completely wrong.
Never thought a barely 4-minute-long opening could get so many things wrong about one of the most well-known events in modern European history.
For those who don't know, it is well documented that people at the execution of Marie-Antoinette were calm, grave, and solemn, unlike during her husband's execution. And Napoleon was obviously not here - he was not even serving in the military nor on the continent during most of that period.
For anyone interested in the history of Revolutionary France (excluding the Napoleon part), I recommend a two-part movie made in 1989 for the 200th anniversary of the Revolution called 'The French Revolution: Years of Hope & Years of Rage.' It is much better and accurate than most recent (and foreign) depictions of that era.
thank you
From a historical standpoint, it’s quite inaccurate. But from a more cinematic view. It kinda hits.
Whose here after gojira in the olympics opening ceremony
First scene and already mistakes.... it is proved that the audience was silent and, after the death of the Queen, left the place still in silence. Plus, Marie-Antoinette accidentally walked on her hangman's foot and apologized... "I am sorry, mister." So he responded "Be couragous, madame".
It's a movie, not an essay
@@empereurdugrandaveyron6477 For sure. But movies can also respect the real history and some movies could not be called "biographie" or "historic movies" when they do not respect the reality.
Even the first second of the movie was innacurate lol because the year displayed was 1789 which was the year the royal family left Versailles, The Storming of the Bastile and the March of the Parisian women but she was not executed until 4 years later
1. Marie Antoinette wore a white dress.
2. Her hair was cut short.
3. She had on a white cap
4. She was placed on a board to restrain her with her hands bound.
5. And Finally!! She apologized for stepping on the executioners foot.
And he replied to her "Show courage madame"
The director of this film didn't do much research.
Ya, the fact that she was just walking around without a cap and with long hair and in a what appeared to be velvet dress that would have required an expensive dye really threw me for a loop.
Though I do appreciate that it showed her as being dignified till the end.
The way her execution was set up was inaccurate too. No one ever bent down on their knees at the guillotine.
Nobody cares how she was dressed lol.
@@lewisnostredame5605 If you're gonna base a movie off of history, at least make it accurate
Nobody cares
Paris Olmpics brought me here.
Same. It's even got the same song.
Really? This was on the recommendations. Did you guys see they called South Korea the North Korea 😂
Marie Antionette’s beheading in this scene describes the historical accuracy Ridley Scott beheaded
I bet he only just focused on the major highlights. This being one of them.
"Pardon me sir, I meant not to do it"
- Marie Antoinette's last words
Notice in the beginning, how Marie Antoinette desperately tries to protect her children from a vicious mob. That’s one accuracy in the depiction. She stated that her enemies were, “all those who would bring harm to my children.” The night before her death she wrote on the back of her prayer book, “My God have pity on me! My eyes have no more tears left to weep for you my poor children. Adieu, adieu.” 😢♥️🙏
(They accused her of disgusting things, but that was orchestrated. These quotes give some truthful insight of her character.)
*FunFact* France didn't stop using the Gullitine until 1977😳. Naturally Manchester United stopping Liverpool from winning the treble that very year. Put a stop to this 😏😉
If Gojira was around in 1789 their version of Ah! Ca Ira! would have been playing here.
No wonder why there were food shortages, they were throwing it all at people about to be executed
Interesting fun fact: Legendary actor Christopher Lee witnessed the last public guillotine execution ever held in France, the execution of convicted serial killer Eugen Weidmann on June 17, 1939. He was 17 years old. And then nearly 50 years later, he portrayed headsman Charles-Henri Sanson in a 1989 French TV drama about the French Revolution. Talk about ironic.
Now THAT's a fun fact.
Napoleon was 24 years old when Marie Antoinette was executed. Joaquin Phoenix is 48 and looks 60-- way too old to play the part. His miscasting ruins this movie.
And the thing is that he doesn't age in the movie, so there isn't even any effort made about it
I thought the exact same thing too; this role was not for him. I had no idea how old Joaquin was. I thought he was in his late 50's. Wow.
He doesn’t look like 60
Amd she was older I him
But then who would've done better??
@@traydaniel0403 Joaquin Phoenix looks older than Tom Cruise, who is 61.
a film without any historical accuracy. Napoleon portrayed as a kind of clown always in heat.
This scene then... I want to draw a veil of compassion over this scene.
Queen Marie Antoinette went to the scaffold in the absolute silence of the crowd. She tripped on the last step and apologized to the executioner who held her up.
Napoleon himself said of her: "A woman who had nothing but honors without power, a foreign princess, the most sacred of hostages, to drag her from the throne to the gallows, through all sorts of outrages, there is something worse in that of regicide".
Ridley Scott, once again as in "Gladiator", misrepresents and rewrites history in the absurd idea of making his work more spectacular.
My rating for this film is 2.5 out of 10
You're being generous.
Your critic trolling earns a solid 5.2. I see potential.
Full version:
“If it is not a subject of remorse, it must at least be a very great subject of regret for all French hearts that the crime committed in the person of this unfortunate queen. There is a big difference between this death and that of Louis XVI, although, certainly, he did not deserve his misfortune. This is the condition of kings, their life belongs to everyone; it is only they who cannot dispose of it; an assassination, a conspiracy, a cannon shot, these are their chances; Caesar and Henry IV were assassinated, the Alexander of the Greeks would have been assassinated if he had lived longer. But a woman who had nothing but honors without power, a foreign princess, the most sacred of hostages, dragging her from a throne to the scaffold through all kinds of outrages! There is something even worse than regicide there! » Nicolas François Mollien relates Napoleon's remarks on the execution of the deposed queen (taken from the Memoirs of a Minister of the Public Treasury 1780-1815)
Due to recent events my mind came to this scene
Paris 2024 Ceremony you mean, right?
What does the song mean?
1:22 When I got home from seeing this movie I automatically looked up that song on the Internet.
ua-cam.com/video/OTh6LoKbATo/v-deo.htmlsi=9_bkUUWhFM4EWDms
The whole square, place de la Revolution went into complete silence ...you only see the Queen executed once in a lifetime.
The screams started once the head was shown
The opening scene itself is the reason why I watched this 😅
“How inaccurate do you want this scene?”
Ridley Scott: “yes!”
As inaccurate as this entire opening scene is, without historical context, I love the way she holds her head high while being jeered at and being pummeled by spoiled food. Then you see her facade break as she realizes the end is just seconds away. I've always been a Marie Antoinette apologist. She was a victim of circumstance and her death served only as a symbol. Yes, you just beheaded her. Did that make food suddenly appear on your table, were your ragged clothes suddenly made new, were your ill and starving children made healthy again? It would only take 10 years for the monarchy to be restored and this was all for naught.
Agreed. They didnt need to execute her or the king imo
They may have been restored but they're not there now 🙃
I had hope about this movie being made by ridley scott, knowing that he made the duelists. So sad of how it turned out...
Sadly it seems Ridely Scott has had his day, he hasn't made a good movie in a long while and at this point they're just selling his name
All of France during Gojiras performance at the 24' Olympics
As a historician I can say that my profesor of Modern History would cry
I am a historian too. Ridley Scott took too much liberties in making this film.
@@ivangomez123 And when professional historians, especially French ones, spoke about it to Scott, he just shrugs and would say "French people even hate themselves"
Its possible I might be a bit wrong but he did say something like that. Very arrogant and that made me loose respect for this once talented film-maker
Maria behaved with dignity and did not start crying or begging for mercy.
@opfer88 your pathetic nonsense are just revolutionary propaganda which by the way, as time progressed their lies were revealed just as much as their madness and stupidity! she didn't cry, she showed dignity, even had witnesses for it, she apologized to the executioner for accidentally stepping on his feet and there's also a last letter written by her to princess Elisabeth (guess who was the person who kept the letter and didn't allow it to be sent to Elisabeth and was instead kept in the hands of those in power for centuries) and your ridiculous words about her being treated well in her entire life! well, being neglected because of being the youngest child in a family with more than 10 kids, being queen of a racist country who never took her seriously as queen and never let go of her origins, being assaulted by everyone, in all ways for years, accused of things you never did or was even aware of, not having the right to have your own privacy and personal boundaries(which revolutionaries behaved much on this part) having your son being taken from you and be abused, being accused of incest and...if all of this sounds like being treated well, you're a lunatic! just like every other of those revolutionaries
Well, the drawing of her on a wheelcart showed she wore a sort of sleeping cap and her hair cut.
I guess her hair was cut in the prison before she was being taken to the gallow.
But the filmmakers failed to look at how she would look on way to gallow. Poor show!
*Fun fact:* Irish actress Catherine Walker portrays "Marie-Antoinette" here, but also played "Madame de Maintenon" in the 2015-2018 TV series "Versailles".
Historically false, Napoleon never witnessed the execution of Queen Marie Antoinette since he was not in Paris. He had been in the South of France since July, participating from September to December in the siege of Toulon.
I would never let an English director make a film about a historical figure like Napoleon.
Let me put your mind at ease - what you’re watching is called a ‘film’. It’s a series of moving images assembled to form a motion picture piece of entertainment. It is not fact, it is not documentary, it is only a film.
You realise the british don't all have some natural hatred towards napoleon?
exactly, so why show him there when he wasn't actually there?
@@Ievitation what does the director being English have to do with anything?
You clearly don't know that many of Napoleon's most ardent admirers - and even several of his best biographers - were English.
Napoleon movie- Made by a British director. Already knew it was going to be a disaster. Was proven correct. The 2002 miniseries is ten times better than this bullshit.
Marie Antoinette's hair was cut prior to her execution, and she also was forced to wear white. Also she had a priest with her in the cart in real life and idk if they actually threw food at her, shit they might have though because of how unfairly hated she was. I do wanna watch this movie for sure though. I get that it is just a movie and not a documentary but it is fun knowing the real history of what happened too. Napoleon actually married marie Antoinette's great niece after him and Josephine split.
What's weirder is the film gets this right later on.
When Napoleon first meets Josephine she has shaved hair, wears just her white undergown, and a red necklace. This was a real style and statement made by many women who barely escaped the Guillotine, they were cosplaying how their relatives and friends would've looked when they went to the chop.
Ngl, as bad as this movie apparently is, this scene was kind of badass. I love the inclusion of Edith Piaf's rendition of "Ça Ira ("It'll Be Fine")," a popular song during the French Revolution that literally calls for aristocrats (i.e. the old, wealthy nobility) to be hung from lampposts.
The First 30/40 minutes are great...but then...
Historically inaccurate. She was separated from her children long before her execution. She road sitting backwards with her hands already tied and hair cut
Cinema put everythings and lies in one scene!
POV: You called 'Croissant' croissant instead of 'Kvasawng' in France
You said 'chocolatine' in Paris.
Croy-eh-sant
The sad part is Marie Antoinette never knew what became of her son, Louis. Rumors did spread that he died from health failure or too much beaten down by his captor. Others claimed that he had forgotten that he was a prince and lived peacefully among the French commoners.
Only her daughter had lived and was given to Hasburg by her uncle as Madame Royale is her name as the last true princess of France.
Starting with the revolution of 1789, France had tried a whole list of political systems, only to have the Bourbons restored, 25 years later.
@@Dusty338 Determined to get all the bad takes in, are we?
If you love feudalism so much you are welcome to go live in a peasant's hovel and perform menial labor for your masters in as servile a manner as you like.
Gojira brought me here
Same
同じく。ゴジラが私を断頭台の前へ連れてきた
I didn't rate this movie at all. A man that conquered most of Europe having fought so many famous battles, along with being a military genius, and the focus is on him lovemaking with Josephine numerous times. Such a wasted opportunity.
Marie-Antoinette was 12 years younger the the actress portraying her. She was 37 and Luis XVI 38 respectively, when they were guillotined.
Thomas Jefferson told the French they needed to execute the aristocracy. He gave them the idea that the nobility needed to removed for the good of France. But like everything the French do is overdone and the children were also executed along with their parents. That was the Reign of Terror! Viva Le Roi
Yes. Catherine Walker is now 48 years old but looks like what people in their mid to late 30s look during those times.
I know that Marie Antoinette had her flaws, but seriously no person deserves to die that way.
Edit:Guys I know it's painless and quick. But I meant to die knowing that people would be cheering to see your bloody corpse, it's still a terrible way to die knowing that people are happy that your gone.
i agree
its painless and instant, not a terrible way to go.
Where is the pain? That blade cut the spinal cord automatically, and the brain not only cannot process pain, but also the individual is dead. I mean, she had her flaws and they killed her with a painless method instead of hanging her.
But it is still a cruel punishment.
Oh please I would rather be beheaded by a guillotine than other methods of execution
The only parts of the movie that I liked were the opening rendition of Ça ira and the set design. It’s ridiculous that the guy who wrote this movie literally read a short biography on Napoleon for the extent of his research into this film and did nothing else.
Imagine making a movie based on one of the most important events and individuals in human history and somehow managing to get like 95% of it wrong. Did the historical advisors for this movie just not get involved or did they lie on their resumes?
More likely Ridley Scott just ignored their input.
The comment section:
Europeans: complaining this movie is inaccurate
Americans: deffending it by telling this is just a fictionalized history, not an actual documentary
Asians: "paris olympics!"
Yes the music is paris Olympics
They're not implying that Marie Antoinette was executed in 1789, right? Because the major event of that year was the storming of the Bastille and it was a couple of years and several major events later that first the king and then the queen got their height adjusted down. O yeah, and they also cut her hair before transporting her to the guillotine, so that it wouldn't get in the way like it does here.
Must be scary walking to your execution
It is.
Too dark.
This song was chanted by the people of Paris during the French revolution when the monarchy was overthrown, and later on guillotined. It was sort of the the national anthem of the people when they revolted against King Louis XVI and Marie-Antoinette.
Ah! Ça ira ! Ça ira ! Ça ira !
Les aristocrates à la lanterne !
Ah! Ça ira ! Ça ira ! Ça ira !
Les aristocrates, on les pendra !
V'la trois cents ans qu'ils nous promettent
Qu'on va nous accorder du pain.
( Ça ira ! Ça ira ! Ça ira )
V'là trois cents ans qu'ils donnent des fêtes
Et qu'ils entretiennent des catins !
( Ça ira ! Ça ira ! Ça ira )
V'là trois cents ans qu'on nous écrase
Assez de mensonges et de phrases !
(Ça ira)
On ne veut plus mourir de faim !
(mourir de faim)
Ah! Ça ira ! Ça ira ! Ça ira !
Les aristocrates à la lanterne !
Ah! Ça ira ! Ça ira ! Ça ira !
Les aristocrates, on les pendra !
Voilà trois cents ans qu'ils font la guerre
Au son des fifres et des tambours
( Ça ira ! Ça ira ! Ça ira )
En nous laissant crever de misère.
Ça ne pouvait pas durer toujours...
( Ça ira ! Ça ira ! Ça ira )
Voilà trois cent ans qu'ils prennent nos hommes
Qu'ils nous traitent comme des bêtes de somme.
(Ca ira)
Ça ne pouvait pas durer toujours !
(durer toujours)
Ah! Ça ira ! Ça ira ! Ça ira !
Les aristocrates à la lanterne !
Ah! Ça ira ! Ça ira ! Ça ira !
Les aristocrates, on les pendra !
Le châtiment pour vous s'apprête
Car le peuple reprend ses droits.
( Ça ira ! Ça ira ! Ça ira )
Vous vous êtes bien payé nos têtes,
C'en est fini, messieurs les rois !
( Ça ira ! Ça ira ! Ça ira )
Il faut plus compter sur les nôtres :
On va s'offrir maintenant les vôtres,
Car c'est nous qui faisons la loi !
(qui faisons la loi)
Ah! Ça ira ! Ça ira ! Ça ira !
Les aristocrates à la lanterne !
Ah! Ça ira ! Ça ira ! Ça ira !
Les aristocrates, on les pendra !
Ah! Ça ira ! Ça ira ! Ça ira !
Les aristocrates à la lanterne !
Ah! Ça ira ! Ça ira ! Ça ira !
Les aristocrates, on les pendra !
Ah! Ça ira ! Ça ira ! Ça ira !
Les aristocrates à la lanterne !
Ah! Ça ira ! Ça ira ! Ça ira !
Les aristocrates, on les pendraaaaaaaaa !!!!!
In English:
Ah! It will be fine! It will be fine! It will be fine!
The aristocrats to the lantern
Ah! It will be fine! It will be fine! It will be fine!
The aristocrats we will hang them!
It's been three hundred years they promise us
That we will be allowed some bread.
It's been three hundred years that they throw parties.
And they maintain their whores
It's been three hundred years that they crush us
Enough lies and phrases!
We do not want to starve to death anymore !!!
Ah! It will be fine! It will be fine! It will be fine!
The aristocrats to the lantern
Ah! It will be fine! It will be fine! It will be fine!
The aristocrats we will hang them!
For three hundred years they make war
To the sound of fifes and drums
Leaving us to die of misery.
It could not last forever.
It's been three hundred years that they take our men
that they treat us like beasts of burden.
It could not last forever!
Ah! It will be fine! It will be fine! It will be fine!
The aristocrats to the lantern.
Ah! It will be fine! It will be fine! It will be fine!
The aristocrats we will hang them!
The punishment for you is near,
Because the people reasserts itself.
You're took us for fools long enough
It's over, gentlemen kings!
You must not rely on our own people anymore
We will now take you people.
Because it is we who make the law!
Ah! It will be fine! It will be fine! It will be fine!
The aristocrats to the lantern
Ah! It will be fine! It will be fine! It will be fine!
The aristocrats we will hang them!
Ah! It will be fine! It will be fine! It will be fine!
The aristocrats to the lantern
Ah! It will be fine! It will be fine! It will be fine!
The aristocrats we will hang them!
Ah! It will be fine! It will be fine! It will be fine!
The aristocrats to the lantern
Ah! It will be fine! It will be fine! It will be fine!
The aristocrats we will hang THEM!
Thank you so much for sharing
Josephine’s hair was cut short prior to execution.The stress aged her.
You mean Marie Antoinette?
Yes,sorry
i like how she just stays calm even when the civilians are throwing vegtables at her. but i can see some fear at her face.
I mean she about to die and there’s no getting out of this so it makes sense
As a historian, Ridley Scott took too many liberties with Napoleon to this movie.
"Get a life."
What like when he did gladiator none of the gladiators were fat nor was there advertisements in the arena. No was commodus killed in the arena but in his bath. Or the fact the crowds hated him when in fact they loved him. Or was balian of iblen in kingdom of heaven yound when the real o e was around 50 and disliked by Baldwin None of his movies are historically accurate bit instead use real life names for an entertaining story. If you want to watch a documentary then ridley Scott movie are not that
@@nicholassorrenson5073 Exactamente. You say it very good, its a Ridley Scott movie. Despite what my colleagues say, I enjoyed this movie but making a movie about the french emperor in a two hour and half movie thats a challenge.
Listen, yes, it's inaccurate, but I don't think the scene is meant to be intended as an actual objective event taking place within the narrative of the film. Rather, I see it as more akin to a dream sequence; Napoleon imagines seeing these events, or we see him see them because of the symbolic value.
Whatever it meant - Marie Antoinette deserves the respect and attention of the audience.
It’s a movie, entertainment. It’s not a documentary. Getting upset at something like this is ridiculous.
Thats awfully easy for you to say. This isn’t one of your idiotic marvel comic films. This Hollywood abomination is using the names and likenesses of real people and real lives. Toying with history is never a good thing. Although it is typically American, so I should not be surprised.
@@charlesmaximus9161 "boohoo America" except the director of this film is British you dunce lol
Nonsense! By changing factual events in movies about historical events, it's capable of misleading, and misinforming people about the past, that which has created our current societies. It's shameful. George Orwell wouldn't be surprised at how this effort to rewrite history has become wildly successful.
I can buy that to an extent, but this film takes huge liberties with history. I understand movies need to entertain but it's possible to be both historical accurate to a degree and entertain. a good example of this is "Master in commander far side of the world" ,"the death of Stalin" and "Apollo 13"
This movie was such a missed opportunity, and a real letdown. It had so much potential, and this opening was epic.
Even the mob admired her courage. She went out with great dignity
According to the movie. Another inaccuracy.
@@Ham-Man-Hammy actually, no. Many members of the crowd were interviewed after the execution. One man who saw it summed it up well “the jaded had courage” She met her fate much like the king. With dignity.
I believe her last words were "Sorry" or something...because she accidentally stepped on the executioner's foot XD
For me it is not the historical inaccuracies but why? Why does a film about Napoleon begin with the execution of Marie Antoinette? Apart from the historical Napoleon not having a hand in it, the opening does not effectively establish Napoleon as a character by giving the audience insight into his motivations and general psyche. Scott could have used this scene to bridged onto Napoleon reflecting on the Regin of Terror (which he disapproved of in private) and his personal ambitions. Alternatively, Scott could have opened with the storming of the Bastille, of which Napoleon was a helpless observer (instead of the execution) and used Napoleon's actual journal entries about the incident to accomplish the aforementioned.
Still it was a good guillotine scene. Well, good, innacurate is the world
Let's just say it was a guillotine scene xd
Because most people have heard of Marie Antoinette, but I suspect relatively few know what the Bastille even was or what it represents. Not that I'm excusing the movie - it sucks. There are a half dozen better ways to represent the excesses of the Revolution and Terror - especially in a way that contextualizes Napoleon's rise to power. People followed or put up with Napoleon to such extreme limits because after that, ANY order was preferable to the abyss they had experienced. Kind of reminds me of movies and shows about the Tudors when they mention NOTHING about the War of The Roses. Tudor absolutism was accepted by the majority of English because they had a living memory of what the alternative was. Same with Napoleon.
@@jhb1493 Plenty of people know about the storming of the Bastille. Give audiences more credit than that.
Ridley scott a spiteful brit alas, this trainwreck had me in total disbelief as how could a man of the stature of Bonaparte be displayed in such rancid manner. The fact that they spent 200 million on this trash heap is so pathetic. English truly know how to bring down even their own achievements not withstanding those of their foes.
Marie Antoinette wore white and had her hair cut on her way to the scaffold. I hate when they do it wrong
And she apologised for having stepped on the executioner's foot rather than smirking to all those around her.
If I'm going to watch a movie about history....it should be accurate, and if it cannot be entirely accurate...at least make a significant effort. Way too much PC and Narrative in much of the content we see from Hollywood today about the past. I simply have decided to tune it all out, but the younger people no doubt watch this stuff and believe it actually happened the way it's presented.
@@dagsterblaster4973 That the fun about movies, it is all entertaiment not study. If you want to know the real story, go study
Watched it last night and enjoyed. Great guess there is a longer version.
I have seen the name of the historian to whose research the “accuracy” of this opening scene is attributed.
Were I he, I should create a disclaimer.
Last night, I watched a film in which Buckingham Palace comes to us via green screen. Couldn’t “Napoléon” have done better with La Place de la Révolution? It took MA’s tumbril an hour to get there from the Conciergerie (which was not adorned with marble statuary).
MA was close to her 38th birthday when she was executed, though we all understand that she’d certainly aged considerably beyond her years. She was ill, could not see well, had been through unimaginable horrors, and was in need of medical procedures unavailable in 1793. I am no monarchist, but I must object to the lack of dignity afforded this unfortunate lady here.
I’m picking on things that most viewers will ignore. Nonetheless, Henri Sanson- the son of Charles-Henri Sanson - guillotined MA. Henri was not a dour or deliberately frightening older man, no offense to the actor who portrays him. Henri was the same age as Antoine Saint-Just; both were born in 1767. In the fall of 1793, Henri was in his mid-twenties.
From what I have researched, a heavy cloth cord seems generally to have been used in tying victims’ wrists; there is a bundle of it allegedly extant, but don’t take that one to the bank. I’ve seen a photo, but such is by no means any sort of definitive “proof.” I need a lot more time in Paris!
Like the unrealistic portrayals of MA and Henri Sanson, the guillotine herself is also misrepresented. A rusty, bloody blade? And I have no idea at all as to what’s being done with that lunette.
As my late friend and email pal Hilary Mantel words a comment regarding whichever Sanson was in charge of an execution, “His was an honorable profession.” Let us respect that idea.
I’m a longtime researcher, writer, and professor. And I’m distantly related to one or two revolutionaries who were busy from 1789 until the spring and summer of 1794. Perhaps I speak for them. But in this day of graphic novels brought to life by human actors, I honestly expected a much finer product from Mr. Scott, whose work I deeply admire.
Thank you for your extremely well-informed post. Can you suggest a starter book on the French Revolution? I love history but have always shied away from diving into the FR--it just seems so huge and complicated and dark.(Jesus, it's so depressing.)
@@NYCBlonde If you have any interest in audiobooks or podcasts, I highly recommend the Revolutions Podcast, and its section on the French Revolution. It's very well researched and presented.
@@StalwartPikeman Thank you!
Life is cruel Marie Anttoniete...
If you care about how historically accurate this is then you are mature. History lovers who agree
👇
The 2002 french miniseries was more accurate and interesting than what this garbage was.
0:57 Last days of the Constitutional Guards, being disbanded and protected their own Queen.
music name : le ca ira
Historically, there is so much wrong with this scene. But hey, its Ridley Scott, the guy who always asks "Were You There?" Well, no, but a hell of a lot of others were-& recounted it for posterity. But Ridley's never let the facts get in the way of a dramatic movie scene. Which basically accounts for so much of this movie as a wild tale of fiction-not what actually happened.
It’s basically a re-imagining version of Napoleon
Lots of people in the comments are complaining that Joaquin Phoenix was in his late 40s when Napeoleon was in his early 20s when he witnessed the execution. So that doesn’t mean he’s couldn’t play at different age. What’s wrong with that? He’s not playing a teenager, because he’s too old
Phoenix was miscast, unfortunately. Not only Napoleon but also his generals were, like, half the age of most enemy generals. The young and wild, the rebels of Europe.
And with Phoenix being (and looking! - he somehow manages to look older in the movie than he does in real life?) older than the actress playing Josephine, this completely reversed their roles. The age difference had huge importance in their relationship.
@@josefavomjaaga6097And he’s one of the producers too
France: had food shortages
Also France: throws tons of food at a woman who's about to die
I think the food is rotten
the cleaver is not even triangular. I'm not sure a blade like that can cut a head
When filmmakers make historical epic features, they often don’t make actions or events accurately.
The reign of terror is the definition of "revolutionary holocaust".
The French when you drink before clinking your glass with everyone at the table:
The funny thing is that french people killed their king and queen because of bread’s inflation
And if you don't look into their eyes while doing it lol
I feel like they went into the French Revolution stuff more than they needed to in the beginning of the movie. Even a 5 hour movie would be hard to do justice to Napoleon's life. I would be better to stick to the stuff most directly relating to Napoleon, especially since he wasn't even there in real life.
This movie is so bad and so historically inaccurate that it deserves to be watched in screener quality on an iPhone 3GS at 7 AM on a crowded train with $5 headphones
If you want to be totally inaccurate, at least include spacecraft and lasers. I would totally watch a movie with Napoleon fighting an alien invasion using nothing but his brilliant strategy... and lasers.
why dont they hire you to produce and direct movies......oh wait
@@IproPvP Do you want to invest in my project? It's called Napolaser: French Emperor vs Alien Emperor. I need 200 million dollars.
I’m still waiting for that movie portraying Julius Caesar invading Poland with panzers
Napoleon Bonaparte vs. Aliens would be the new Abraham Lincoln vs. Vampires lmao
The Americans were appalled by their French cousins. Much of the Constitution is designed specifically to stop such atrocities.
The end of the day. The constitution is a piece of paper.
@@zdwade with these things called “Amendments” 😂 to update it as required to keep it relevant. Americans act like it was carved in stone by God.
@bobbybinns379 You clearly do not understand the constitution at all lol though it sounds like you aren't American so I can hardly expect any better.
@@poling1990 so it’s a “choice” for all Americans to be armed to the teeth and for horrendous mass killings to continually occur as a result? I get that in 1776 it made sense for people of a new country to be armed with flintlock muskets that took about 30 seconds to reload… but machine guns?!
@@bobbyb379not american, so your opinion is irrelevant
BS. When Marie Antoinette was executed, Napoleon commanded the artillery during the siege of Toulon. Seems that this move has some historical discrepancies.
Its a movie
No mate, I asked Ridley about that. Apparently Napoleon caught the early morning flight to CDG, watched the execution and then flew back that afternoon. I wasn’t there but I guess Ridley might have been so well just have to take his word for it.🤪
Paris Olympics.
I think she has been grossly misrepresented throughout history....dragged away from her family when basically a child, in a loveless marriage during a phenomenally turbulent period in France....my heart breaks for her.
Loveless at first, yes, but eventually Marie and Louis would grow to be very affectionate toward one another.
I'm a big Marie Antoinette fan of her fairytale , but Hollywood movies made her seem like a saint and she tried to help some But she was never meant to be a queen and was never taught to be one but her mother and fate chose her to be one. But she was a terrible queen.
Yes, she was too innocent to be a politically good queen.
She was absolutely taught to be a queen. Her father was the Austrian emperor! She may not have deserved execution, but she was not some innocent lamb either. She and her husband plotted with the Austrians/Prussians to invade and restore the absolute monarchy.
as much as i dont like this movie it had some great scenes like this one
Soundtrack is one of the best things from this movie for example
I actually liked the film. Phoenix phones in his performance, yes, but Vanessa Kirby is exceptional in it and found it entertaining
Opening ceremony of Pari Olympic is 2024version of this??
Why
3:30 why would Ridley Scott show Napoleon at Marie Antoinette's execution when he wasn't actually there in real life?
Are you seriously bringing up historical inaccuracies in this film? 😂
@@tobiasdenhollander3210just saying, like it says so on Wikipedia and for a real history fact that Napoleon really wasn't there
@@DaveFisher-cq2dr I know, but it was quite a joke from me because this whole movie is one big historical innaccuracy and it's funny you're focusing on one point.
Maybe because Ridley Scott doesn't give a sh## about historical accuracy. 🤷♂
@@Michael.96don't say that about Ridley Scott, maybe he just did it to be different
This movie has all the building blocks it needs to be at least a fun Hollywood romp.
It just needs some tender loving care in the editors room. A little snip here, a trim here, a remix there...
This can be fixed.
Tbh I don’t think that’s the problem. It’s how they went about telling the whole story and how they made Napolean look. I think maybe it could’ve used more of the battles and politics perhaps but certainly nothing needed to be cut imo. They just went about it wrong, portrayed things the wrong way and the acting and directing isn’t good to how it should be
@@protector_of_the_realms My approach is, there's no such thing as an unsalvageable movie with over 6 hours of processed material.
People are gonna not like the movie because they don't want to like the movie. The goal is to make the movie as enjoyable for those who want to like it as possible. ;)
Tengo entendido que María Antonieta subio al cadalzo con el cabello previamente cortado para facilitar a la cuchilla hacer su trabajo. Aquí la muestran con la cabellera a pleno. Un detalle.
Yes lost her head
Paris olympics anyone?
I understand that Ridley Scott is a filmmaker and was trying to set the "tone" for his film with this scene, but the cost of that was truth - this depiction of Marie Antoinette and her final moments are totally false.
Watch a Gladiator, no Ridley Scott movie is historically accurate cause he really does not care for it. He cares for making a good movie.
Still a good movie. Stick to documentaries.
I am only here becuz of the song lol
It's an incredible thing when the desperate need for change overpowers the fear of death, and the masses truly just take things into their own hands. Ofc the French Revolution ended up turning into somewhat of a fustercluck for everyone, but my point remains.
3:10 Damm, no words
The revolution has started ...
Nope. Just democracy.
this film is only good for entertainment rather than learning history, it is inaccurate and sometimes dull but a meh
movies should only ever be entertainment, otherwise a documentary or a book would be best suited to learning
I'd say that it isn't good for entertainment either
It s-u-c-k-s at entertainment too. Boring.
1:43 Her physiognomy is beautiful
Absolutely beautiful actress
@@Brookigetit Indeed
I thought the same. Her profile looks like the real death mask of Marie
Movies are like the news half true but enough to give you the idea
Only here for the song
This is a movie, it's entertainment, and it served it's purpose. I'm not gonna bitch about historical inaccuracies, because I wasn't there, but if anyone was, please, I'm all ears.
maybe it would be less entertaining. I don't know if they really shot cannons at the Giza plateau, but that scene was scene entertaining and funny AF.And I say it again, it is a movie, something that is played in cinemas, you know places of entertainment. If I wanted historical accuracy, then i would pick a history book or watch a documentary.
I was there, she blinked after she was beheaded, lol
@@raulestevez7307 well at least once a woman winked at you
@@chaotic2050 She did not wink at me, she blinked in shock and passed
@@raulestevez7307 just blinked?! Did she say anything at all?
Why are they throwing food at her? I thought there was food shortage and hunger in the land
Rotten food. But also, she was executed a full four years after the start of the revolution in 1789, longer after she was alleged to have told them to eat cake. There wasn't constant famine in France the whole time, not even with France getting into war with all its neighbours around this point.