Monsieur N.

Very well done! Great film! Well acted. Well written. Good directing. Good camera work. Beautiful visually from both the directing/camera work, and the picturesque scenery. Great acting performances all around.

I like how the film isn't just in French, or just in English. The English characters speak English to each other, and speak French to the French. The French characters speak French. This gives the film a realistic feel.

Great storytelling. The viewer falls prey to Napoleon's charismatic charm as much as those who knew him in person, and we come to feel for him, as if he is a victim of his imprisonment, rather than a deposed tyrannical dictator paying for his vast crimes. His humbled situation brings out his humanity and weakness, yet he still retains his dominance, but through subtler control than his former meglomanical ways. It is almost as if he has lured the audience into routing for him and pitying him, while he secretly pulls our strings.

It is also refreshing to see the human side of a once powerful ruler, and brutal military commander, through witnessing his relationships and interactions with others. We tend to only see powerful world leaders in their public personas, without getting to voyeuristically peer into their private lives, and therefore, they seem larger than life, rather than a human being going through the things we all go through in life. Life plays no favorites, nor spares anyone based on title or fame.

I am a history buff, and I enjoy most well made historical films, but I think anyone would enjoy this. It has intrigue, romance, action, dialog, storytelling, conjecture, moving moments, something for everyone. It is not "boring history", but the juicy bits that fell through the cracks, that cannot be found in a text book, the story within the story so to speak. The film is based on a combination of know facts, and explored theory. It is an intriguing conspiracy theory, that could well have happened. We may never know the whole truth about Napoleon's fate, but isn't it fun to explore the what ifs, especially the ones that make a glorious story? As with Billy The Kid, Jessie James, Elvis, & Jim Morrison, among others, Napoleon's legend is romanticized, and made even grander by the thought that he may have cheated death and fame, and "rode off into the sunset"...

Watch the film, you'll enjoy it.

Of the thousands of movies I've seen so far, this is the first one which made me think of the "wasted talents" expression. I had never EVER seen so many fine actors giving so dreadful performances (Frédéric Pierrot, Elsa Zylberstein,and so on). The "aging" make-up is quite awful and, to make it worse, lit broadly. The use of music (e.g. love at first sight for the young aide de camp) is at times so caricatural that I could feel most spectators around me smile awkwardly. So far, Antoine de Caunes has been quite a good actor, but seeing this one and "les morsures de l'aube" I think he should start considering quitting. Please Antoine, give up that "master of balantree" project ; I doubt you deserve it.

Although I am a native English-speaker I usually have no trouble following dialogue in French but I found the dialogue of this film very hard to follow.

I agree with a previous reviewer that the background music is obtrusive. Another problem is the switching from English into French, Corsican Italian, English and back again, which makes it harder to "tune in" to the speaker, and the British actors speak French with a heavy accent.

There are only French subtitles, and these are only for the parts of the dialogue which are spoken in English. Also, they cannot be read unless you have your screen format set to full wide-screen, so you are watching the film through a letterbox slot!

I did not find this to be Richard E Grant's best performance, and I agree with another reviewer that the "ageing" make-up was clumsy.

I shall watch it again, to see if I can pick up any more of the dialogue. It could have been a good film, but it was let down by what I think they call post-production. Perhaps they ran out of money? I expect they spent a lot on the costumes and locations.

Viewers of this film need to be aware that the movie is VERY speculative--sort of a "what if" version of history. In this case, the "what if" is whether or not Napoleon could have escaped from his second exile--the one on St. Helena. However, instead of a documentary-style piece, it is a dramatization of those who knew him in his final years. And, it does a pretty convincing job in this department.

The acting, direction and writing well all good, though I think the movie might have benefited by a little bit more energy. After all, if it is asking us to suspend belief regarding the plot, perhaps they could have infused a little more energy. Oh well, I still enjoyed it and think lovers of history out there will feel the same.

PS--for parents, there is a brief nude scene. It's not THAT explicit, but you might want to consider this when letting your kids see this.

funny, almost saddening how the one who tells the story first makes it their own at the truth's expense. a brilliant piece of motion picture artistry yet the undeniable undertones of English supremacy left a bad taste in my mouth. true to the genius of napoleon, but one has to question whether it was the intellectual workings of a genius' mind we were bearing witness to or the one who unwittingly outwits the genius, even though by the dumbest of luck. the mind is the most unforgiving of captures and physical captivity is a mere detail if compared to it. that is what i came out of the movie in awe of. the story has been recycled and repetitively told much to the detriment of it's truth and purity; and even though it has been airbrushed to do away with the blemishes, one can not help but feel that the newly-created veneer of English supremacy was the gremlin in their propaganda machine.

i highly recommend the movie, intriguing to the final scene.