Film Critics, Ba Hum Bug

[iskander_32]

Companions I may be in the minority here, But for one I thought the Alexander moviec was great and Oliver Stone nailed him, fair enough the sitiations were changed but I thought he had Alexanders character correct and did very well with what he did.I realise and understand the movie disjointed and people new to Alexander would be lost to understand him, but to get close we would need a movie longer than Lord Of The Rings and to be hones I would stuggle to sit through something that long.With what he had Stone Did a great job with what he showed, For peolpe to Call Alexander soft and a cry baby for showing emotion is real hard and unthinking, that was refereshing as Im sure Alexander was normal with emotions he would have been mortified with grief following spiking Clietus and the loss of his hest friend.The Americans need to get over there predjudice and see beyond the trees.In reality the only way to do a great project on ASlexander maybe to do a series of episodes Alexander The Greats story is too big for any one movie.But for one I thought the film was good.Kenny

[jan]

I have to admit that I judge each and every response to the movie by my own high standards of excellence. I can hardly wait to hear what Marcus has to say.To my mind, Oliver Stone took the best horse in the race and brought him in last, ten furlongs behind the next to last. In horse racing terms, he did Alexander worse than the worst owner did to Black Beauty.So Kenny, your evaluation causes me to doubt your good sense and good judgement about Alexander and movies in general.

[marcus]

So if I like it, Jan with think I'm mad; if I don't, Kenny will ... I can't win :-)Thanks for your comments, Kenny - I got the feeling you were going to end up hating it, so it's interesting to see that you thwarted my expectations. So now we'll have to see whether I agree with you or Jan ... hmm, perhaps I'll just say nothing :-)Marcus

[Linda]

Kenny - you were fast off the mark! What time did the film begin? The earliest you can see it here is 2pm, I think. I won't be able to see it until the weekend. Linda Ann, thank you for posting J R-Z' s review. Linda

[Linda]

Oh - and I hadn't realised that Stone wrote the script for Conan the Barbarian. That is a great film.Linda

[iskander_32]

Marcus
Hail we are all entitled to opinions, wether Jan demeans me because I liked the movie effects me in the least. each to there own I guess.Maybe your standards are high but to say the movie was as bad as you say maybe we have different Ideas.I am sure Alexander would have been happy, this movie more than shewed Alexanders tender and emotional sides.maybe give Peter Jackson a call to do a massive ( hour movie but I am sure he wpould only touch the surface to make comment about my judgement on Alexander is a little harsh,, I guess your too narrow minded and burried in Curtias and Arrian to maybe grab the essense of Alexander,, I feel Oliver Stone was trying to do that independently of the writers and I like the way he feels Alexander was.Marcus enjoy even if you disagree with me totally I will honour and respect as we are allowed opinions but please dont doubt my knowledge and wisdom because I liked It.regards.Kenny

[amyntoros]

Kennny - I thought I'd wait until you'd seen the film before I posted again on the subject. Am so glad that you liked it because I see here on Pothos how important Alexander is to you. When it comes to taste in movies, you never know what to expect. I just read a review on the Sky website which panned Alexander, and saw that the site lists their top-rated movies. Number one is Daddy Day Care! I mean... Daddy Day Care??Linda - glad you got to read JRZ's review. I hope more people take a look as it's an excellent, in depth article. Best regards,Linda Ann

[jay]

So Kenny, your evaluation causes me to doubt your good sense and good judgement about Alexander and movies in general. Wow, I had to stop and read this twice because I couldn't believe what I was seeing!To those who didn't like the movie, you have a right to your opinion. We have all read about it...MANY TIMES, and you were allowed to have your say. Kindly allow others to post their opinions without insulting them. It's this kind of thing that degrades this board.

[marcus]

Hi Kenny,I'm going tonight or tomorrow (not sure yet). Whatever happens I'm convinced I'm going to enjoy it, whether or not I end up thinking it's good or bad ... I'm really excited!My comments will come on Monday.All the bestMarcus

[susan]

I saw the film last night, and I thought that it was better than I'd expected, particularly given the bad reviews. Remembering that it is intended to be a dramatic interpretation rather than an exact historical account, I felt that visually it was fine if a little too lavish; historically there were some changes, but they were understandable in the limited time and by the fact that Stone had a story to tell; but I think the script let it down.
Sometimes they seemed to go on and on, and I found myself more than once looking at my watch and thinking "Get on with it" .I think that it could have been edited more effectively and ruthlessly; about 20-30 minutes could have gone without too much loss to the plot, and it might have lost the dragging feeling.I suppose my main gripe is that Alexander didn't seem Great in this film.Susan

[ruthaki]

Well, Susan, It think you were right about the actual 'script' And Kenny, I was pleased to hear you agreed with me. I'm going for a third time this weekend and will this time focus on something different than the other times I watched it. I felt 'inspired' by it although there were flaws, of course. I think the general reaction in US was based on a lot of their fundamentalist crap about the homosexuality (get over it!) and the fact they dislike Stone because he's controversial. In comparison with the old Richard Burton film this one was spectacular. You couldn't expect them to do the full story justice in even 3 hours and what they did was good enough for me with the exception of some of the casting (minor gripes) and, as I said, a bit of weakness in the script in places. Ruthaki

[iskander_32]

Ruth Sue AND Linda Hail, Im so very glad with whgat you say and of course I agree small things could have been shortened etc but regardless I think Stone nailed Alexander the person, Also I agree it wasnt made clear enought just how great this man was, But as I said 3 hours,to do that would have needed to consontrate entirely on battles and war and the person of Alexander would be lost.I doubt he cried at Gaugamela as Im sure by then he was used to war battles and killing but it was nice all the same to see emotion in war.I had a funny Idea to edit both films they would indeed look stupid but more story would be told, Then Peter Jackson could do a 9 hour Trilogy then we could be close.I am so irritated by the crirtisism of Collins hair it is only through hindsite that pompous attitudes prevail,, If people had never seen Farrel in his other movies magazines etc, No one would have a clue what colour hair he had,, It looked ok maybe a wig would have looked obvious,, People nit pick fat too easily,,, Besides We never expected a deformed twisted guy to play The Elephant Man. John Hurt needes more than a little blonde dye for the part.I could go on and on but I wont,, Only to say I stand byu Stones Alexander: The ultimate conquerer and at the same time ultimate adventurer and visionary, Loved and adored by his soldiers and the common yet envied and misunderstood by his high minded kinsmen, The ultimate visionary withj a heart that was for all his subjects and not just for those who thought they werev special.If I could say to Stone I reckognise his Alexander I would say yes, I look foreward to Marcus report I echo the opinions about the racist bigoted attitude to the Americans I never understood but this may be the fundamental reason that although America preaches freedom and tollerance they dont very well practice it and Although I dont realise theyu are very much hated throughout the world, I didnt say rthat but many people do regardsKenny

[jan]

Oh, Kenny, You missed the whole point. I loved Lawrence of Arabia. Peter O'Toole was fantastic! I wanted the equal to that. (But I am glad that without realizing it, you really like me. sound like a Sally Fields speech. I already said that Colin Farrell clued me in with his Doris Day reference so I was prepared.) Jan

[iskander_32]

Jan Of coarse I like you, Your probably a very nice girl with a difference of opinion which I value if not agree,, Sarcasm however can intern be a lowly from of witt.
there is one aspect this film taught me is the phsyche of the American society and how inward looking they are and really how threatened they are it has become clear that they cant accept or ignore facts that they dont like nor accept. Robin Lane Fox made a very good remard about the sexual content, He did notice Americans laughing at the bisexual conetations,, He called it belingered laughter in a way they didnt think it funny but more threatening.Judge Judy, Jerry Springer, persistent workout programes , Plastic surgery, programes and there heroes. Spiderman, Batman,Superman, Americans won world war two etc etc, I dont class all Americans the same. Andrew I apologise but we have a very superficial in looking society.America can't take such a magnificent complex her as Alexander The Great he is too huge for there dispositions.For years we saw hollywood distorting therte own history, making the indians out to be bad yet we all know that the near extinction of the native Americans for me is one of humanities most atrocious acts, To wipe out a nation and society so that the could have it all, to kill and mutilate buffalo fo no reason but to starve them.I thought the friendship and bond between Alexander and Heapheastion could be agood lesson for us all even without sexual sonetations.Kenny

[kenny]

Sue HailI agree with the looking at the watch and wanting them to move on, The bedroom scene with Roxane totally was out of the story, to spend so much time on that when there was other things was a waste of film.I think it was obvious that Stone thought Alexander was poisoned but the biggest puzzle to me was that Cassander was present throughout all the campaigns, Yet in reallity He only visited Alexander in Babylon in my opinion to get rid of Alexander before he replaced Antipater and himself,, I dont klnow why stone so involved him?RegardsKenny