This film is exactly, to a tee, what you would expect a Napoleon Bonaparte biopic directed by Ridley Scott to be like.

“Napoleon” tells the story of the famed French general (played by Joaquin Phoenix), his relationship with Joséphine de Beauharnais (Vanessa Kirby), and his fall from power; Ridley Scott directs.

As a director, I’m fairly agnostic on Ridley Scott. I think he has made some great films (“The Last Duel,” “American Gangster,” “Blade Runner”) but also has his share of boring duds (“Exodus: Gods and Kings,” “G.I. Jane,” “House of Gucci”). I was looking forward to his “Napoleon,” a $200 million epic set in a time period I enjoy. The results are mixed, though the sheer scale and attention to detail by Scott and his team cannot be denied.

I’ve never been a big fan of Joaquin Phoenix, I think he’s perfectly serviceable in most of his roles but he often makes obvious acting choices (his Oscar win for “Joker” over the likes of Adam Driver is objectively silly). That being said, I think a role like Napoleon Bonaparte suits him, because he gets to play a man who was, essentially, a mopey manchild. You never really buy into the “power hungry” label bestowed upon him by others (it mostly comes off like Napoleon is just trying to win battles and receive credit for them, not go become a dictator), but Phoenix makes you buy into the fact that the term “Napoleon complex” began with this man. He has Napoleon appear tough in battle but shy in private, and often demands compliments and affirmation from those around him. It’s also a deceptively comical performance, and while it won’t win him many awards I do think it’s one of Phoenix’s better outings in recent years.

As his partner Joséphine de Beauharnais, Vanessa Kirby holds her own and continues to have her stock grow. Though we don’t dive too much into her life and psyche outing her marriage with Napoleon, Kirby has some emotional and seductive scenes that make you buy into how a common woman like her could have a powerful general like Napoleon wrapped around her finger.

For all Ridley Scott’s flaws, action scenes have never been one of them and he delivers again here. Getting the opportunity to depict famous conflicts like the Battles of Austerlitz and Waterloo, Scott does not shy away from the brutality of 19th-century warfare, nor the genius of Napoleon’s planning. From the visuals to the sound design, the battles feel lived in, and I’m glad I got to see this in a theater.

The sets and costumes are also top-notch. From marble government offices and luxurious palaces, to the frozen tundra of Russia or plains of Belgium, the film feels like it’s taking place in these locations, opposed to in front of a green screen or in Atlanta cosplaying as France.

However, despite his visual prowess, a common Scott complaint are his narratives and that plagues this film. We jump around in time a lot and sometimes it creates an odd sense of pacing (we open in 1789, characters have a conversation, and it then cuts to four years later, although the editing makes things feel like it’s been a few days). Some characters are introduced with on-screen titles and job descriptions, and I feel this is in-part because the film was trimmed from Scott’s original four hour cut to a theaterically-appropriate 2:37. Those extra 90 minutes could add nothing but more filler, but they could also flesh out some relationships and backstories, so I look forward to checking out Scott’s director’s cut when it is released on Apple TV+.

“Napoleon” is a bit overlong in its current state (yet in some ways, not long enough), and it certainly deserves the big screen treatment. Phoenix and Kirby are solid in the central roles and Scott’s handling of the battle sequences need to be complimented. I wish the film was either a bit more streamlined or fleshed out, and am looking forward to Scott’s four-hour cut to see if these issues are resolved. But as it stands, “Napoleon” is a handsomely made film that we don’t get very often, and if you enjoy historical epics like me then there’s enough positives here to offset the flaws.

Critics Rating: 6/10