Great interview. FYI that OTS graphic@2:51 has an incorrect photo. The picture on the bottom is visual effects wizard Douglas Trumbull, who worked with Ridley on Blade Runner.
Napoleon was the worst movie of the entire century. Nothing can possibly be worse. It was so bad that I wanted to tear out my own eyes. I hope Ridley Scott and Mel Gibson can go butcher history in a different dimension, anywhere but here. They are so so bad at history. Disgusting.
Love Ridley! He's a true artist, painting with light! I'd rather watch a "bad" Ridley film than almost any other director's film. His vision of Napoleon wasn't at all the impression I got off Napoleon when I studied him, but his version was still really, really interesting! Ridley has always been interested in the quiet hero who draws people in with their power, rather than the blustering speech giving strong man. It should be no surprise this is how he portrayed Napoleon!
What is this thing about AGE in America? You start the piece by saying he made his first film in his 40's! (as if that was sooooo old) in the industry. Gee... I thought America had learned how to deal with that "ages" ago. Look at the ages of both major contenders to be the president of the country. By doing that, the corporate TV propagates this ridiculous stereotype about age. Sad...
Ridley could have made one of the greatest historical epics in years, but instead to make a movie as though he were some miserable British aristocrat 200 years late with his anti-Napoleon character assassination propaganda.
@@_fantasticscenes So, he's Oliver Stone's buddy? ;-P Unfortunately, most people don't, or won't, make the distinction, and accept them as "fact"... I question the authenticity of any scene between any two historical figures that had no witnesses or, at least mentioned in memoirs . The whole "argument"scene in the LEM in "Apollo 13" did NOT take place, per Jim Lovell. Tom Hanks didn't want it, but Ron Howard wanted it added "for dramatic effect" (as if the real story wasn't dramatic enough). I think that it does a disservice to NASA training, as well as to the reputations of Fred Haise and Jack Sweigert. I'll stick to documentaries, I guess...
I enjoyed The Crown but understood that no one knew what was actually said and most of the characters have passed on. You take a story that’s over 200 years old and you can swerve even further off. Vanessa Kirby is a wonderful actress and went from Princess Margaret to Empress Josephine.
A more interesting version would've been Kubrick's. Maybe he would've mentioned he was a selected freemason who was given everything and then selected to fall.
Couldn't stand Joaquin Phoenix in Gladiator, so I should have known how much I would dislike Napoleon. I wanted to like it, but couldn't. Really inaccurate as well.....
Ridley Scott is an amazing director but, his rendition of Napoleon is atrocious. The movie is so bad it's disrespectful to the military and political genius of Napoleon. It is visually spectacular but gives the impression he was forced to make it.
No its not even visually spectacular. Doesn't look genuine and beautiful. SFx are just average. On a movie like Gladiator you can tolerate cuz the narration is on point. But Napoléon was a catastrophy.
Watch more extended interviews from “CBS Sunday Morning”: ua-cam.com/play/PLwBoQZPcMB03n8K69HrfxRsnw2L-jlMXK.html
Legend was a great movie. I still love it. Wonderful set, wonderful music too
Great interview. FYI that OTS graphic@2:51 has an incorrect photo. The picture on the bottom is visual effects wizard Douglas Trumbull, who worked with Ridley on Blade Runner.
Blame the intern
It’s ALL ABOUT Alien, Blade Runner, and Thelma & Louise.
Topic begins at 4:41.
Napoleon was the worst movie of the entire century. Nothing can possibly be worse. It was so bad that I wanted to tear out my own eyes. I hope Ridley Scott and Mel Gibson can go butcher history in a different dimension, anywhere but here. They are so so bad at history. Disgusting.
Love Ridley! He's a true artist, painting with light! I'd rather watch a "bad" Ridley film than almost any other director's film. His vision of Napoleon wasn't at all the impression I got off Napoleon when I studied him, but his version was still really, really interesting! Ridley has always been interested in the quiet hero who draws people in with their power, rather than the blustering speech giving strong man. It should be no surprise this is how he portrayed Napoleon!
❤
if they let him make the film without cgi it would be alot better ?
My vavorite is 1492 Conquest of Paradise 1992
😊
What is this thing about AGE in America? You start the piece by saying he made his first film in his 40's! (as if that was sooooo old) in the industry. Gee... I thought America had learned how to deal with that "ages" ago. Look at the ages of both major contenders to be the president of the country. By doing that, the corporate TV propagates this ridiculous stereotype about age. Sad...
…..a perfect example is Madonna, and the ridicule she’s faced.
Ridley could have made one of the greatest historical epics in years, but instead to make a movie as though he were some miserable British aristocrat 200 years late with his anti-Napoleon character assassination propaganda.
You feel his hatred of Napoleon in the movie.
I didn’t get that at all… it was about how Napoleon & Josephine were born of the Revolution and came from opposite sides of the repercussions of this.
Such a shame Napoleon was so inaccurate
And people get their "history" from films like that.
I mean alot of his historical films are. Its just his vision. He doesn’t advertise them as documentaries lol
@@_fantasticscenes So, he's Oliver Stone's buddy? ;-P
Unfortunately, most people don't, or won't, make the distinction, and accept them as "fact"...
I question the authenticity of any scene between any two historical figures that had no witnesses or, at least mentioned in memoirs .
The whole "argument"scene in the LEM in "Apollo 13" did NOT take place, per Jim Lovell. Tom Hanks didn't want it, but Ron Howard wanted it added "for dramatic effect" (as if the real story wasn't dramatic enough). I think that it does a disservice to NASA training, as well as to the reputations of Fred Haise and Jack Sweigert.
I'll stick to documentaries, I guess...
I enjoyed The Crown but understood that no one knew what was actually said and most of the characters have passed on. You take a story that’s over 200 years old and you can swerve even further off. Vanessa Kirby is a wonderful actress and went from Princess Margaret to Empress Josephine.
It’s not even that it was historically in inaccurate. Is was just plain bad
A more interesting version would've been Kubrick's. Maybe he would've mentioned he was a selected freemason who was given everything and then selected to fall.
Couldn't stand Joaquin Phoenix in Gladiator, so I should have known how much I would dislike Napoleon. I wanted to like it, but couldn't. Really inaccurate as well.....
Ridley Scott is an amazing director but, his rendition of Napoleon is atrocious. The movie is so bad it's disrespectful to the military and political genius of Napoleon. It is visually spectacular but gives the impression he was forced to make it.
No its not even visually spectacular. Doesn't look genuine and beautiful. SFx are just average. On a movie like Gladiator you can tolerate cuz the narration is on point. But Napoléon was a catastrophy.
I'll be watching NAPOLEON, soon.
It is the worst movie of all time
it's terrible
Napoleon was a shoddy film made with the skill of a high school student who failed history
One of the most superficial director of all times