NAPOLEON – Stanley Kubrick’s Unmade Masterpiece

Introduction

When thinking about what Stanley Kubrick’s unrealized and unmade Napoleon might have been like, one thinks about how his incredible use of natural lighting (Barry Lyndon) and one-point perspective (The Shining, 2001: A Space Odyssey) would have been when inevitably applied to the project. What might the music and cinematography have been like? Unfortunately, we’ll never know. For over five decades, Hollywood has been trying to get the epic story of the rise and fall of Napolean Bonaparte on the big screen.

In 2023, that vision was finally realized when Ridley Scott’s Napolean (2023) had its world premiere at the Salle Pleyel concert hall in Paris. Starring Joaquin Phoenix and Vanessa Kirby (as Empress Josephine), the $200 million epic historical drama was released to mixed reviews and was a box-office flop domestically and internationally. The jury is still out and how much of a return it will make in On-Demand in terms and new Apple TV+ subscriptions.

Putting all of that aside, we thought that we would revisit one of the great ‘what could have been’ films of all time (along with Jodorowsky’s Dune, which we talked about here), Stanley Kubrick’s Napolean, which would have been his followup to the critical and commercial science-fiction classic, 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968). Like all of the director’s projects, he dove head first into the project, obsessing over every last detail, only to see it all fall apart when Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer pulled the plug on the project.

Backstory

There is quite a mountain of information available online on Kubrick’s abandoned Napoleon project. This includes a 148-page screenplay that is linked at the end of this article. The breadth and scope of resources and time that the director had spent on it was staggering. He had also spent hundreds of thousands of dollars of MGM’s money trying to bring his vision to life.

After the release of 2001: A Space Odyssey Kubrick wanted to change gears a bit. This is in part due to some critics calling the director’s latest work too confusing and too ‘high concept’ for the public at large to fully grasp. Kubrick referred to these critics as:

“dogmatically atheistic and materialistic and earthbound.”

To get his mind focused he immediately began two years of intense research on what he envisioned being an epic historical drama about the French emperor Napoleon Bonaparte. The working title for the film was Napoleon and Kubrick, as per usual, had dozens of assistants and specialists to help him with this ambitious project.

Pre-Production

Concept art by Warner Brothers for Napoleon had even been produced for the upcoming project. However, Kubrick would later switch studios, bringing his latest project to Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer. This was because Warner Brothers had refused to put up the financing that was needed for this ambitious period-piece production.

Kubrick’s brother-in-law and assistant Jan Harlan had stated that the film would follow Napoleon from his birth in Corsica in 1769, to his death on the remote island of Saint Helena in 1821. Harlan also further elaborated that the film’s emphasis would be on field battles. Kubrick had often been heard referring to these battles as “vast lethal ballets.”

In addition, the other main focus and narrative for Kubrick’s Napoleon would be Bonaparte’s legendary love and obsession for Josephine de Beauharnais. The former prisoner during Napolean’s ‘Reign of Terror’ was married to Napolean from 1804 until 1810. Harlan went on to refer to this love affair as “one of the great obsessional passions of all time.”

The Cast

For Napoleon, Stanley Kubrick had lined up British actor David Hemmings (Deep Red, Gladiator) to play the title role. The actor was still red hot off the wildly successful 1966 Antonioni classic Blowup. Kubrick’s legendary attention to detail was in overdrive for the project. Harlan, now eighty-six, would later state:

“I was in Zurich in 1968 and 1969, looking for relevant material, books and drawings, simply everything I could find on the period from the French Revolution until The Congress of Vienna in 1815. Other people traveled for weeks through Germany, France and the UK on the same mission. He loved research and study. Pre-production and editing were his joy – filming itself a necessity.”

Kubrick had also desperately pursued Oscar-winning actress Audrey Hepburn (Breakfast at Tiffany’s) to play the role of Empress Josephine. However, the iconic actress had turned the director down. As to why, it’s never been formally determined. However, Hepburn did state in a pleasant letter written to Kubrick:

“I still don’t want to work for a while so cannot commit or involve myself in any project at this time.”

For some context, at this time in 1968, Hepburn was in the middle of divorce proceedings with actor Mel Ferrer. That may have had something to do with it. It’s more likely that if Hepburn had read the script, she would have seen that there was a sexually charged relationship between the two main characters. It’s more likely that this is the reason she declined the part.

Supporting Roles

Kubrick was also said to have been pursuing actors Peter O’Toole, Alec Guinness, Jean-Paul Belmondo, as well as Charlotte Rampling for supporting roles. There are also strong rumors that the director wanted to cast a young Jack Nicholson to play the title role as an alternative to Hemmings. This rumor, however, is hard to verify. The two would collaborate just over ten years later, to create one of the greatest horror films of all time. 

The Budget

In 1967, Kubrick was red hot and had back-to-back critical and commercial hits with Lolita (1962) and Dr. Strangelove (1964) Also, 2001: A Space Odyssey was about to be released. The proposed budget for Napoleon was reportedly $5.2 million, equal to about $34 million, adjusted for inflation. When you look at the amount of production that was to go into this movie, you can see that the budget would have been much much higher. 

It was the mounting costs of Kubrick’s ambitious project that might have been part of its downfall. The director sunk $420,000 into Napoleon in the form of costumes, as well as location scouting in Italy, France, and Romania. He also allocated funds towards securing the rights to borrow the Romanian army to stage elaborate battle scenes. Kubrick even camera-tested dozens of European military uniforms.

Downfall

Sadly, Metro-Goldwyn-Meyer, the studio that had just recently financed Kubrick’s masterwork, 2001: A Space Odyssey, started to have doubts concerning his latest project. Much like Hitchcock’s never-realized The Blind Man (which we wrote about here), things rapidly deteriorated. Harlan would later state that:

“Stanley only had a pre-production agreement in place with MGM…an agreement to make a plan, schedule and budget. These elements were delivered, but MGM did not proceed to the next stage.”

It seems that Kubrick’s timing was extremely unlucky in his Napoleon project. MGM had just recently changed ownership and its new owners were wary of putting up financing for monumental historical dramas. Especially those with 50,000 military extras. Dino De Laurentis’s own epic Napoleon movie Waterloo (1970) had been a huge disappointment. This resulted in the studio having no motivation or reason to continue to move forward with Kubrick’s project.

It’s tragic to think what Napoleon could have been had it come to fruition. It would have combined the massive battlefield scenes of Spartacus with the slow-paced sexually charged energy of Barry Lyndon. Harlan believed that it would have been the perfect project for his late brother-in-law; stating it would combine:

“Self-destructive actions by intelligent people, the poison of jealousy and revenge, the ways that brilliance, success and power can go hand in hand with egocentricity, vanity and the abuse of such power…these were the themes that always interested him. Just think of Lolita, Paths of Glory and Dr Strangelove.”

Conclusion

While Kubrick’s ambition and breadth of scope for Napoleon caused this never made the film to die on the vine, it didn’t slow Kubrick down. The 18th and early 19th century influences would never fully leave Stanley Kubrick.

In 1975, Kubrick would make one of his most controversial movies. The widely discussed and visually stunning Barry Lyndon. This was an adaptation of an 1844 novel by William Makepeace Thackery about the travails of an Irish rogue. The movie would take place during the times and wars that predated Napoleon’s rise from the 1750s, until its epilogue, set in 1789.

After the Napoleon fiasco, Stanley Kubrick would go on to make A Clockwork Orange (1971), Barry Lyndon (1975), The Shining (1980), Full Metal Jacket (1987), and Eyes Wide Shut (1999), an incredible run by one of the preeminent masters of cinema.

As promised, here is the link for the unmade screenplay of Napoleon:

If You Enjoyed This Article We Recommend:

Scholars’ Spotlight: Steve McQueen (Click Here)

The French Connection: 50 Years Later (Click Here)