To all of the fans of this film We know why we have this in our personal collection. To all of the critics .......You are way way way jaded. Give it a rest.I need more lines. the color was awesome. The acting was awesome. The picture was awesome.If you did not like this movie you are a spoiled snob that needs a vacation. I can not wait to share this movie with my friends .Hey snobs .....what the hell do you want from people anyway?? Why am I typing a review that no one will read anyway?Why am I wasting my time anyway?What is the point of all of this? Hello go watch the movie idiots.

This is a gorgeous production, with great make-up, costumes, locations, battle scenes etc. (which were nominated for Emmys and other awards). But there are so many weak links in the cast that it makes the film difficult to enjoy.I guessed (correctly) early on in watching that this must have been a dual-language film, with one cast shot in both English and French, which explains why so many of the actors seem uncomfortable with their lines. Clavier's delivery is often so uncertain that the emotion of the scene is lost. Besides, he lacks the handsome bravura that all the paintings of Napoleon convey so strongly. How can we believe that a whole country blindly followed this soft-spoken, dumpy little person?Gerard Depardieu seems to have forgotten whatever he learned about speaking English back when he was an English film "flavor of the month" in the 1980s, although he hasn't lost his strong, menacing presence. Some of the supporting actors are wooden enough to have been Al Gore's stunt doubles, delivering their lines like a child reciting at a class play. John Malkovich practically phones in his part; haven't we seen enough of his mumbling, poker-faced, pursed-lipped villains for one lifetime? The ladies in the cast fare much better, with Isabella Rossellini taking the top prize for believability and realistic emotions. But the Oscar goes to Napoleon's war horse, who puts on a great show of fancy stepping in one unforgettable scene! The production was shot in many of the actual buildings and rooms in which the action really took place, which lends some excitement and credibility. It is lovely to look at...if it weren't for all those darned PEOPLE cluttering up the scenery.

As a historian, I thought this movie was lacking in certain parts. Yet it had a lot of history in it, which I seemed to me to be correct and well done. There are a lot of beautiful shots, wonderful colors and the art department did a great job in this movie. The costumes of Napoleon and the foreign minister was almost magic. I was taken away by the details of the costumes and the scenery. I was most likely not filmed at Versailles or Paris, yet you had the impression that they were filming there. It was generally well edited and filmed. That said, there are several things that bothered me. For example, when Napeolon moves across Europe with his army and confronts the Allied forces or even the Prussians; they animated this by computers. I didn't think this was at all necessary, I think it would have been a better movie if the director simple left this out (that is what most directors do anyway). The maps rather bothered me, too many details; names and dates of battles covered were enough. The other thing that really bothered me was the whole accents. We are supposed to be watching a movie set in Napoleonic France where people spoke French. Most of the actors don't come from France and so speak with a heavy American or German accent. I first noticed this when Murat was attacking the Directoire and so says "attack" in a clear American accent; this bothered me. I would have preferred to have the movie in French and subtitled.

What a shocking disappointment. I bought the Napoleon 2 DVDs edition, as a gift to myself for Christmas and, what a waste of money . and time waiting for it. The product is so bad in contents as in features; it even lacks the actual almost standard Close Captioning.I have read some biography and historical books about Bonaparte and his time, and I can't stand for Depardieu casting Fouche, I think it could be better as a Marshal, Ney, Lannes of somebody like them.Napoleon casting actor is anything but `imperial', for the man who forged by himself the greatest empire in human history. Where are the famous Marshals? Across hours and hours of soap opera, all we see is two or three puppets in uniform. The top of ridiculous is the mid-eastern bodyguard Napoleon got from his Egypt campaign, remarkable.You get tired of see Napoleon, alone, reading papers or playing with maps and lead soldiers, lost in the immensity of the palaces, and the overacting (as many of his plays) Malkovich spying through doors. Napoleon spent his years as France head of state, when in office, surrounded by tens and hundreds of clerks, messengers, ministers (not only Police - Fouche and Foreign Affairs - Talleyrand), aides du camp, and . in first place, his `Joint of Chiefs', leaded by the superb Marshal Berthier.At last, but not least in the insanity, the time (and the weight on the drama) gift to Josephine de Beauharnais. She was an important lady of French high society, but the emperor's romance with her was short in time - against the almost 20 years he commanded France destiny - and, more important, probably was calculated from his part, because the important connections and relations she had in society, but he, as a young officer of provinces, lacked.Is true, he was fair with her son, Eugene de Beauharnais, named him general, prince of the empire and Viceroy of Italy. Eugene was fighting for his stepfather from 1796 to 1814. But, he earned all these awards because his own merits as a fine officer and not because his mother influenced over the emperor.