videos

[bob]

Since some have asked me to stay, I will stay. I also have more questions to ask. What does everyone think about the following:
1. The history channel's alexander documentary
2. National Geographics "True Story" documentary
3. Alexander the Great 3 DVD Myth & Reality documentary
4. The Real Alexander the Great True Story DVD
5. I saw a fabulous 1 hour documentary on the History channel analyzing the battle of Gaugamela. Is that available on DVD somewhere? Does anyone know? Has anyone else seen this?
Does anyone know of any other documentaries on Alexander? Is Woods documentary as bad as the reviews? Is it worth the price?
Thanks

[kennyxx]

Woods ProgrameBob Hail. The Michael Woods Programe is very good in that it gives the viewer some idea of Alexanders journey. Michael Woods is very blazey and really doesnt like Alexander and is pretty asumtious about Alexander.But what Woods learns and is evident. That Alexanders endevours are even difficult even now. He huufed and puffed and even at one stage he says these Macedodonians must have been tough cookies. See beyond Michael Woods and his opinions and the programe is very good.The programe about Gaugamella I think comes under the title of decisive battles. A good half hour programe and gives a little insight into the Battle.Most programes are ok. with different points of views. Most comentators put there own slant on Alexander. Hes been called everything from a conquering Hero and a funny one I heard was about Persia and Persepolis and the Persian scholars called Alexander a mountainus thug.A progarme entitled the body of Alexander consisted of theories about the wherabouts etc of his body. That particular programe went into great deatail of Alexanders influence on world religions.But the funniest one that should have been good was a so called Scotland Yard Detective solving Alexanders mysterious death. The guy discounted poison theories claiming it wasnt the Macedonian way and concluded Alexander accidently poisoned himself. Purging himself with too much medicine to get well for war. Ask Marcus that was hilarious.Kenny

[val]

Hi!I am afraid I canGÇÖt be of much help. Regarding Alexander the Great Myth & Reality documentary DVD and The Real Alexander the Great True Story DVD, IGÇÖm afraid I havenGÇÖt seen them, though the later wasnGÇÖt particularly well rated at Amazon, which is my only reference.
In my country WoodGÇÖs documentary was released through The History Channel; I have it recorded but I never really had the chance to see it completely but for the few I have seen it seems interesting. Eugene N. Borza wrote a review of it for Archaeology magazine that can be found at:
http://www.archaeology.org/9805/etc/multimedia.htmlNow I actually liked The History ChannelGÇÖs documentary, especially for some good collaborations from diverse historians, although I admit I found some reenactment scenes a bit too theatrical for my taste. Borza again wrote a review for Archeology magazine:
http://www.archaeology.org/online/revie ... er1.htmThe Decisive Battles series program, the one that is done using the Rome: Total War video game graphics, is available at The History Channel shop:http://store.aetv.com/html/product/inde ... bcatid=Now, the only documentaries I know are the ones broadcasted on TV.
The History Channel had a one hour documentary from the Line of Fire series called, at least in my country, The Conquests of Alexander the Great, which also featured analysis on the mayor battles (maybe this is the one hour documentary you saw?).
Discovery Channel also released, time ago, a program discussing many theories about AlexanderGÇÖs death which I think was called Who killed Alexander the Great? I think the one that features the Scotland Yard Detective that Kenny mentions.
And later, promoting the film, there was a program that features the training that Colin Farrell and the cast had as preparation for the film shooting as well as comments from Stone, the actors and advisor Robin Lane Fox. Translated, the name of the program here would be -¿I am Alexander-¿ but I think the original name was -¿Becoming Alexander-¿.Now there were some other programs that loosely feature some comments or reference about Alexander.
There was a program on the History Channel called Richness and Power: Tyrants and Looters; despite the dark name it has good comments regarding Alexander.
Then there was a program from the Metropolis series about Alexandria at the Discovery channel and, on the same network, there was a program about the history of p

[val]

Then there was a program from the Metropolis series about Alexandria at the Discovery channel and, on the same network, there was a program about the history of plastic surgery, if you ask what it has to do with Alexander I mention it because there was a reference about how he firstly implemented the use of the campaign tents and explained how the arrow he received at India was extracted.
Lastly there was a documentary called The Kingdom of David Ep2. The book and the sword, that basically explained how AlexanderGÇÖs conquests that brought the Hellenism altered the Hebrews life.
Now, as I said the last ones are light references and maybe I went too far.

[Paralus]

G'day Bob."Alexander the Great Myth & Reality" I haven't seen. Can you advise its production details?? Love to give it a view. Also, I am yet to see "Decisive Battles: Gaugamela". I'm sure it aired in Australia but for some reason I've missed the entire series! One wonders: what am I doing with my viewing life? The answer? Too much reading."The Tue Story of ATG" from the History Channel was quite good. Green, Murray and Bosworth did a great job of de-mystifying the subject. Note they did not always concur on everything. The programme's stripping away of some of the more fanciful/romantic attachments to the subject appealed to my sense of Alexander. It is by far the best of the recent efforts largely inspired by the recent Stone film. Green's descriptions of the main "characters" is worth the spend. Parmenio (to paraphrase): "He was by far the most trusted and capable of Philip's generals; he was also quite the most thoroughly political bastard (or animal GÇô can't remember which)!"The NatGeo documentary seemed to be filled with long, lingering looks GÇô some vacant, some intent GÇô from the main "characters" which added precisely bugger all to the show. The fellow who did the on-screen talking head bit annoyed the daylights out me for some reason GÇô the breathless voice methinks. The reconstruction of Issus was very good though as I recall GÇô particularly the description of the serious trouble the Macedonian phalanx found itself in. Not as good as "the True Story".Woods' film is more a "road" or "journey" piece. It's been some time since I saw it and my recollection is that as history I could take or leave it GÇô mostly the latter. As a geographical backgrounder to the Macedonian's journey of conquest it is beyond comparison. Worth the view to see where it all happened, the obstacles encountered and how they managed to get over or around them. And all 2300 years ago.Paralus.

[bob]

Thanks Kenny and Valeria! I ordered that video, so your link to the History channels site was excellent. Very helpful information, and thanks for the links on Borza's reviews.
Bob

[bob]

Release date June 28 2005. UPC: 032031287198 Filmed over 2 years in Greece, Turkey, Egypt, and Israel. This is a 3 DVD set, with 240 minutes of material. No one has rated it at Amazon, and it is around 22-30 bucks *USA dollars on eBay and Amazon. Thus, if it is cheap, you would end up paying a bit for a video for crap. But how "cheap" can a three DVD set be? Not sure...
Bob

[Nicator]

"National Geographics "True Story" documentary" The documentary that was billed as the "True Story of Alexander the Great" was an appalling waste of time. Though it was interesting to see Green and Bosworth interviewed, neither one of these guys is particlarly positive about Alexander. The worst thing about it had to be the moronic self aggrandizing grad student that said something to the effect that war was better than sex for Alexander. "Is Woods documentary as bad as the reviews? Is it worth the price?" I wouldn't call this documentary bad...just negative. I think Woods started out on his journey in hero worship mode (like so many of us) and ended up in disillusionment mode. Let's face it, Alexander pushed himself and his army (camp followers and all) through some of the most horrendous conditions imaginable. A modern, underweight, slack, overweened writer would inevitably wilt under the pressure of so many inhospitable climes. I wonder how he feels about his hero today. Time has an unrivalled way of modifying ones perspective. later Nicator

[Paralus]

G'day Nicator.You really are a cheeky bugger!Yes, the tripe about conquering being better than procreational activity for Alexander was just that. Then again, he was possibly referring to females...But Bosworth and Green not "being disposed" to Alexander?? Now, now, that's not quite true. both have devoted a serious (some may say too serious) an amount of time to the bloke. One doesn't always need to agree with everything, but I must say that personally, I find Bosworth very much on the money.There's been enough hero worship and aggrandisisng of intentions when it cones to the Macedonian conqueror.
A little the other way redresses the mix methinks.Paralus

[Gary]

Paralus,"I am yet to see "Decisive Battles: Gaugamela". I'm sure it aired in Australia but for some reason I've missed the entire series!"I think this series aired on SBS a couple of years ago, when I saw the program on Alesia (which was quite impressive IMHO). AFAIR it was on at some awful time like noon Saturdays, so I haven't seen the rest."Woods' film is more a "road" or "journey" piece.
[...] As a geographical backgrounder to the Macedonian's journey of conquest it is beyond comparison."Indeed, his video (and companion book) does more to bring the history to life than anything else I've seen, such as he and his camera crew tramping through the Makran, and his breathless exposition in the doorway of the Oracle of Ammon.I don't have any trouble crediting him with real scholarship; the Cave of Spitamenes for example could have only been revealed in a field trip by a real historian, an Indiana Jones figure as Wood I think fancies himself (with his other telegenic shows about Troy and the Conquistadores).