This moderated forum is for discussion of Alexander the Great. Inappropriate posts will be deleted without warning. Examples of inappropriate posts are:
* The Greek/Macedonian debate
* Blatant requests for pre-written assignments by lazy students - we don't mind the subtle ones
* Foul or inappropriate language
I haven't seen Alexander yet, however I've seen a lot of clips over the weekend, having no great desire to run out and see it. Two friends who know more about Alexander than I do concur with the critics and 90% of the top American critics are not going to be wrong. Apparently one does laugh at the Hephaistion death scene among others. What clips I have seen show pretty dreadful acting and scripted lines all around. One critic made a hilarious comment that Angelina Jolie sounded like a cross between Dracula and Natasha on Bullwinkle. Farrell looks lost. However, in his defense, my friends said they felt sorry for him because he tried so hard. Some are calling it a cult classic because it is so unintentionally bad. Some of the CGI on Babylon looked pretty cool. Basically what I'm saying is, beware the Ide(a)s of Stone, although admittedly he's never been one of my favorite directors and his biographical movies are in general weak.
Just as for Stone, it is very hard for an Alexanderophile to view the subject or the movie objectively. However, for even worse news, Alexander didn't do well at the box office either, despite a very long weekend. It did about half the business Troy did in the US on opening weekend. To give perspective, about half the American critics liked Troy and Brad Pitt is a huge draw overseas. It did so-so in the US running about $40 million shy of the cost, but made a huge amount of money all over the rest of the world. Warner Bros who distributed both movies, intentionally placed Alexander in the critical Oscar position and they must be wringing their hands. Alexander has about one in ten American critics who liked it and doesn't have a drawing star in it, so things are not looking rosy. Although it should do better overseas than in the US.Luhrmann is now saying his Alexander project is still on. He's probably the only one smiling.Meanwhile I'm struggling through Virtues of War - not as bad as it sounded from the excerpts on the web, but more like Braveheart than Ancient Macedonia
Why listen to the critics? Go find out for yourself.
There are weaknesses, yes. But there are also some amazing strengths. Astounding, in fact. As for "Virtues of War" I read an advanced copy and loved it. Since then have read "Last of the Amazons" and now I have "Tides of War."
either something is wrong with me or i just dont get it. the hephaestion death scene i thought was well done. ill never know why people would think it laughable. in the 3 times i have seen this movie so far not one person in the audience laughed during this scene. not one.the only time people did laugh was when alexander was reading one of his mothers letters to him and he sais (such a high ransom for lodging in her womb for 9 months). given this isnt supposed to be a "funny" movie, that piece wasnt very smart on stones part but maybe he intended it to be funny, i dont know.stop letting all of these negative reviews get to you, yes the movie was slow and yes he does overkill on his bisexuality but the movie was good in the sense that it was accurate. its just not the way we alexanderphiles would have liked it. stone did not give you the sense of how great he was on the battlefield. (except the battle of gaugamela and hydaspes, trust me). instead he concentrated way too much on the minor aspects of his life (his sexual preference).
The only tittering I heard during the film was by the homophobics who laughed during the (what I thought were) sensitive scenes between A & H. At one point someone else in the audience yelled "if you don't like it, leave!" and that shut them up.
I have seen it reported that in addition to the womb line, the thigh line also seemed hammy , and those are the accurate ones.....I would love to see Luhrmannn doing this - but if Stone has made it unintentionally camp, then I don't know where Luhrmann can go...Maybe if Stone had concentrated less on "accuracy", and just gone for a good story, it might have been better.Still waiting, though. Might love it.Linda
I think it's the way the "womb" line is delivered. It's said with some sarcasm and it seems that it's being picked up as humorous in a pretty serious movie. The other scene that gets laughs is fighting the "small, hairy men."I haven't heard any laughter during either Hephaestion's death scene or during any of the more sensitive scenes (not even the "kissing Bagoas" scene). Nor have I seen even one person leave the theater (except those going for a short trip for food or restroom usage). The theater on Saturday wasn't sold out, but it was fairly packed.The one criticism I heard after my 2nd viewing was a trio of girls who thought Jared Leto did a better Irish accent than Colin Farrell (I thought that was pretty funny). An elderly couple was sitting next to me during one of the shows. I heard the woman sigh more than once and thought she was bored. Eventually, I looked over and saw this beatific smile on her face - she was sighing from pleasure at hearing some of those famous lines. The few of us who have gone to this movie with open minds seem to be the ones who enjoy it. If you go expecting "your" Alexander, don't bother. He's Stone's through and through. Am I the only one cringing at the thought of Leo DiCaprio playing Alexander? I can't imagine him giving a stirring speech before a battle without his voice cracking, let alone having his voice carry for all to hear.
Hail loisRespect to what you thpought of Dicaprio,, Some may say Im totally off balance but I always thought Dicaprio more Alexander than Farel for me he does have the look.The performance in Gangs Of New York convinced me even more.If the movie does happen and Dicaprio scores remember who told you so, I always maintained the Stone movie would be a warm up.
Kenny
Hail Kenny,Thanks! I didn't see Gangs of New York - will have to check it out. If it happens, I'll go with an open mind as I did with Stone's version. And I'll keep your recommendation in mind. :)Lois
Hi Kenny,I've never been hugely impressed by DiCaprio, but I admit that's as much to do with the overblown hype that surrounded Titanic as with anything else (and no, I haven't seen Titanic - refuse to on a matter of principle).He was very good in Romeo and Juliet; and I admit that he held together well in "Gangs", although I did find him a bit anodyne. Would you believe that one of the best things he's done (in my opinion) was "The Quick and the Dead" ... I don't know what that says about him ... or me, for that matter! :-)I can't see him as Alexander, though. Sorry.Marcus
He might well be, Luis - I just haven't seen enough of his work to be convinced of it, yet. As I say, he held his own in Gangs of New York, and he was extremely good in Romeo and Juliet. Those two, and The Quick and the Dead, are (I think) the only films of his that I've seen, and he was good in all three, as far as I'm concerned. That's not enough to convince me that he'd make a good Alexander, though.Marcus
