As awards season heats up in Hollywood, one highly anticipated blockbuster film of 2023 will face the disappointing reality of being less decorated than its eponymous 18th century-born Corsican military hero. With four wins (including two satirical 「Yoga」 awards) and 39 nominations, to Oppenheimer's more than 300 wins out of nearly 400 various nominations, Ridley Scott's Napoleon has apparently faced its Waterloo.
隨著好萊塢頒獎季的升溫，一部備受期待的 2023 年大片將面臨令人失望的現實: 它所獲獎項相較於那位同名的18世紀的科西嘉軍事英雄來說，實在有些黯然失色。 【歐本海默】在近 400 項各種提名中獲得了 300 多項，相比之下, 雷德利-史葛的【拿破侖】只獲得了 4 項大獎（包括兩項諷刺性的 "瑜伽 "獎）和 39 項提名，【拿破侖】顯然遭遇了滑鐵盧。
At the box office, Napoleon, with its almost three-hour runtime, has also fallen short. The film is listed as number 43 in the top-grossing films of 2023 behind PAW Patrol: The Mighty Movie and Trolls Band Together (Box Office Mojo). Popular reviews of Napoleon hover between 2/5 (rogerebert.com), 58% (Rotten Tomatoes) and 6.4/10 (IMDb). British and U.S. film critics were mostly positive, while their French counterparts were unanimously disparaging. The right-wing newspaper Le Figaro compared Napoleon and Joséphine to 「Barbie and Ken under the Empire.」
在票房方面，【拿破侖】近三小時的片長也不盡如人意。該片在 2023 年最賣座影片排行榜上位列第 43 位，僅次於【汪汪隊立大功大電影2】 和【魔發精靈3】（Box Office Mojo）。【拿破侖】的大眾評價介於 2/5 (rogerebert.com) 、58% (Rotten Tomatoes) 和 6.4/10 (IMDb)之間。英國和美國的影評人大多持肯定態度，而法國同行則一致持貶低態度。右翼報紙【費加羅報】將拿破侖和約塞芬比作 "帝國下的芭比和肯"。
The movie reflects filmmaker Ridley Scott's approach to the genre of historical epic, through which he creates a mirror to reflect, explore, and comment on the contemporary world of his audience. Historical inaccuracies abound, but do not matter. 「Get a life!」 blasts Scott to this kind of criticism. This is cinema where the story and the meaning for the audience have more value than strict adherence to facts, and where a little fiction may hold more truth than expected.
這部電影反映了電影制作人雷德利-史葛對歷史史詩類別片的態度，他透過這部電影創造了一面鏡子，來反映、探索和評論觀眾所處的當代世界。盡管有很多地方不符合史實，但這並不重要。對於這種批評，史葛經常猛烈地回應： 「幹點正事吧！」 在這部電影中，故事和對觀眾的意義比嚴格遵守事實更有價值，有時一點虛構的情節可能比想象的更真實。
Since the beginning of film history, directors have been adapting the past to fit the big screen, often focusing on individuals such as Joan of Arc (Méliès 1900; Dreyer 1928); Napoleon (Gance 1927); and Alexander Nevsky (Eisenstein 1938). Such early films firmly ensconced the historical epic film in a cinematic tradition that blends fiction and fact. Over time, with advances in technology from hand-coloring of film reels to widescreen format, CGI, and VFX, directors have negotiated historical realism with their audience.
自電影史誕生以來，導演們就一直將過去的歷史改編成適合大銀幕的影片，通常以聖女貞德（梅裏愛，1900 年；德雷爾，1928 年）、拿破侖（甘斯，1927 年）和亞歷山大-內夫斯基（愛森斯坦，1938 年）等人物為主題。這些早期影片將歷史史詩片牢固地納入了虛構與事實相結合的電影傳統。隨著時間的推移和技術的進步，從菲林卷軸的手工著色到寬銀幕格式、CGI 和 VFX，導演們與觀眾共同探討歷史的真實性。
Perhaps none more so than Ridley Scott, who has produced six historical epics (including Gladiator II, to be released in 2024), in addition to one biblical epic, five science fiction films, six thrillers, several dramas, and two comedies. And yet, as with Napoleon today, his film epics have often been criticized for historical inaccuracies. So why have they persisted? Precisely because Scott's historical epics are provocative and uncomfortable in the present. These films demand that we engage with the issues they raise—from colonialism to democracy.
雷德利-史葛可能是其中的佼佼者，他已經拍攝了六部歷史史詩片（包括將於 2024 年上映的【角鬥士 II】），此外還有一部聖經史詩片、五部科幻片、六部驚悚片、多部劇情片和兩部喜劇片。然而，就像今天的【拿破侖】一樣，他的電影史詩片也經常被批評與歷史不符。那麽，它們為什麽會持續存在呢？恰恰是因為史葛的歷史史詩具有煽動性，讓人在當下感到不適。這些電影要求我們關註並參與到它們提出的問題中來——從殖民主義到民主。
In Gladiator (2000), Maximus (Russell Crowe) and Commodus (Joaquin Phoenix), hero and anti-hero, represent the battle for the Republic against imperial ambition at the beginning of the first millennium. The film's plot starts in 180 C.E. Marcus Aurelius, emperor and father of Commodus, has appointed Maximus as regent until the Republic can be restored, after declaring Commodus unfit to rule as emperor. Commodus, however, murders his father, stages a coup, and enslaves Maximus. The film's climax ends with gladiatorial combat between Commodus and Maximus in the Colosseum, which leads to Maximus's death.
在電影【角鬥士】（2000 年）中，英雄馬克西姆斯（羅素-克勞飾）和反英雄康莫德斯（華金-鳳凰城飾）代表了第一個千年之初共和國與帝國野心的鬥爭。電影的情節始於公元 180 年，康莫德斯的父親、皇帝馬庫斯-奧勒留在宣布康莫德斯不適合當皇帝後，任命馬克西姆斯為攝政王，直到共和國復國。然而，康莫德斯謀殺了自己的父親，發動政變，並奴役了馬克西姆斯。影片的高潮部份是康莫德斯和馬克西姆斯在鬥獸場的角鬥，最終馬克西姆斯戰死。
The film is deeply inaccurate. Its conclusion implies wrongly that the Roman Republic was re-established and kills off Commodus (a victim of politically motivated assassination) in gladiatorial combat. But the film connected with audiences at the turn of the 21st century who were seeking affirmation about democratic ideals and the power of the people. Marcus Aurelius powerfully articulates this dream when he says to Maximus, 「I want you to become the protector of Rome after I die. I will empower you, to one end alone, to give power back to the people of Rome and end the corruption that has crippled it.」
這部影片嚴重失實。影片結尾錯誤地暗示羅馬共和國已經重建，並且康莫德斯（政治暗殺的受害者）在角鬥場上被殺死了。但是，這部影片與 21 世紀之交的觀眾產生了共鳴，他們正在尋求對民主理想和人民力量的肯定。馬庫斯·奧勒留在電影中有力地表達了這一夢想，他 對馬克西姆斯說："我希望你在我死後成為羅馬的守護者。我將賦予你權力，只為一個目標，將權力交還給羅馬人民，結束使羅馬癱瘓的腐敗"。
During the film's production, George W. Bush was running his presidential campaign against Al Gore, with the ambition of succeeding President Bill Clinton. Bush lost the popular vote but became president in 2000 after a contentious contest that ended with the Supreme Court weighing in. The film's release inevitably invited comparisons between President George W. Bush and Commodus. Both were sons of leaders, who came into positions of power under controversial circumstances, and had reputations for levity and ethical ambiguities. Over the next few years, the film resonated even more with contemporary audiences as the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq during Bush's presidency raised interesting points of comparison with the Roman Empire’s patterns of invasion and expansion.
在這部影片制作期間，喬治-W-布殊正在與阿爾-戈爾競選總統，立誌接替比爾-克林頓總統。布殊在2000年的總統競選中雖然輸掉了普選, 但在一場激烈角逐的競選活動後，最終在最高法院的幹預下成為了總統。 影片的上映不可避免地引起了人們對小布殊總統和康莫多斯的比較。兩人都是領袖之子，都是在備受爭議的情況下掌權，都以輕浮和道德模糊著稱。在接下來的幾年裏，這部影片在當代觀眾中引起了更大的反響，因為布殊總統任期內入侵阿富汗和伊拉克的行為與羅馬帝國的入侵和擴張模式形成了有趣的對比。
Five years later, Scott's Kingdom of Heaven (2005) made these connections to contemporary politics even more explicit. Released in the political and cultural aftermath of 9/11, the film revisits the Crusades, and specifically the time between the second and third crusades. Once again, the historical portrait is deeply skewed. The film's protagonist, Balian, is a blacksmith, who has just lost his wife to suicide following the death of their child. During the burial, Godfrey, the Baron of Ibelin, rides into the village in search of his son Balian, who has not known his father until this point. Balian ascends the social ranks from blacksmith to Baron of Ibelin after following his newfound father on crusade, ultimately forging an ahistorical and anachronistic analogy to the American dream.
五年後，史葛的電影【天國王朝】（2005 年）更加清晰地展現了這些與當代政治的聯系。該片在 9/11 事件後的政治和文化背景下上映，重溫了十字軍東征，特別是第二次和第三次十字軍東征之間的歷史。歷史畫面再次被嚴重扭曲。影片的主人公巴利安是一名鐵匠，他的妻子在孩子死後自殺身亡。在葬禮期間，伊貝蘭男爵戈弗雷騎馬來到村子裏尋找他的兒子巴利安, 而巴利安直到這時才知道他的父親是誰。 巴利安在跟隨自己剛剛相認的父親進行十字軍東征後，從鐵匠晉升為伊貝蘭男爵，最終與美國夢形成了一個不合歷史、不合時宜的類比。
But Kingdom of Heaven had a clear message about contemporary American politics. The United States had just launched what President George W. Bush dubbed the "war on terror.」 His administration initiated an increased focus on national security through the introduction of the Aviation and Transportation Security Act and the USA Patriot Act.
但電影【天國王朝】對當代美國政治有明確的啟示。美國剛剛發動了喬治-W-布殊總統所稱的 "反恐戰爭 "。他的政府透過出台【航空和運輸安全法】和【美國愛國者法】，加強了對國家安全的關註。
These and other policies were associated with increased racial profiling at a time when racially motivated hate crimes were on the rise. The film, by contrast, presents secularized religions, and highlights points of commonality between different groups. Throughout the film, the battle cry 「God wills it!」 pierces the battle ranks of both Christians and Muslims. When Balian negotiates terms of surrender ensuring safe passage for the citizens entrusted to his care, he is respected by both Christians and Muslims.
這些政策和其他政策都與種族定性和種族辨識行為的增加有關，而當時出於種族動機的仇恨犯罪正在上升。與此相反，這部電影展現了世俗化的宗教，並強調了不同群體之間的共同點。在整部影片中，"上帝的旨意！"的戰鬥口號貫穿了基督徒和穆斯林的戰鬥隊伍。當巴利安透過談判達成投降條件，確保受托的公民安全通行時，他受到了基督徒和穆斯林的尊重。
In short, Scott's construction of Balian's character is not an attempt to recreate medieval history. Rather, the character is an avatar for a contemporary American spectator living the Crusades through the lens of modern foreign policy.
簡而言之，史葛塑造巴利安這一人物形象並不是為了再現中世紀歷史。相反，這個角色更像是一個當代美國觀眾的化身，他透過現代外交政策的視角講述了十字軍東征的故事。
The same dynamics are at play in Scott's Napoleon story, which is also less about historical accuracy and more a critique of the dictator for 21st century audiences concerned with rising authoritarianism across the globe. The very casting of Joaquin Phoenix as Napoleon, with his history of playing psychopathic characters such as Commodus and the Joker, sends a distinct message. Phoenix plays Napoleon anti-heroically, subtly and ironically undermining the 「great man theory」 of history. His Napoleon is odd, ill at ease, petulant, emotionally immature, and he gets what he wants more often than not. In a notable sex scene with Joséphine, Napoleon stamps his foot repeatedly, like an impatient stallion pawing the ground.
史葛的【拿破侖】電影故事也同樣如此，該片也不太註重歷史的準確性，而更多地是為 21 世紀的觀眾批判這位獨裁者，關註全球不斷上升的獨裁主義。華金-鳳凰城曾出演過康莫德斯和小醜等精神變態角色，他出演拿破侖一角本身就傳達了一個明確的資訊。鳳凰城以反英雄的方式扮演拿破侖，巧妙而諷刺地破壞了歷史上的 "偉人理論"。他筆下的拿破侖性格怪異、桀驁不馴、脾氣暴躁、情感不成熟，而且常常得償所願。在與約瑟芬的一場著名的性愛戲中，拿破侖反復跺腳，就像一匹不耐煩的種馬在地上刨來刨去。
Napoleon is the latest in a series of Ridley Scott films that raise questions about contemporary political trends, interests, and anxieties through the genre of the historical epic. If we take a step back and look at our place in history against the foil of another era, where are we now and where are we going? Is democracy being overshadowed by dictatorial rumblings? Are we in an empire in decline? Are we winning or losing, and against whom? Where do we identify violence and barbarism in our society? Do we have a voice and who is telling our story? Are we repeating the mistakes of history? How will future audiences experience our history on screen?
【拿破侖】是雷德利-史葛系列電影中的最新一部，該系列透過歷史史詩的類別提出了關於當代政治趨勢、利益和焦慮的問題。如果我們退後一步，在另一個時代的襯托下審視我們在歷史上的位置，我們現在處於何種地位，我們又將走向何方？民主是否被獨裁的喧囂所掩蓋？我們的帝國是否正在衰落？我們是贏了還是輸了，輸給了誰？我們該如何辨識社會中的暴力和野蠻？我們是否有發言權，誰在講述我們的故事？我們是否在重復歷史的錯誤？未來的觀眾將如何在銀幕上體驗我們的歷史？
While Napoleon may have a poor showing at the Academy Awards this weekend, it has used the landscape of history to ask important questions about the contours of modern politics. The fact that Gladiator II is in preproduction with a release date in November 2024, a mere three weeks after a historic presidential election, suggests that Ridley Scott’s films will continue to probe and provoke.
雖然【拿破侖】在本周末的奧斯卡金像獎頒獎典禮上的表現可能不盡如人意，但它卻利用歷史背景提出了關於現代政治輪廓的重要問題。電影【角鬥士 2】正在籌備中，上映日期為 2024 年 11 月，距離歷史性的美國總統大選僅有三周時間，這表明雷德利-史葛的電影將繼續深入探索和激發人們的思考。
