Argo Dutta

A plot that deserved a 90-minute film at max, got an 8-hour long drag in the form of series. It was so boring in the end, you just desperately wanted it to finish. The plot twist or whatever that was could be guessed even by a 5- year old.

Excellent historical docu-drama. The actings of all the major cast are top class. The best part is that the film doesn't try to impose any ideology on the audience, nor does it try to run any propaganda, but it captures the varied viewpoints of the judges unfiltered and leaves it to audience interpretation. This is a must watch for any serious audience interested in second world war and modern day history.

A lame attempt at the Tarantino genre which only he can handle.

The plot is okayish, they tried to create a lot of twists and turns but overall it lacked solid storyline. However the capstone of the series is the acting. Both Konkona and Manoj are amazing, especially Konkona. The subtle nuances of expression, the depth she brought in the character and the effortless humour she creates in the scenes are the essential elements for which you could watch this 7 hours ++ storyline. Overall, 3 stars.

Sometimes reviewing a historical film gets difficult. Mainly because you dont know from which perspective you should review it. If the priority is on the historical accuracy and other associated technical detailings like costumes, language, cinematography, sets etc then Napoleon is definitely a masterpiece. Whereas if it is about having a strong core message from the current generation's perspective and most importantly for me- having a "soul" in its story, then Napoleon is lacking in many areas. Joaquin Phienix tried hard, but fell short of his Joker feat. Perhaps even he was searching for the soul in the script to connect himself better with the most enigmatic character in modern history. Eventually, the story lacks to interpret a multi layered character like Napoleon. What was he? An arrogant dictator? A mass murderer and invader? Or a pawn of the political circumstances and a patriot who was heavily misunderstood? The Movie fails to answer or even attempts to seek answer to any of these questions. It shows the total fatalities of Napoleon's war efforts in the end as an information, making us feel that it wants to convey the evils of war, however, throughout the movie what it did was just to justify one war after another. And funnily, each one of them conveniently ignoring the complexities that the character of Napoleon might have gone through while taking a call; he neither looks like a power hungry dictator nor a motherland loving patriot, but a confused soul who writes his day to day military achievements to his otherwise lukewarmly related wife. In the end, you get a great cinematographic delight, leaving the cinema hall wondering what exactly was missing in the magnum opus. 6/10. One time watch. Recommend some pre-watch reading of The French Revolution and its background.

It is a good movie and a tad too long. Very well researched and informative but stretched at times. Great acting all around but misses some crucial psychological, emotional and philosophical connects that I was expecting from a movie of such scale. It is more like a docu-drama than a blockbuster. Defo recommended but don't expect to watch the " greatest movie of the century" and all.

A hidden gem. Awesome movie with great plot twists. Must watch.

One of the weakest from Hitch, along with Marnie. I don't know what happened to the great man between 1964( Marnie) to 1969(Topaz). He simply lost the plot. Torn Curtain moves at a snail's pace for the first one and half hours or so. It gets a bit interesting towards the end- especially the escape scene on the bus, the Polish lady and her sponsorship hunt, and the theatre scene are good on a standalone basis. The acting is dull. Newman and Amdrews share no chemistry whatsoever- one of the poorest castings in a Hitch movie, again, along with Marnie.