Like just about every other Ridley Scott movie, 'Napoleon' is getting a director's cut

Posted:
in iPod + iTunes + AppleTV

The Ridley Scott epic "Napoleon: The Director's Cut" is now available to stream on Apple TV+, with the online version 48 minutes longer than the theatrical release.

Horsemen in Napoleonic uniforms charge with swords raised, carrying French flags, across a grassy plain.
Napoleon [Apple TV+]



The epic historical drama "Napoleon" achieved a theatrical release in 2023, but at the time, director and co-producer Ridley Scott wanted to release a longer version. Now we know how long the Apple TV+ edition is.

Written by David Scarpa, "Napoleon" told the story of the titular historical figure, his rise to power, and his relationship with Josephine. Starring Joaquin Phoenix and Vanessa Kirby, the film ran for 157 minutes, or two hours and 37 minutes, in theaters.

The teaser video, published to YouTube on Thursday, says there are another 48 minutes of new footage included in the new release. That brings the new film's length up to 3 hours and 25 minutes.



This is still shy of what Scott wanted to previously release. In August 2023, he said that there was a "fantastic" version lasting 270 minutes, or just under four and a half hours, while in October he managed to get to four hours and 10 minutes.

"Napoleon: The Director's Cut" is available to stream now via Apple TV+, along with the shorter theatrical release.

This is far from Scott's only director's cut, as he has made many adaptations of films he previously directed, often lengthening what moviegoers had previously watched.

"Kingdom of Heaven" included almost an extra hour of footage in the director's cut, with "The Martian" gaining another ten minutes, and "Black Hawk Down" securing another eight. Bigger releases also had the same treatment, with "Gladiator" adding 15 minutes to the epic, but the 2003 version of 1979's "Alien" had a rare deduction of one minute.

"Blade Runner" had two director's cuts, with the initial 1992 cut changing the tone of the film and cutting the runtime by one minute. A "Final Cut" in 2007, considered the proper release due to Scott having full creative control, brought back that lost minute.



Read on AppleInsider

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 8
    iadlibiadlib Posts: 116member
    Just release the director's cut in the first place... after all... he is the director
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 2 of 8
    mpantonempantone Posts: 2,222member
    iadlib said:
    Just release the director's cut in the first place... after all... he is the director
    Hollywood studio executives are understandably allergic to films with really long running times. Remember that the "perfect running length" varies by person. The problem is when too many reviewers say a movie is "too long" or "too slow paced" which will dampen ticket sales.

    Ridley Scott knows this. He is well aware going into these projects that there will be a theatrical release that is shorter than his own ideal version. It's not like Napoleon is his first film. Remember that the first people he needs to gain acceptance from are studio execs, not AppleInsider forum contributors.

    And when Scott releases a new film we (well at least those who aren't naive) can expect a longer "director's cut" in the future. Hell, he probably scripts these films knowing that some scenes aren't going to make the theatrical cut but are important to the longer version. It's not like he goes back to reshoot additional footage six months later.

    And he's definitely not the sole practitioner of this. There are Michelin star chefs that offer tasting menus will differing numbers of courses. Taylor Swift has done this with great success, releasing different versions on an album with additional content. Her most recent The Tortured Poets Department has been released in a different forms including the Anthology edition which includes an entire second album.
    edited August 29 watto_cobraAlex_V
  • Reply 3 of 8
    48 more minutes of that god awful borefest.  Time to stick Ridders in the retirement home.
  • Reply 4 of 8
    anonymouseanonymouse Posts: 6,962member
    48 more minutes of that god awful borefest.  Time to stick Ridders in the retirement home.
    Yeah, it was barely watchable at its original length. I don't think I could have borne another 48 minutes, I definitely won't be finding out.
  • Reply 5 of 8
    robin huberrobin huber Posts: 4,024member
    Beautiful and forgettable. 
  • Reply 6 of 8
    Show me the 2 hour director’s cut of the 1984 Super Bowl and I’ll be interested. 😉
  • Reply 7 of 8
    tundraboytundraboy Posts: 1,909member
    It's a garbage movie that pretends to be historically accurate.  What a waste of my time.  Napoleon was charismatic and decisive, he would not have gone far if he was the mumbling, bumbling, socially inept clod portrayed in the film.  I kept watching it just to find out how bad it can get.   The answer was far worse than I could imagine.
    edited September 1
  • Reply 8 of 8
    The fact that the original release of the movie completely ignored his Italian campaign is just completely unforgivable, his campaign in Italy is where he got his reputation from for crying out loud!
Sign In or Register to comment.