User reviews

I saw this back in '81 or '82, on the Big Screen at the Shrine Auditorium in Los Angeles, with Carmine Coppola conducting a live orchestra -- there has never been anything like that in all my movie-going experience! The closest that's come since was _Intolerance_, restored, with another live orchestra performing under the baton of the composer, Gillian Anderson (no, not the one from the X-Files). That, too, was an occasion to remember ... but where is Napoleon on DVD?

As many other reviewers have said, Napoleon was a relevatory experience. Certainly, other films to that point had used most of the devices Gance employed so brilliantly (except, of course, his three-screen-wide "Polyvision"), but then sound came in and the requirements of the microphone killed the recently mobilized camera. The camera became very static for at least the next ten years of films -- dynamic camera movements only returned when sound mixing came in to being, and scenes could be shot MOS (mit out sound), with foley and overdubbing replacing the missed sounds.

For this reason, Napoleon is important to see -- as a technical achievement. But Gance's artistry wasn't limited to gimmicks. His pacing, editing, and direction of the actors (including Dieudonne as Nappy -- looking amazingly Rod-Stewart-like) is excellent as well.

Highly recommended -- and when the DVD comes out -- hopefully, with the fuller, five-hour restoration, and Coppola's music on one track, with a reconstruction of the original music on another (and perhaps Gillian Anderson has a score of her own to share?) -- you'll owe it to yourself, as a student of Film, to see it, over and over again.

... and remarkable even in it's current, truncated form. The film details the early life of Napoleon Bonaparte (Albert Dieudonne), from his unpleasant childhood in boarding school to his early military life during the French Revolution and the subsequent Reign of Terror, through to his first military victories and marriage to Josephine (Gina Manes). Also featuring Annabella and Abel Gance as Saint-Just.

Gance seems to have taken note of every cinematic technique of the previous 30 years of the medium, combining them all into a breathtaking, exhaustive epic that transcends the time of it's making while being wholly of it, as well. This could not exist with such strength as anything but a silent film, I feel, as the reliance on visual stimulus forced Gance into finding new and exciting ways to express emotion and mood. His early use of montage editing and super-imposition of imagery is stellar. The use of handheld cameras adds to the immediacy of the revolutionary scenes, conveying a newsreel touch that seems far advanced from other films of its day. The sets and costumes are very impressive, as is the cast of thousands. Dieudonne resembles Olivier's Richard III more than any other screen Napoleon that I've seen, but it works, and I wonder if this is the image I'll conjure in the future when thinking of the French military genius.

This movie has a storied existence, with multiple running times and edits throughout the decades. Gance's original version is said to have run over 9 hours, but subsequent edits ran as short as 115 minutes (the 1929 US release). Noted British film historian and preservationist Kevin Brownlow has made it his life's work to try and restore the movie as closely as possible to Gance's original vision. The version that I watched was the recently released BFI version, supervised by Brownlow, and it ran 333 minutes, or about 5 and a half hours. It's definitely a must see.

Abel Gance's 'Napoleon' was premiered on April 7, 1927, at the Paris Opera House, the first movie to be accorded such an honor… It was been shown on a triple screen and to full orchestral accompaniment, running slightly under four hours…

Impressive as it seems, it was conceived as the first of a six-part biography running many hours and tracing the life of Napoleon from childhood to the bitter end in St Helena… Fortunately-for Abel Gance who directed and for us-the project was only completed to that moment where Napoleon enters Italy at the head of the French army, and the later and less pleasant aspects of his spectacular career were left unfilmed... The Little Corporal, after all, is a less controversial figure than the Emperor…

Gance needed a figure as emblematic and powerful as 'Napoleon' to fulfill his dream of super cinema…

'Napoleon' is a masterpiece of excess:

• The child Bonaparte keeps a pet eagle and wins a snow fight while at school in Brienne... In this sequence, the frame splits into nine subliminal images; as Napoleon watches his men entering Italy, the screen expands on each side to form a breathtaking panorama, then changes into three coordinated views of the scene…

• The National Convention seems to sway and rock as Napoleon makes his escape from Corsica in a storm-tossed sailboat…

• The Gallic of cabaret singers, Damia, leads French troops into battle personifying 'La Marseillaise'…

'Napoleon' is like one grand musical composition. It throbs with life…

That was Gance the great filmmaker who thought that film could do everything and who said to Kevin Brownlow: 'For me, the cinema is not just pictures. It is something great, mysterious and sublime.' Brownlow is known now not only as an English filmmaker and film historian but also as a great restorer of silent films, notably Abel Gance's 'Napoleon.'

I was lucky enough to see the very latest restoration of Napoleon by silent film expert Kevin Brownlow at the Royal Festival Hall in London earlier this month (December 2004). Carl Davis was there in person to conduct the London Philharmonic Orchestra in a live performance of his own brilliant score. It was the most moving and overwhelming cinematic experience of my life and I doubt whether it can ever be bettered. The film is decades ahead of its time, the bravura editing and inspired direction reveal Gance as the true genius that he was.

However...

The very performance I attended was under legal threats from Coppola, who wished to ban its screening. Back in 1980-81, he and his Zoetrope Studio helped fund a restoration and he got his father to compose a score. He helped get the US audiences to recognise what a remarkable work of genius Napoleon really is, and all credit to him for trying to do so. This would all seem very well and good, but even in 1981 Coppola wasn't showing the best version of the restored film that he could have. He had cut it down from Brownlow's (then) latest version to fit the score his father had written. He also showed it at 24 fps instead of the intended (and more realistic - the movements are at a normal rate, not unnaturally sped-up) 20 fps. Throughout the 1980s, Brownlow and others in Europe kept finding better elements and more footage. Yet, Coppola's version was still being called "THE restoration" and not altered at all. Brownlow also found prints with more authentic editing, giving a much better idea of the order and number of cuts in many sequences (so many versions/reels of Napoleon have had inferior takes/editing put in by people other than Gance that it took time to discover the best and most authentic). It was becoming increasingly clear that Coppola's version was very much flawed and out-of-date with the new discoveries. In 2000, the latest and most complete version available (including the authentic tints, near-definitive editing in line with Gance's intentions, and the best print so far etc.) was screened in London. Carl Davis had altered and lengthened his magnificent score to match the latest version. Even after this showing in 2000, elements were still being improved to make the film as close as possible to Gance's intentions. The 2004 screening which I attended had a print that ran for nearly 5 and a half hours. Coppola's version runs for less than 4 hours and it hasn't been touched to include any improvements in print quality or more authentic tinting or editing.

The Coppola version of Napoleon, with a run time of 223 minutes (3 hours and 43 minutes) is out on DVD in Australia. I do not know when or even if it will come out on DVD in the US. Rest assured, it will NOT be the best version of this great film, or anything close to it. Coppola and Zoetrope sold rights to their version of the film to Universal in the 1980s and so now the issue of rights has become entangled with a major studio (Universal Studios, incidentally, destroyed all their silent film negatives in 1947 - a very (in)appropriate choice of distributor for a film whose failure and subsequent neglect was mainly due to a horrendous re-editing by studios (MGM) in 1927).

The Australian DVD, released by Universal, is filled with faults. Apart from inferior image quality (unlike the 2004 print, which was superb and scarcely a speck of dirt was visible any time during the whole 5 and a half hours), the final triptych sequence is horrendously cropped from 3.99:1 to 2.55:1 and isn't even adjusted for widescreen televisions. It's also exactly the same version from 1981 which, even back then, wasn't the best there was available. The music, admirable though it is, cannot compare to Davis' score (he has worked on many other silent film scores with great acclaim) - especially now that Davis has reworked the score for the latest version.

Coppola's efforts to suppress the latest restoration are a dreadful example of precisely the kind of money-driven censorship and selfishness that Napoleon has been dogged by for eighty years. Not just the 90+ minutes of extra footage, but the score and print quality itself, makes the latest print by the BFI/BFA/Brownlow indispensable. Anyone who claims to have rescued this film (as Coppola did in 1981, even though Brownlow had been working for decades before then, alongside Gance himself, to remaster the film) and yet tries to ban a closer version to the original film is monstrously hypocritical. As much as I welcome any hope of seeing Napoleon on DVD, I recoil at the thought of thousands of people being forced to watch a terribly flawed and inferior version of this masterpiece. Even as I type, there are rumours of even more lost footage from Napoleon being found in Denmark - with any luck this will lead to an even better restoration than the 2004 one.

This ongoing saga of restoration (and much credit is due to the person who seems to have the least legal rights out of the whole cast of those involved in the restored film: Kevin Brownlow) means that a DVD release of the Coppola version, with its many flaws, seems absurd and remarkably selfish and damaging. This film desperately needs to be released on DVD, but only in as close a form as possible to Gance's original masterpiece of 1927, seen by far too few people. That US rights-holders are trying to ban better versions with over 90 minutes extra in them is just another sad chapter in the story of this much-abused wonder of cinema. This is a magnificent film and deserves better than the shoddy and selfish treatment it has been given in America.

January 23, 1981. Radio City Music Hall. Nearly midnight. One of the most thrilling experiences of my life. "Napoleon", restored, and reconstructed, not seen for over fifty years, was debuting in front of 6,000 people packed into the great theater with Carmine Coppolla conducting a huge orchestra rising up on the lift as lighting cast fifty foot shadows of the conductor on the walls. The score was magnificent. By the end of the film when the tryptyches stretched the size of the screen to triple size filling the glorious famous sunburst proscenium, Radio City Music Hall erupted in a standing ovation - and Kevin Brownlow, who restored the film, at that very moment from the theater had Abel Gance (soon to die) live on the phone from France to hear the ovation! Just incredible. Glorious. The film is a masterpiece of the Twentieth Century. And a must see. The best scene was the battle in the Convention between the Girondists and Jacobins superimposed on Napoleon's escape from Corsica in a sea storm. Staggering editing and camera work. It is a tragedy for us all the the remaining chapters of Napoleon's life were never put on film as Gance planned.

Four showings at the art deco palace Paramount Theatre in downtown Oakland on March 24, 25, 31 and April 1 will be a landmark for cinemaphiles. From the opening snowball fight to the closing triptych of the eagle's shadow leading the Grande Armee, there was so much to love. Abel Gance takes you on a journey that your mind gets to ride with distinct pleasures. Robespierre in the John Lennonesque sunglasses, the teaching of the Marsailles, the dinghy with an escaping Napoleon and the General Assembly simultaneously in stormy seas, are but a few. I can't imagine I'll ever watch this on DVD after seeing it like I did. I certainly could never consider a sped up 24pp version. I watched Metropolis once like that and it just wasn't the same film. In fact criminal. So weirdly, I recommend the film but can't recommend seeing it unless a better format is available. I'm going to buy Carl Davis' score and play the film in my head from memory, which includes the crowd at the Paramount rising to their feet at the close shouting Vive La France! Vive La Gance!

The (more or less) full length version of Gance's NAPOLEON assembled by Kevin Brownlow over many years is an absolutely astounding achievement, both for Gance's inspired execution of a vision nearly too big for the screen, and Brownlow's dedication and perseverance, not to mention his superb reconstruction skills in bringing such a masterpiece back for the enjoyment of the world.

Well, not the whole world... Despite all this effort, the full restoration cannot be seen in the United States, on video or theatrically. It's a long story, but I just wanted potential and past viewers of this film to be aware of a few things:

-First of all, though video may be the only way to see this film in the U.S., keep in mind that home video can not even come close to providing the proper setting for such a gorgeous and epic film. The word "epic" has in fact never been so appropriate. So while I don't discourage people from seeing the video for lack of theatrical viewing opportunities, remember that the film was made on and meant to be seen on a grand scale.

-Secondly, the version currently available in the U.S. is not shown at the correct speed (24fps instead of the necessary 18/20fps). Also, it is missing footage. It is my understanding that in order to provide wider release possibilities in the U.S. upon the completion of the first major restoration in the '70s, the U.S. prints were edited somewhat to cut down on the admittedly long running time. This is also why the film is shown faster in the U.S., at "sound speed" or 24 frames per second. The newest restoration runs at 333 minutes, while the U.S. version is only 235.

The primary reason why the latest, glorious 2000 restoration of the film cannot be seen in the U.S. lies mainly with Francis Ford Coppola. Coppola controls the U.S. distribution rights, and allows only the U.S. version - with a score written by his father - to be shown. This is unlikely to change in the near future, so until then, deal with the substandard videotapes or plan your next European trip around one of the periodic English screenings of the film version - believe me, it's worth it!!

Modern film-goers are used to explication, to having everything explained for them. The art of visual story-telling -- where images and action indicate the emotional state of characters, rather than have the actor tell you how angry or sad or excited they are -- has almost been lost. But "Napoleon" is a masterpiece of visual art. (Writer-director Abel Gance was honored at the Telluride film festival a few years ago for this film. Far too late, in my opinion.)

The film tells the life of Napoleon Bonaparte -- the Corsican who adopts France as his homeland, rises to supreme general of the French armies during the Revolution and eventually seizes the seat of government itself (twice!). It starts out with a lengthy (if perhaps mythological) examination of Napoleon's childhood in a Catholic school. Snowball fights between Napoleon and two future foes portend the future. Napoleon's friendship with a pet eagle foreshadows his role as emperor of France. But even though these scenes represent more artistic license than history, they are tremendously well-acted by the young Vladimir Roudenko (as young Napoleon). Among the many innovations are some relatively naturalistic acting by the members of the cast and some jaw-dropping editing and montage sequences (especially during the brawl during the snowball fight and the fight in the sleeping quarters). Such innovative use of editing probably wouldn't be seen for another 30 or 40 years!

After almost an hour of this three-hour epic, we're transported to the period of the adult Napoleon -- acted with gravitas and iciness by Albert Dieudonne (who is among the cast's taller actors, just as Napoleon was in reality fairly tall, too). The film dwells extensively on the formative period when Napoleon first arrives in Paris during the late Revolution, focusing heavily on how the chaos in the city stamped into Napoleon the authoritarianism and dictatorial leadership traits that would emerge later in life. This is perhaps the highlight of the film. The editing and visual images create a swirling, spinning, mind-blowing effect that is extremely effective.

The film then focuses on Napoleon's return to Corisca -- whose people held allegiances to Spain and Italy as well as France, and where Napoleon faced imprisonment due to his French leanings. For anyone interested in learning more about the life of Napoleon, this segment is pretty eye-opening. It's followed by a sequence at sea that's amazingly effective in conveying the power and terror of a storm at sea. For its time, this film contained some powerful ocean footage (watch for those amazing low-angle shots, and the ingenious intercutting of the "angry storm" of the French assembly and Napoleon's tiny skiff tossed about on the stormy seas).

The final hour and a half of the film depicts Napoleon's rise in the army and his tenure as emperor of France. This is perhaps the portion of the film that most viewers would think of as "the story of Napoleon." But perhaps one of the reasons why this film is so fascinating is that it delves deeply into the formative episodes in Napoleon's early life and gives as much importance to them as to his later actions on the battlefield in Italy, his tenure as emperor, and his subsequent exile, return, and exile. And the film does so without being heavy-handed, un-subtle or overly expositive.

A restored version of "Napoleon" is making the rounds in the US in cinemas and on television. It contains a new musical soundtrack by Carmine Coppola, which is fairly good (although at times repetitive and too loud). The film was restored and re-edited by Francis Ford Coppola's Zoetrope studio. Zoetrope added some tinting (the ocean scenes are all blue, the "angry mob" scenes are all red) that is interesting but perhaps not quite the "restoration" some viewers might have had in mind.

Watch "Napoleon." You'll be very surprised at how modern the film is. Compared to other silent films of the 1920s, with the undercranked action, overly emotive acting, fantastic plots and theatrical make-up and costumes, "Napoleon" is years ahead of its time. Silent films require concentration to watch. "Napoleon" will keep your interest.

This film is epic in its design, but dull on delivery. This story, about the early days of Napoleon, shows us the quiet emotionless mastermind, who is totally immersed in his quest to conquer all. After the snowball fight in the beginning of the film, which foreshadows the future of Napoleon, the whole of the film is a little bit confusing, complicated and it lost me a lot. I hope that isn't a commentary on me, but I lost my way a couple of times. That is about it when we talk about the bad stuff.

It was tough though, but this film does offer some great technical gems for the eye to see. Every shot seemed like it was perfectly composed. There is no better camerawork than there was from the masters of the pioneering era. There were lots and lots of close-ups, rapidly fired editing cuts in some scenes and there was some decent sepia-tone colors used for the film cells. Each scene was covered in beautiful stuff, especially the reds & blues.

The claim to fame for this film is that director Abel Gance wanted to show the climactic battle at the end of the movie in a scale as big as possible. Being that the film was in 4:3, how would he do that? They came upon the idea of shooting the scene with three cameras, then showing the film simultaneously on three film projectors. It was effective, bold and I am glad all copies from each camera still exist. By the way, we are not talking Waterloo here. The battle mentioned earlier happened much earlier in Napoleon's life. What happened was this film was supposed to be Part One in a series of films about Napoleon but like most big ideas ...... the funding ran out.

7.5 (C+ MyGrade) = 7 IMDB.

"Napoleon" is an absolute masterpiece in the world's history of filmmaking. In 1927, it was completely overshadowed by the technology of "The Jazz Singer". And that was a real tragedy for decades. Abel Gance is a director I will always admire for his innovation in filmmaking that still is impressive in the 21st Century. He mounted cameras on skis and swings to give the audience the effects that he wanted to convey, and it works perfectly. I was impressed by two great scenes - the 'ocean storm' scene and the final battlefield scene, which was done in the tints of the three colors of the French flag. Any aspiring director should study the techniques of Abel Gance, because the brilliance of this great director would be inspiring! Gance was also instrumental in perfect casting. Though Albert Dieudonne was older, as actors go, he was perfectly cast as Napoleon. If this was an American film and not a French film, I'm sure it would be considered as one of the greatest films ever made by AFI and other organizations.

I was glad that Abel Gance was able to see the affection that audiences had for this film in the late 1980's and early 1990's when the film went on a world tour with a world class orchestra. It would have been sad if Gance had passed on without knowing that his film was considered a masterpiece. If their was ever a silent film that 'pulls out all of the stops', this film is it. Viva Le Gance - the Visionist!

I was one of the thousands who were fortunate enough to see the fullest version of Napoleon at the Royal Festival Hall in early December 2004. As noted in 'alternate versions', this may prove to be the last showing until the second half of the Century (when copyright lapses) of what is so far the definitive version of the film.

It was a truly memorable experience. I had not seen 'Napoleon' for several decades, and that was a shorter version with piano accompaniment ~ though still played at the correct speed. This longer version at the correct speed with The London Philharmonic Orchestra and the RFH organ playing in full volume for the climax was a mind-blowing experience. I have not seen Coppola's 'keystone cops' version, but if the trailer on this website is any guide, with Napoleon strutting in Chaplinesque mode, it seems a travesty of what I saw; More 'Homage to Mack Sennett'.

It is clear that these two versions are radically different. It seems grossly unfair to score and review the two main versions in a single poll as if they were the same. The 95 minute difference in running time is longer than many complete films reviewed on this site ~ such as Bronenosets Potyomkin from the same era. There are clearly enough reports/votes to permit the two versions to be scored separately. I suspect the approval rating of the longer version would be significantly higher than for the Coppola version.

It there is ever another opportunity to see this latest version (or even better, an even fuller version) with the Carl Davis score, I shall do my utmost to seize the opportunity.

While I admire the film's ambition and scope, the material just isn't interesting or exciting enough to hold my attention for over 5 hours. The film could have been halved with little impact to the narrative.

The battle scenes could have been more exciting, but for it's time I guess they are still epic.

Also, the way the subject matter is handled leaves the story feeling quite sparse. This is Napoleon after all. Could have done with more detail, but maybe not possible with silent and intertitles.

The final 30mins were incredible. The use of three cameras to create stunning panoramic scenes is very impressive.

Respect to Gance for being a pioneer, but I just wish Kubrick had actually got to make his version.

This is the 1927 silent version restored in 1989 by Kevin Brownlow. Gance himself made two revised versions of his film: Once in 1935 when he shortened it and at the same time added sound; many of the original actors dubbed their voices e.g., Antoine Artaud in a mesmerizing performance. In 1971, he lengthened the film as much as was then possible, retaining much of the 1935 sound. The 1971 film "Bonaparte and the Revolution" ("Bonaparte et sa revolution") is easily one of the ten best films made. The actors' passion overcame problems in continuity and Gance's didactical manner.

I went with high hopes to the restored version the day it opened in 1989. Perhaps if I had not seen/heard the 1971 version I would have found the "new" silent version at least acceptable. Unfortunately, Gance's flaws as a director were made more apparent by the bombastic music added to the 1989 version. The actors appear in this version as silent puppets -- a lot to ask of an audience for over four hours. (The video version, which I have not seen, has apparently had parts dropped -- irony of ironies -- and has been speeded up. See comments elsewhere on this site for more details.)

Many people, as illustrated by comments on this site, are totally unaware of the 1971 version -- which is presumably the version that Gance wished to posterity to see. My memory of Gance's comments opening week in 1989 is that he was sad, but diplomatic, over the results.

My understanding is the the US copyright to the 1971 version was acquired in the course of making the 1989 version and that it has been the copyright holder's policy not to allow Gance"s "competing" version to be shown. So much for the marketplace of ideas. (Again, there is more detail on this elsewhere on the site.)

Consequently, memories of the truly superior 1971 version have already faded and will continue to.

So watch if you wish the 1989 version of the 1927 silent film. Imagine one that is ten times better.

I've never felt compelled to write a review on here before, but have just enjoyed the fairly recently released four part, 5+ hour version of this film painstakingly restored by Kevin Brownlow and wanted to highlight what a revelation this was. As mentioned in a review by Quibble more than 10 years ago, this film has now had 90 years of pain to get where it is now, with different substandard restorations.

I would urge any serious film fan to give this a look, even if they are not keen on silent movies, as I've never seen anything quite like this. From a technical point of view, it is full of features and processes that were years if not decades ahead of their time (handheld camera-work, multiple exposures, split screen, POV camera shots, widescreen etc.). It is the definition of a masterpiece from the director Abel Gance, and the central performance by Albert Dieudonne as Napoleon is captivating and powerful. The musical score by Carl Davis drives the story beautifully.

I hope to one day get the chance to see this performed live as other reviewers have. Fantastic film- making.

I had the privilege of seeing the restored version of this film, to the accompaniment of a live orchestra under the baton of Carmine Coppola, in Los Angeles' un-air-conditioned war memorial. Despite uncomfortable seating and terrible heat, the experience of this four hour movie remains a watershed for anyone who attended. To think that because of the invention of sound, this masterpiece was partially destroyed by Abel Gance in a fit of depression, is heartbreaking. More shocking is that Gance's invention of Cinemascope - of which today only the end of the film retains in its triptych screen effect - was lost to filmgoers until its reinvention years later.

Obviously true art can't be hidden forever, and Gance did live to see Napoleon take its rightful place in cinematic history. Though it is many years later, I can still remember the tears and the ovation when the black screen with the white signature, "Abel Gance", signified the end of the film. A compelling and great work of art.

At the weekend i went to see Napoleon at the Royal Festival Hall in London. I am a relative newcomer to silent moves but too see a 5 and a half hour performance with the London Philarmonic Orchestra was incredible. Loved it, there seems to be some dispute with Coppola about the rights to this production, but if it is ever done again, it is something that any serious movie goer should make an attempt to see. And to prevent others from seeing this with an orchestra would be a travesty. The music by Carl Davies added another dimension to what was a fantastic film. It would appear that the work is a lifes work for Kevin Brownlow, he should be very proud of this acheivements.

Do not waste your time, money, or effort watching the 2024 film. Even the trailer screams "miss me" in spite of Joaquin Phoenix portraying the title character and Ridley Scott directing that obscene mess.

This is Abel Gance's masterpiece of history telling and film editing. It shows nothing lacking historical evidence or educational value, unlike the 2024 film, which obviously seeks to gain the "most paused moment" prize. Those moments are not the battle scenes.

Watch this silent film and learn some real history lessons about the French Emperor AND film editing, since the three-screen triptych ending predated Cinerama by almost 30 years.

This film needed nothing obscene and depicted battles in the 1700s very accurately.

This is an experience. One would be hard-pressed to think of a film more ambitious than Abel Gance's "Napoléon." I would love to see it on a big theatrical screen, or rather three screens in the case of the triptych climax, an early wide-and-split-screen effect Gance later dubbed "Polyvision," and with a grand orchestral score such as the one composed by Carl Davis, to be fully immersed in the historical spectacle full of extras. Yet, "Napoléon" was even too large, too daring, too cinematic for cinema--an inimitable vision of its artistic potential that dissolved against its commodified wake. It arrived around the time that the industry was transforming to the revolution of synchronized sound, nullifying Gance's and that of fellow filmmakers, especially fellow Impressionist ones, dream of cinema as a universal language. "Napoléon" was too singularly monumental to be as likewise revolutionary as the simplicity and repeatability of the image of Al Jolson's lips moving being matched to hearing him quip in "The Jazz Singer" (1927), "You ain't heard nothin' yet." By contrast, you've never seen anything like this, nor will you again.

I finally saw the BFI home video of Kevin Brownlow's five-and-a-half-hours restoration, having seen the sped-up, four-hours "Coppola" version of Brownlow's work on VHS years ago. As daunting as those runtimes seem, one shouldn't feel obliged to complete the picture in one sitting. Indeed, the four-disc BFI set includes two intermissions, and Gance didn't originally intend one to do so. This was but the first entry of a planned six-part historical reenactment, and alone it was imagined to be distributed in serial installments. Gance, however, struggled to get even this first part financed, and the failure to distribute it in any coherent manner doomed hopes for the subsequent five films. If Stanley Kubrick's ill-fated plans to make a Napoleon picture is "the greatest movie never made," then Gance's may be the greatest one to always remain incomplete.

Perhaps, no other cinematic masterpiece has so oft been mutilated and transformed throughout the years. Wikipedia lists 30 different screened versions, and it was reported, although I'm unsure of the state now of the project, that Netflix is financing another by the Cinémathèque Française, to restore the "Opera" (a little over four hours) and "Apollo" (over nine hours) cuts, so-called for the two venues where "Napoléon" first premiered, the former with the triptych climax and the latter not.

There are so many spectacular scenes throughout, I'll just list some of the highlights before examining the whole.

* The opening snowball fight. Besides beginning the heavy foreshadowing of what schoolboy Napoleon will grow up to be, the sequence establishes the paroxysms central to the picture's exuberance and lyricism, full of panoramic and subjective camerawork--symbolic superimpositions, translucent camera masking, whip pans, shots achieved via mirrors, flowing tracking shots and shaky handheld camerawork, to the point that it's as though the camera becomes a snowball to be tossed around--and rapid montage that folds the space and time of the various angles together until they overlap, including shots lasting only a single frame.

* A subsequent pillow fight. The symbolic connection between Napoleon and the eagle are established by another exhilarating sequence between quarrelling boys, with more dolly and proto-steadicam movements, frantic cutting, and a nine-shots-in-one composition.

* Napoleon's window to the violent turn of the Revolution as Plato's Cave. The film moves and cuts back and forth between the hanging and an ironic view of "The Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen" hanging on Napoleon's wall and scenes outside, including Danton's vivid speechifying of the Revolution as a furnace or forge, becomes a play of light upon Bonaparte's cave.

* Corsican chase on horseback, including the camera being on horseback.

* The Double Tempest, of the sirocco one for Napoleon's escape from Corsica with the French flag as his sail, intercut with the metaphorical storm (reportedly a visualization of a Victor Hugo quotation) of the Convention initiating the Reign of Terror. Rollicking camerawork, including the apparatus swinging back and forth as a pendulum over the crowd, and rapid juxtapositions make it appear that the Convention is the more likely to be tipped over into the depths of the sea. Crosscutting, silhouettes, night tinting and superimposed guillotines abound.

* The nighttime, rain-soaked, mud-engulfed Siege of Toulon, with inserted flashbacks to the snowball fight, occasional bouncing and musical camerawork, shots of outstretched hands of soldiers engulfed in the murky ground, and culminating in heroic imagery of Napoleon sleeping, high on a mound, surrounded by flags, the sun rising in the background and the eagle flying down to perch above him.

* The Victims' Ball. There's a rapid flashback of prior scenes of Josephine in Napoleon's mind, and tinted in striking purple, the camera becomes a participant in the frivolity on the dance floor, including glimpses of exposed breasts and legs, which are crosscut with Napoleon settling a love triangle over chess and subsequently lustily gazing upon Josephine.

* Napoleon's double weddings reflect the themes of The Victim's Ball. There's another love triangle, with his marriage to Josephine and the pining from afar for him by Violine. The purple tinting of the wedding night further connects the color with sex, just as blue tints are with night, or red with war. Ultimately, the love triangle is somewhat resolved by proto-horror-film camerawork from the perspective of a figure behind Violine, which turns out to be Josephine, and the two of them share in idolatrous worship of Bonaparte as he sets off for his Italian campaign.

* The triptych finale. If this three-camera, three-screen widescreen effect weren't so spectacular, it would be rather anticlimactic to watch the lengthy film end in soldier formations and marching. But merely watching figures on horseback entering and exiting between the three simultaneous shots is impressive enough for the grand vistas, and three screens only adds to the rapidity and totality of the panoramic montage otherwise. The apotheosis has Napoleon at his highest vantage point in the mountains, as Josephine and conquest imagery return, along with the eagle and, finally, tinting of shots of soldiers marching in the tri-colors of the French flag, the aptly-titled "Strange Conductor in the Sky" from Davis's score playing the film out.

These bullet points aren't even to mention the many smaller snippets of beauty throughout, such as the many musical narrative moments that underscore the picture's visual symphony, and even a glimpse of a mirror shot at the ball, silhouettes here or shadows there, soft-focus imagery especially prominent in the courtship of Josephine, or the reflexivity of doubles, actors-playing-actors and reference to an optical telegraph would be worth remarking on. The most significant flaw, which I find minor and that regardless plays to the picture's variegated nature, is too many titles cards purporting "(Historical)" in ahistorical, Griffith-esque fashion.

Yet, to dismiss Gance's "Napoléon" as hagiography, or even "fascist" as some have, is rather both an understatement and misses the point. This Napoleon is largely revered as a messianic figure; indeed, he becomes the subject of idolatrous veneration for the two women who worship him. This isn't so much religious, though, or nationalism as religion, or even a godly portrait of Napoleon, as it is about constructing a "Cathedral of Light," as Gance said--a cinematic cathedral. A picture to absorb those of the pews in rapture. Little wonder, then, that Gance is oft associated with--perhaps even more so than with fellow French Impressionists--the two great propagandists of the silent film image and its juxtaposition, D. W. Griffith and Sergei Eisenstein. This is powerful and dangerous art.

To articulate coherence to the film, one may look no further than its character of Napoleon, as wonderfully portrayed by Albert Dieudonné. That the totality of the picture concerns seeing from different perspectives and in different ways, exploring "the music of light," as Gance said, and the rhythm of cinematic space and time. Note, then, the brilliance of its narrative sight analogy. The main motif is Napoleon's eagle. By the end, a title card refers to "His eagle eye," as he surveys the Italian campaign atop the mountains. Earlier, he imagines an empty Convention to be filled with superimposed ghosts approving of his assumption of the Revolution. This also makes sense of the gobs of eye shadow sported by Dieudonné, the flickering light upon his eyes in one scene, or that he largely appears to merely stand in observance at the battles he orchestrates or the Revolution he becomes. This is the Revolutionary tactician who sees all the angles, except, perhaps, when it comes to love, as indicated by the blindfolded scene with Josephine, for which her conflation with Napoleon's warmongering may indicate the direction Gance was going with his planned series. Or, perhaps, that an all-seeing cinematic language was always impossible, always to be outstripped by its ambition, appearing in many forms, but always incomplete.

Note, too, the contrast with the squinted eyes and blinding sunglasses of the leader of the Reign of Terror, Robespierre, or the generals under Napoleon's command before the finale who initially turn their backs to him, obscuring their views. It's his "piercing eyes," as one of them admits, that frighten them--and everyone else throughout the picture--into submission. Of course, the cinematic masterpiece of French Impressionism, one of the crowning achievements of silent cinema, and thus of film history, is primarily focused on the cinematic gaze.

A film about the French Field Marshal's youth and early military career.

"Napoleon" is widely considered to be one of the greatest and most innovative films of the silent era, and it is easy to see why. There are a variety of ways the camera is used, and just the very fact it is so long... the version I saw ran four hours, and I hear there are versions that go more than six. That seems almost unthinkable in the silent era, when so many movies were an hour or less.

With so many versions out there, I have no idea how to tell which is the best. Even with the newer Kevin Brownlow versions, he has put together something like five different cuts at different speeds. What is now considered the definitive version?

I feel fortunate that tickets were available at the last minute and I was able to see the Kevin Brownlaw 5 1/2 hr restoration of Abel Gance's "Napoleon". The hype after the first weekend's performances made it irresistible. The film was accompanied by the Carl Davis score, conducted live by Mr. Davis, and played flawlessly, by the Oakland East Bay Symphony, at the beautiful Paramount Theater in Oakland, California. (Eat your hearts out Manhattan and Hollywood.) It felt a special occasion and the audience was primed for the event.

I've wanted to see "Napoleon" for a very long time and somehow as I've gravitated toward DVD I hoped that I could watch it at home. Wait, wait, wait and nothing. Luckily, the DVD option never happened.

When I heard that the San Francisco Silent Film Festival intended to show the Brownlaw restoration over two weekends in Oakland. I never thought that a regular film buff, like myself, would be able to get tickets. Fortunately I was able to do so.

I traveled to Oakland, arrived an hour early for what was, in itself, with intermissions and a dinner break, an eight hour commitment. I've attended films with similar demands ("Our Hitler" comes to mind) and I only hoped it would be worth the commitment.

At the dinner break, about half way through the film, while I was impressed with the production values and the seemingly modern shooting style what most impressed me was the live symphonic accompaniment. But, based on my own expectations, I was a bit disappointed in the film itself. But that feeling was soon dissipated by the beauty and the power of the last half of the film. The cinematography seemed even more modern (lots of hand-held shots and special effects), plus the frankness of the sexuality, the humor, the romanticism, and beautifully paced scenes of great sensitivity.

By the time of the "Three Screens," wonderment, (Gance called it "Polyvision") I'd been won over, completely by this Masterpiece. There is no way to describe what Gance was able to produce. It must be witnessed first hand. One can only hope that somehow it will receive further exposure to those who love the greatest art form, Cinema. I'd see it again in a heartbeat.

the story of french revolution and about legendary Napoleon Bonaparte. Abel Gance was talented no doubt.Gance was without a doubt the greatest silent movie director and this movie is absolute masterpiece one of the greatest movies of all time.this film has made a movie history.and Albert Dieudonne is one of the very best french actors ever.almost perfect movie,but it's was too long 3 hours and 50 minutes. my aunt husband is french so i haven't nothing to against french. Napoleon Bonaparte the most legendary french of all time without a doubt - ardent patriot and boldfaced who won a several highly important battles.In this movie battle scenes were brilliant. Gance was the master of battle scenes.this movie is 80 years old but it's looks like 50 or 40 years old.it's the most grandiose silent movie with Metropolis(1927)and The Gold Rush(1925)but it's have more power and burning energy.Albert Dieudonne was the best choice have to play Napoleon Bonaparte like Bela Lugosi who was the greatest choice to play Count Dracula.the ocean storm scene was great too.It's was a truly memorable movie.it's definitely worth seeing it's timeless film.i guess that current France president Sarkozy likes this movie too like me.it's a visually impressive good movie too.a masterpiece of visual of art.it may be a little bit propaganda movie,but it's one of the 25 best movies ever and without a doubt the greatest french silent what ever produced and one top 3 french movies ever.Napoléon is my favorite warrior.if you want an epic watch this highly recommended by me.a fan of Napoléon Bonaparte i give it perfectly 10/10

I am a movie fan. I like several silent movies and wanted to watch 'Napoleon' for a long time. It's great to look at and the performances are fine but it's boring, in fact it's VERY boring.

I think many will award this nine or ten stars simply because they think they have to but it has a run time of five and a half hours and boy does it feel like it. There are of course touches of brilliance but absolutely NO movie should last this long. To think that Abel Gance wanted to make another five of these is beyond belief.

The start of the movie is terrific when Napoleon is shown to be a loner and disliked at school. It promised so much but this movie really does become an absolute chore despite it's reputation.

I'm the first French user to write about the best French movie of the silent era.Even a poster from Slovenia wrote about it (he or she had a French relative).But no French .

Part of the reason can be found in the fact that it has become almost impossible for the French to see Gance's work in its native land;my copy is the Coppola version,with English subtitles ,which is a bit amazing all the same.Believe it or not,it is never screened on French TV:about ten years ago ,it showed a digest "Napoleon et LA revolution" which essentially consisted of extracts of roughly part one;it's not available on DVD ,it has not been shown in movie theaters for years ;a lot of people know the existence of this film,few have seen a decent version,and less have seen the original version ,with Gance's dialogs - a work always loses something when translated in another language-

The Coppola version is quite satisfying ,Carmine Coppola's music really enhances the phenomenal pictures and displays a good knowledge of the French culture:the original music often segues into French hymns (of course "La Marseillaise" which was written in 1792,but also 'Le Chant du Départ " as well as English anthems ("God save the king" and "rule Britannia" );revolutionary songs ("Ah ca Ira " -"Chanson des Sans -Culottes" - "La Carmagnole " ) are also present.Coppola sr also included French folk songs such as "Malborough S'En Va t En Guerre" or the obscure "La Chanson du Carillonneur" which is heard during the siege of Toulon .This "drummer song" which I sang at school (and never heard of afterwards)has several versions,one of them is about the appalling army of king Louis (I cannot tell which one" whose soldiers would bravely serve if he paid them well;that's really a smart idea to have included it in the soundtrack.On the other hand "Auprès de Ma Blonde" ,which Gance had selected to enhance the final on the "Triple Ecran" in Italy did not make the Coppola score.

Technically,it's stating the obvious to write that Gance was very advanced ,using his camera in a way most (and in France all of them) did not start using before the talkies when they did.Most of basic filming precepts came into as being innovations on particular Gance techniques .He had begun experimentation long before 1927:the scene when Danton's,Robespierre 's and Saint-Just 's ghosts come back to "inspire " the hero to help lead the French on their way to freedom (which was a naive idea if you know -and of course you do-what Bonaparte will become later)directly comes from the wake of the dead from "J'Accuse" (1917).To think that this director used the split screen (scenes in the snow) and the triple screen (Italy).Nonetheless,the most impressive moment is the hero alone on his boat tossed by the raging sea ,while l'Assemblée is caught in the whirlwind too;a scene which was borrowed from Victor Hugo's "Quatre Vingt Treize " (93)

"Napoleon" cast a giant shadow on the rest of Gance's work ;his two other silent major oeuvres "La Roue" and "j'Accuse" are still highly thought of,but it is considered polite to ignore most of his talkies.And he never stopped trying ;his first talkie was a sci fi movie ("La Fin du Monde" 1930) whereas almost all his colleagues stayed in the filmed stage production style.He continued his experiments with "Un Grand Amour de Beethoven" where he invented the "subjective" sound .He often partially failed for lack of means : for his remake of "J'Accuse " (1938) he had to use shots of "La Fin du Monde" .But until the very end he never produced anything mediocre:his last work "Cyrano and D'Artagnan" was in verse.

If someone tells you there was nothing interesting in the FRench cinema before Bresson or- yuk !-Godard ,set him down with a DVD player for a screening of "Napoleon".It will blow his mind.

About the actors

Albert Dieudonné would play Napoleon again in Roger Richebé's fine comedy "Madame Sans -Gene" (1941)

Gance told the young Suzanne Charpentier who played Violine (Toulon segment) she made him think of Poe's "Annabelle Lee" ;and she became Annabella .She would marry Tyrone Power.

I saw this film in Los Angeles sometime in the 80's. I remember not being that thrilled to go see such a long "silent" film, but agreed to go because a friend of mine was playing in the live orchestra accompaniment and I wanted to be supportive. I was, to say the least, completely blown away. To this day, it remains the best film I have ever seen. Nothing compares with it. There were 3 screens with a mixture of film action, photographs and, of course, the live orchestra and, despite the length, it was utterly phenomenal. Until reading some of the comments here, I was unaware there was a controversy about the length, quality and musical score. In fact, in the years since I've seen this film, when discussions about movie favorites come up, I've always said this was my favorite film. Not once have I ever come across another person who's even heard of it, let alone seen it. Perhaps I need a higher brow version of friends and acquaintances...smile. On reflection, I would assume the version I saw must have been Coppola's. If this lesser restoration could blow me away, it would be a privilege and honor to see the more complete restoration. If it ever comes my way, believe me, I'll be first in line to see it. Should this epic travel in your direction, don't miss it. It is truly one of the finest films ever.