Napoleon is certainly a complicated figure and his raw ambition caused death and misery for millions. I don't think he carried out any genocides though, did he? I see an accusation of genocide online ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napoleon%27s_Crimes ), but it doesn't sound very credible.
Complicated doesn't begin to describe him! I think that, by our modern standards, I would be very unhappy to be a citizen of Napoleon's empire.
However, considering the available governments in Europe at the tail end of the 18th century, I think a time-traveller such as myself would be more interested in spending a few years in France than any of her neighbours. I imagine I would think differently if I came from an aristocratic background!
Indeed, he didn't commit genocide, but his wars ended up killing 3.5 to 6 millions people, a staggering amount for the time.
Given that those deaths were basically because of his lust for territorial extension and disregard for human life, I would say we are in a similar ballpark as Mao, Hitler, Stalin, etc.
Of course, our history books are quick to state he made reforms, particularly legal and administrative ones, that benefitted our country a lot and still echo benefits today.
But again, I think if you a responsible for millions of deaths because of your desire for conquest, any arguments you can make in the other way are instantly moot.
You may, however, made the argument that it would have been better to be a French citizen at the time than somewhere else, depending on where and how you were born. But it's a different point.
But there is never a critic of it, it's mentioned as matter of fact for the first, and only in positive for the second.
I had to grow old to realize "wait, napoleon was basically our hitler...".