The Movie

[justme]

Thanks, Ruth and Andrew. Good call on the use of kohl as a symbol of Hephaestion's willingness to change. Come to think of it, it did become more prevalent in Babylon.Yes, I loved the Bagoas scene too! I hope Stone includes some of the cut scenes in the DVD.

[kenny]

Hail CompaniosI think it fair to say with general feedback from you folks, People who do know Alexander is a far greater endorsement for this film than any film critic out there, I doubt film critics hace the attention span to read past the introductions in Arian or Robert lane Fox.What I'm getting is good possitive feedback more than I expected I mostly expected put downs for minor details but It seems people have gone open minded and judged what they have seen with minor critisism.If we had wish books we would expect hundreds of hours to get close to Alexander as studiers and reader we are closer but Id gamble miles off.As far as film critics go I have always used great critisism as a yard stick to stay away.Citizen Kane has been named the number I movie of all time but I just never understood that one.Critics panned Costners Waterworld as the worse movie made but to be honest as a movie it was entertaining.Titanic, Beautiful Minds, Silence of the Lambs,Reservour Dogs,My left foot,only a few highly acclaimed movies I thought borring and to be honest Apart fro Lord of the Rings all the recent Oscar winners are that memorable I cant think of any.RegardsKenny

[amyntoros]

I'm moved to comment again more by a post on another Alexander forum than anything said here by members. The owner of said forum actually walked out of the movie half-way through and demanded his money back! His complaint - chiefly the dialogue and the historical inaccuracies.First of all, historically the movie is a mish-mash. Know this! There is dialogue taken directly from the histories, but often the words are spoken in the wrong place, at the wrong time, for the wrong reason, and by or to the wrong person. Events subsequent to earlier battles are transported to Babylon, events from Opis are transported to India, people live longer than they should have, etc. Does it matter? Not in the least. Most of these liberties were taken to keep the film to a realistic performance length. The others were taken because this was never meant to be a true history, but an illustration of Stone's vision of Alexander. And make no bones about it, this IS Oliver Stone's vision. You won't find your Alexander here, as I didn't find mine. (I do not believe Olympias was such a "witch" nor do I believe in the concord of nations which is much espoused in the movie.) However, I never expected to find my Alexander on the screen, any more than I expected to find Arrian's or Plutarch's. Stone's Alexander is angst ridden and full of insecurity about being loved, emotions which compete constantly with his all consuming pothos. This is how Stone envisioned Alexander, and the movie works as Stone intended. And for those who found it sometimes confusing and are perhaps less familiar with Alexander, I have to say that the film would surely be made clearer for you by the scenes on the editing room floor. I'm hoping for a DVD with the hour of missing footage, and not one with a few minutes added here and there. :-)To everyone who hasn't yet seen the film and those in England and Europe who have to wait for the release, I can only tell you not to go into the theatre expecting consistent historical accuracy. You will not find it. But for those of us familiar with Alexander, there's an almost secret delight to be found in recognizing dialogue from the ancient texts, as when Stateira espouses first Sisigambis' words to Hephaistion and Alexander, and then those of Porus.It's a movie, a story, a visual rendering of the director's own imaginative insight into the character of his Alexander. If you know this and you expect this, then you can keep an open mind, as

[amyntoros]

It's a movie, a story, a visual rendering of the director's own imaginative insight into the character of his Alexander. If you know this and you expect this, then you can keep an open mind, as Kenny has so sagely declared as the only way to see this movie. If you go into the cinema prepared only to seek and criticize the historical accuracy or inaccuracy, then you might indeed walk out as well.Best regards,Linda Ann

[Nax]

Squak all you want but no, Im not conservative- and not a boot licker either- the accents didn't bother me, I didn't expect historical accuracy (some woulda been nice)- but I still say dialogs weak . Jolie was fine, the others had to make do with the sucky script but Farrell doesn't have what it takes.All the bawling didn't bother me either- surprise, some of us DO "get" the movie and the times but STILL think it sucked SPOILERSYeah, right, the harem girls start dancing- uh huh
Didn't someone here talk about that kind of thing or was it on another forum? Anyway I'm not buying that scene, the Persians and Macedonians knew more than that about each other, I betLeto comes in with a ring & Alexander declares his eternal love or whatever- 5 minutes later Alexanders tossing the ring to the floor for a bit of Romping With Roxann? Shallow shallow And I STILL think the kitty growls are dumb, unless some guys are a lot more weird than I am & did ANYONE but me see when Leto's sucker punched and Alexander doesnt even notice? I liked Leto but I didn't get where Stone was going with this dude. Like, was he some kind of limp dishrag or what?

Its obvious Stone made a movie about Alexander like Tim (?) said- a bad one Im a fan of movies & I still say this is bad. are we REALLY gonna claim that the main people had any distinguishing personality characteristics when h**l, they had to keep saying their names to keep them even identifiedI STILL say the death scene is like a cartoon, and it shouldnt beHey man, its just a movie & one mans opinion- you don't hafta agree with me & I don't hafta agree with you Whoopee

[history buff]

I disagree with you, i havent seen the movie but what i see from the previews the film was historicaly inaccurate. The depiction of persians was way off in terms of charateristics. Stone researched for 10 yrs about Alexander and this is what he comes up with? Persians at that period did not have slave or slave laws, in fact they abolished slavery 200 yrs earlier. They lived in luxury and their army attire was in plated in gold. Also they were High terrain people who were identified as caucasions. Even oliver stone wouldnt pass for one unless he looks like he is from norway if that crazy psycho path leader of the nazi's claimed that the german race has its origins from ancient persians then you might as well question stones research. As alexander returned from his raids from india he stopped by persepolis and burned it down? why?...according to history there are 3 versions of why he burned down one of the most ancient cities...he burned down the library..that library contained information about humanity and human contact recordings all the way back to the start of human society. The film is probably garbage because it gives false details about alexanders life and conquest. I think alexander was a great general..something that his counterpart (darius III) was not. I give him and his army credit for covering all that terrain because of their size 4'11.
This is just europe against asia. Eg. in the movie sparticus...they did not mention that persian rulers "partians" avenged sparticus death by attacking romans..they drove them out of anatolia...
Dont forget that there persian army were comprised of other races who were under the persian rule. My point is that they werer united and wanted to fight for the persians because of love and admiration.

[history buff]

I disagree with you, i havent seen the movie but what i see from the previews the film was historicaly inaccurate. The depiction of persians was way off in terms of charateristics. Stone researched for 10 yrs about Alexander and this is what he comes up with? Persians at that period did not have slave or slave laws, in fact they abolished slavery 200 yrs earlier. They lived in luxury and their army attire was in plated in gold. Also they were High terrain people who were identified as caucasions. Even oliver stone wouldnt pass for one unless he looks like he is from norway if that crazy psycho path leader of the nazi's claimed that the german race has its origins from ancient persians then you might as well question stones research. As alexander returned from his raids from india he stopped by persepolis and burned it down? why?...according to history there are 3 versions of why he burned down one of the most ancient cities...he burned down the library..that library contained information about humanity and human contact recordings all the way back to the start of human society. The film is probably garbage because it gives false details about alexanders life and conquest. I think alexander was a great general..something that his counterpart (darius III) was not. I give him and his army credit for covering all that terrain because of their size 4'11.
This is just europe against asia. Eg. in the movie sparticus...they did not mention that persian rulers "partians" avenged sparticus death by attacking romans..they drove them out of anatolia...
Dont forget that there persian army were comprised of other races who were under the persian rule. My point is that they werer united and wanted to fight for the persians because of love and admiration.

[beausefaless]

Greetings Linda,All I can say about this person is DAAAA! No *bleep* Sherlock! Don't let these yoyos bother you, they're not worth your beautiful mind. I'll bet he didn't get one red cent back and rightfully so.I can hear this whatever talking now. "Oh gee wiz If I were Parmenio but I'm Alexander. This wasn't said jus before The Battle of Gaugamela, DAAAA, I want my money back."Like you said, this was Stones version of a movie not a history lesson. But Oliver opened the door to the thought of Alexander to many young kids that were accompanied by adults in the theater I went to which was a good thing.Best regards, Andrew

[iskander_32]

Theres a time and place for history buffs, as a forum we do nothing but debate and try to cliriofy points about Actual Alexander.I hope as it is for me this movie is a little escapeism, Lets ignor Arian Curtias etc and just enjoy the specatacle of Stones Alexander,,, Stone gets his critisism but still makes great movies, as Andrew also staeted it opens Alexander a little to the youth of today and thats a good thing.If one kid wlks out and says hey,,, Whats this Alexander guy really all about?Kenny

[jan]

Marcus, Trust me on this. It is godawful! Jan

[jan]

Kenny, this movie is really as bad as the reviews say it is. It is a spoof on me so that even in court I could prove it! I have enough evidence to go to trial if I wanted, but I just jolly well needed the wakeup call I guess as friend Colin clued me in very early on. I felt sorry for him all the while. This is an Alexander that no real fan of Alexander could love, but as a spoof of me, it is pretty darn good! I liked Stone for showing me how he has seen me! I am guilty as charged!

[jan]

Hi Dara, I just saw some of Girl, Interrupted last night while Colin Farrell was appearing on Conan O'Brien. Angelina and Jared Leto were both a part of Girl, Interrupted also, and I like Jared as Winona's lover a lot better. His hair was good in it.The movie Alexander is perfectly dreadful, imo, as my own opinion of Alexander is so different from that of Robin Lane Fox and Oliver Stone's version as to be night and day. I just hope I can get my own version translated to the screen someday too.As a parody of me in my teaching years, and even in some of my retirement years, I could see the truth of that. Colin had already warned us in Premiere magazine that it was a Doris Day wig he was sporting so I knew right away to be on guard. Sure enough, when Alexander is dwarfed by all his officers and family, I could see that some people may have seen me looking a bit that when I was teaching journalism and advising the cheerleaders and songleaders. So I caught a glimpse of myself and am thinking about it yet. WAs I really that bad? All my evaluations say otherwise, though.

[jan]

Hi Dara, I just saw some of Girl, Interrupted last night while Colin Farrell was appearing on Conan O'Brien. Angelina and Jared Leto were both a part of Girl, Interrupted also, and I like Jared as Winona's lover a lot better. His hair was good in it.The movie Alexander is perfectly dreadful, imo, as my own opinion of Alexander is so different from that of Robin Lane Fox and Oliver Stone's version as to be night and day. I just hope I can get my own version translated to the screen someday too.As a parody of me in my teaching years, and even in some of my retirement years, I could see the truth of that. Colin had already warned us in Premiere magazine that it was a Doris Day wig he was sporting so I knew right away to be on guard. Sure enough, when Alexander is dwarfed by all his officers and family, I could see that some people may have seen me looking a bit that when I was teaching journalism and advising the cheerleaders and songleaders. So I caught a glimpse of myself and am thinking about it yet. WAs I really that bad? All my evaluations say otherwise, though.

[jan]

It isn't worth the wait, really. It is sad that in the end, it does not do Alexander well at all.

[jan]

If I wanted, I could give this a really good scathing. It is undoubtedly one of the worst movies ever made, except for a few choice scenes which are really quite interesting. I especially disliked the sacrificial scene in which Stone makes Alexander look incompetent and stupid with having to get blood all over his face. Alexander, who had so much experience, would never do that at all, and would have practiced it efficiently. Stone is deliberately making Alexander look stupid, weak, ineffectual, and downright idiotic! This is a movie about a world conqueror! Hardly! It is an insult!