pothos.org

supposedly stone is only depicting the battles of arbela and hydaspes. i surely doubt he will just completely leave out granicus and issus. but i dont see how he is going to throw granicus and issus into the mix. i wonder how hes going to go about depicting those two battles without filming them? anyway, issus is probably my favorite battle and im disappointed it wont be in the movie.

Apparently the story is being told in flashbacks, by an elderly Ptolemy. If it were a purely chronological telling of the story then I'd agree with you - it would, of course, be odd to leave out the Granicus and Issus. In this case, however, I can see that it would be relatively easy to focus on just two battles, without 'ignoring' the others.All the bestMarcus

Actually, it is a pity that they choose these battles. From a Hollywood point of view, I would have preferred the Jaxartes, where four types of weapon (artillery, ships, cavalry, infantery) were employed. This was Alexander's most spectacular battle and it would make great cinema. Besides, as a battle, it was bigger than the Hydaspes / Jhelum, were only one sixth of Alexander's troops were employed. But of course, then and now, the elephants were impressive: useful for ancient propaganda and modern cinema.Gaugamela was just one big cloud of dust - hardly spectacular at all. I wonder what Stone makes of it, especially as his adviser Lane Fox has written so convincingly that no one could see anything.Jona

I was really hoping to catch at least a glimpse of Chaeronia.

If one reads Steven Pressfield's version of Gaugemela which is on his website, you will see that there is some confusion mixing Gaugemela with the battle of Issus. Whether Stone is making the same error is something I don't know.

From the point of view of the story, however, I think choosing Gaugamela over Granicus or Issus makes perfect sense, as it was the final battle against Darius. I imagine that there won't be too many dust clouds hiding the action, though - not very good cinema, really .I would certainly like to see some mention, perhaps with some brief battle scenes, of the other battles ... and you'd sort of expect there to be a clip of Chaironeia, considering they appear to be devoting so much time to Alexander's late teens. Still, there'll be plenty of excitement with the Olympias/Philip spatting, and no doubt Philip's murder. Much as I like well-constructed battle scenes, even I can get a bit tired of them if they take up too much screen time! ('Waterloo' with Rod Steiger and Christopher Plummer, has over an hour of battle - in a two hour film - and I tend to get rather restless, even with the French cavalry charge at the 'British' squares, which is visually fantastic).All the bestMarcus

Basically FolksOne three hour film can only touch the surface,, The story of Tyre in itself was basically Lord Of The Rings twin Towers,,, Tyre was a siege and a whole story in itself. A three hour plus fil man only scratch the surface of Alexanders story, I always maintained this story should have been done in three parts to give it more justice.It took Andrew Woods three hour documantary to scratch the edges of his footsteps.I wonder if this film will do anything for Alexander or more for the career of Colin Farrel.I hope the young and youth with have an interest to read and learn about one of histories true legends.Kenny