FAQs about the movie and Alexander

[ancientlibrary]

As everyone starts to see the movie--except the
Europeans?--it seems to me the world needs a
"Frequently Asked Questions" about the movie
and its historical basis. I'm going to start writing
one, but maybe this topic can be bandied about
here. Depending on interest, we could have
different people answer the questions. There
are some I'm not really qualified or interested in
answering, eg., "were the costumes historical?".Right now I'm coming up with the questions.
Here are some starter ideas. The idea would be
to have many be a sentence or two long, with a
link. For example, for "Was Hephaestion
Alexander's lover?" .Is the movie good?.GENERAL HISTORYHow closely does the movie follow the history?
(generaly)What scenes are historical? (Or might be.)What scenes are not historical?What are some glaring errors?What does the movie leave out?What simplifications and compressions are
there?.CHARACTERSAre the characters all real? How do they differ
from the historical record?What was with all the accents?Was Olympias really a freaky, evil and
controlling witch?Was the portrayal of Philip accurate?Did Roxane murder Hephaestion?.ALEXANDER'S PERSONALITYDoes the movie accurately depict Alexander's
personality?Was Alexander gay?Was Hephaestion Alexander's lover?Did Alexander want to bring change and
freedom to Persian subjects?What about Alexander's death?.OTHERAre the costumes historical?.What do you guys think?

[ancientlibrary]

.. for "Was Hephaestion Alexander's lover?" I
imagine a sentence with a link to Jeanne's
website.

[susan]

TimI admire your intentions, but does anyone take the film seriously enough to question its historical accuracy ?I've spent the last hours looking at the reviews on rottentomatoes ( http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/alexander) and it seems so bad that I fear it will sink very rapidly ( it's now at 16%) . From the trailers there seem so many glaring casting & script errors that the historical detail must surely take second place. I think that Alexander himself, had he watched the film as an evening's entertainment, would have ended in a furious rage that his reputation had been damaged in this way. Susan

[justme]

I think it's a great idea. I for one would like to see the comparrisons everyone makes. There is a long explanation of the dialect choice on the official movie site. You can't link to it, nor can it be copied-and-pasted. Let me know if you are going to move forward - I'd be happy to type it out for you.Lois

[justme]

Susan - Good point, but I think there might be enough interest to merit undertaking the project. Looking at fan reviews on Yahoo, people are split right down the middle. They either give it all A's to B+'s or all D's to F's, averaging out to C+. It seems it's an either love it or hate it type of film. Since it is the only film to address Alexander in almost 40 years, I'd like to give it some serious attention.

[ancientlibrary]

Well, 16% is progress! (It's risen from 8% and
13%.) Well, I think some people will want to
know. You have to remember that for 99% of its
viewers this will form everything they know about
Alexander. For most it will be everything they
ever know. Some however, will be interested
enough to want to know more.
.You have to remember the scale here. This
website has maybe a hundred regular visitors.
The total sales of Green or Fox's book probably
doesn't exceed the tens of thousands. At
absolute worst this movie will reel in *tens of
millions* of viewers. .Quite frankly, I think that this sort of thing is
about the ONLY useful thing an amateur group
like this can do--your entering of sources
excepted. If we don't do it, who will? You're not
going to see Ernst Badian writing a "MovieFAQs"
and submitting it to a scholarly journal with 500
institutional subscribers. Jean might be
inspired or convinced, but we can certainly help
her come up with the questions. In short, I think,
this is our duty! .Lastly, I think it's important because the reviews
I've seen have been so pig-ignorant about
historical issues, and it's come under a lot of
misdirected criticism on that score. I for one
think the movie is pretty accurate "as movies go"
and, in any case, that the accuracy is hardly its
problem.

[susan]

OK, maybe you've convinced me. Mind you, I've yet to persuade my mother that he's not "Alexandra the Great" . My invariable rule for telling if an author is reliable is to look at their description of Roxane - if she is described as Darius' daughter then the author doesn't know his stuff. Words fail me about Graham Phillips' references to Roxanne (his spelling) - she's "spiritually-minded" and "popular with the troops because of her sense of humour".I'll start work, thenSusan

[Linda]

It is quite hard to come up with questions if you haven't seen the movie (sorry - FILM). I don't think I can bear to read any more reviews. I am just going to go one rainy afternoon, buy a big bag of maltesers, put my feet up on the seat in front and pretend I am watching Demetrius the Gladiator (if you like muscly men, Jan, that's your baby. Excellent stuff).BUT - it imght be fun to do a really detailed historical inaccuracies bit - Jeanne mentions somewhere in her historical fiction page that a novel mentions a spinning wheel, and they weren't invented for X number of years.. That sort of thing. Linda

[susan]

Based on not having seen the movie, but having seen the trailers and read the reviews:
.Is the movie good?
-------------------. No - Alexander is not portrayed as capable of conquering most of the known world in a few years - there's none of the greatness that projects his image through thousands of years, and makes his legend still live in lands where he never visited.GENERAL HISTORYHow closely does the movie follow the history? (generaly)
----------------------------------------------Probably reasonably closely, if rather patchy - episodes are shown as illustrations, rather than strict chronologies. probably not many glaring errors of fact - Robin Lane Fox knowns his stuff.What scenes are historical? (Or might be.)
------------------------------------------
battle scenes, Philip's death, Hephaestion's death, entry to Babylon, Cassander's visit, marriage to Roxane, Darius - in fact most of the deaths are probably historically accurate as they occurred, but what causes them may not be accurate.What scenes are not historical?
-------------------------------
Wedding night scene, conversationsWhat are some glaring errors?
-----------------------------
Probably the women are freer and more high-profile than they would have been - also everyone is too glamorous and scantily-clad. The Sogdian nobles look far too old.What does the movie leave out?
------------------------------
Some battles, Gordian knot, visit to Siweah, Egypt, early years subduing Greece, GedrosiaWhat simplifications and compressions are there?
......CHARACTERSAre the characters all real? How do they differ from the historical record?
------------------------------------------------
Probably all based on reality - but also probably made more glamorous, wordy and emotional. Would have been very hard men, with self-survival predominating.What was with all the accents?
------------------------------
Macedonia had only recently absorbed snmaller kingdoms - rivalry between highland & lowland; best expressed by British analogy. Good idea if it works.

[ancientlibrary]

With a TLG search I find "R+¦xane", "R+¦xana",
and (in versions of the Romance) "Roxandra." In
any case, we know precious little about her. .Looking through the sources, I found it
interesting that the Suda entry for Alexander
manages to get the parentage right at first
(apparently summarizing Arrian), but then
(summarizing the Romance) makes her the
daughter of Darius.
.Incidentally, do we know anything more about
the following tidbit in the Suda? I wish I had
Berve. (The following is a mix of my translation
with the Suda On-Line's.)."DRAKON, grandson of Hippokrates the famous
doctor; son of Thessalos; father of Hippokrates,
who again had a son Drakon, the latter being
the doctor who healed Roxane while she was
living with Alexander.".echoed in:."HIPPOCRATES the fourth, son of Draco, doctor,
also from Cos, of the same family; he treated
Roxane, and died at the hands of Cassander
the son of Antipater. He also wrote medical
works.".The latter supports the notion that Drakon was
or became Roxane's personal physician, and
was killed when she was killed.

[susan]

Yes, I saw this in Suda; I also interpreted it that Roxane's household were probably put to death with her. I suppose the implication is that Drakon accompanied them to India or Persia and treated her there - unless Alexander refers to her son Alexander IV, in which case I suppose that it's possible that she was healed after she became ill when they were held prisoner at Pydna, when the garrison was starved out.But, Suda does sometimes get confused, doesn't it? Years ago I saw a picture of a silver bowl that Roxane had dedicated to the goddess Athena at Athens - I've never come across it again - has anyone else heard of it ? Susan

[ancientlibrary]

Okay, if you read Greek, see the text:.http://www.isidore-of-seville.com/greek.gif
.
Wait, does this mean both Drakon and his son
healed Roxane--with the son doing it while
Alexander was alive, but the father perhaps
not--or am I messing up the hos?

[ancientlibrary]

Does anyone know how we can get a wiki page
to work on this? I think it would get erased from
Wikipedia? I've been meaning to set up my own
Wiki someday, but now's not the time.

[ruthaki]

As for accuracy of costuming and historical content, I read Robin Lane Fox's interview and he was evidently consulted on all aspects of the film including costumes and seemed happy with it all.As for some 'accuracy' I've read, on about.com they had a blurb that said Kassandros killed Roxane in 316 BC but actually I believe it was 310. Lord knows if this is even in the movie. I doubt it.As for Roxane's bowl to Athena, as many times as I have haunted the museums of Greece (and it has to be hundreds since 1978) I don't EVER recall seeing such a bowl. And as I am most intersted in my trips there for historical details I can't imagine why I'd have missed it.I'm off to the opening night tonight. Trying not to form any opinions until I've seen it. Going with an open mind. Of course the historians and classical scholars are going to pick it to pieces. I, myself, am bound to be relentlessly picky. But it's going to be a spectacle to enjoy and I'm most looking forward to been jolted into a big does of inspiration so I can get my novel finished!!!

[karen]

Count me in, if I may be so bold!But I won't write anything conclusive until I've actually seen the movie end to end.Here's one little booboo I noticed from a clip: Roxane is mispronounced, i.e. with the "e" on this end silent rather than its own syllable, like the modern name Roxanne.And Alexander would never have told a Makedonian phalanx that they're fighting for the glory of Greece. Tsk.BTW, Tim, someone should smack you with a wet fish for "Roxane! You don't have to put on the red light!" Sheesh!A-quiver with anticipation,
Karen