Spielberg developing Kubrick's Napoleon

[Holdfast]

More Details

Anyone else interested in this?

I'm fond of Napoleonic history generally, so this project has piqued my interest. It's interesting that he's going for a TV miniseries approach rather than a movie. I think that's a great choice, as the story is sprawling and naturally episodic anyway.

I'd love to see battles like Jena, Austerlitz and Waterloo done well. The series sounds very focused on Napoleon himself, so I suppose we won't see much of the Penisular War after the initial phases. Shame, because there are some great stories there too.

The personal stories & rivalries are also potentially compelling. I don't know anything about the original Kubrick project, but it would be great to see Spielberg develop this series in a way similar to some other recent fictionalised historical dramas like Rome, The Tudors, etc, etc.

[Owain Taggart]

Very intriguing. I like the Napoleonic era as well, so I look forward to seeing this. Thanks for the heads up

[Gaith]

Indeed. Though I'm a bit concerned the cast would go with English accents. In nearly any other context, from ancient Rome (Rome) to WW2 Germany (most of the cast of Valkyrie), I'm totally cool with the English accent = historical speech trope, but with the French... I dunno. Interesting to see how that plays out.

[CorporalCaptain]

If I find that Kubrick's script has been heavily adapted, I'm going to have very little interest in seeing this. While I understand that some changes might be necessary, the fewer changes, the better. With Kubrick's name attached, as something to draw me in as a viewer, I naturally want to witness as much Kubrick as possible.

By the way, I wasn't really pleased with A.I., and I have zero interest in ever watching that again.

[DalekJim]

I'm a big Kubrick devotee, Barry Lyndon is possibly the most beautiful film I've ever seen.

Even I consider AI to be a great film. A lot of the stuff people bitched out Spielberg for is stuff Kubrick wanted in the movie.

[Harvey]

Without Kubrick in the director's chair, and with the changes that will inevitably happen transforming it from a motion picture to a television miniseries, I'm not sure the final product will have much of anything to do with deceased filmmaker. But, I suppose it makes for a great marketing edge.

Who knows how it will turn out, though. Spielberg has produced excellent miniseries in the past, so it's possible this could be equally good.

[Holdfast]

CorporalCaptain wrote:

---

If I find that Kubrick's script has been heavily adapted, I'm going to have very little interest in seeing this. While I understand that some changes might be necessary, the fewer changes, the better. With Kubrick's name attached, as something to draw me in as a viewer, I naturally want to witness as much Kubrick as possible...

Harvey wrote:

---

Without Kubrick in the director's chair, and with the changes that will inevitably happen transforming it from a motion picture to a television miniseries, I'm not sure the final product will have much of anything to do with deceased filmmaker...

Not knowing anything about the original Kubrick project myself, I looked it up and came across this quote on its wikipedia (so usual reliability caveats apply) page:

During interviews with Michael Ciment, Kubrick said he still intended to do the film some day. He also explained that his screenplay adopted a chronological approach to his life:

"Napoleon himself once remarked what a great novel his life would be. I'm sure he would have said "movie" if he had known about them. His entire life is the story, and it works perfectly well in the order it happened. It would also be nice to do it as a twenty hour TV series, but there is, as yet, not enough money available in TV to properly budget such a venture."

I'm sure Spielberg has access to adequate funds!

I also came across this book on Amazon, should any hard-core Kubrick devotees be interested.

I'm potentially interested in the series more from a Napoleon angle than a Kubrick one. But it seems like there may be a bit more of Kubrick in the TV series than I'd have originally guessed.

[Lt. Cheka Wey]

We have our fair share of movies about the crazy corsican. If the screenplay is by Kubrick i say there is no reason to reanimate the project. Nobody could make it as great as Kubrick and he is dead.

[Caligula]

Intrigued as I am that Spielberg wants to resurrect this long thought to be dead project of Kubrick's, there is a certain sadness that comes with the fact that it won't be a Kubrick film. I would have loved to see what this movie would have looked like with all of Kubrick's recognizable cinematography tricks.

[publiusr]

I wish Spielberg would do a series on Soviet Chief Designers like Korolev and Glushko.

To steal a suggestion, it could be called RED GIANTS

[Emh]

I know very little about Napoleonic era, but as a huge fan of Kubrick and Spielberg and think A.I. Artificial Intelligence was a roaring success, I'm very interested in this.

I still lament Kubrick not being able to produce The Arayan Papers, but I understand why he didn't (because he found out Spielberg was working on Schindler's List). I know Spielberg will never want to do it because how emotionally draining Schindler's List was, but I would be interested to see some other director (perhaps Christopher Nolan, who reminds me a lot of Kubrick) will take it on some day.

[Relayer1]

Having been a fan of Duel, Jaws, Jurassic Park and the Indiana Jones films it was a surprise to me when I sat down and looked at the rest of his output and realised that I really don't like any of them. I'd only really registered the dire E.T. and the extremely overrated Close Encounters, but there is not much else that I even find watchable.

I don't expect Napoleon to change that...

[Lt. Cheka Wey]

Relayer1 wrote:

---

Having been a fan of Duel, Jaws,

I read Duel of the Jews. I am really tired. LOL.

[mos6507]

CorporalCaptain wrote:

---

By the way, I wasn't really pleased with A.I., and I have zero interest in ever watching that again.

Only recently have I really "gotten" the last act of A.I., and hence explains the entire picture. And it really made me appreciate it a lot more.

Most people complained that the last act was tacked on by Spielberg in order to transform a sad story into a happy ending. But it really isn't a happy ending at all when you think about it. The whole movie really is a tragedy, not a fairy-tale. It's deeper than people realize.

[Holdfast]

Relayer1 wrote:

---

Having been a fan of Duel, Jaws, Jurassic Park and the Indiana Jones films it was a surprise to me when I sat down and looked at the rest of his output and realised that I really don't like any of them. I'd only really registered the dire E.T. and the extremely overrated Close Encounters, but there is not much else that I even find watchable.

I don't expect Napoleon to change that...

I don't find ET or Close Encounters particularly interesting either, but do like the other ones you do, so I wonder what you thought of Minority Report & Empire of the Sun?

I enjoy those two quite a bit.