Becoming Alexander

[karen]

Okay, I haven't seen the movie yet, so I'm going to cheat by talking about something I have seen, the documentary on Colin Farrell's preparations for the role, _Becoming Alexander_.Wasn't it cool watching him become more and more ripped as the show went on? He starts out with a little flab on the belly, and by filming time the veins are standing out on his arms.I'm sure a real phalanx of that time would have brought down their sarissas much more tightly and sharply. That'd be the difference between years of training, and a few weeks. Colin didn't swing a sword like someone who's practiced it for years, either... of course, how can he, without having practiced it for years?But most importantly, for me, I just didn't get the warrior spirit coming from him, even when he was barking orders. I think he's just too gentle and sweet and sociable a personality, so that he can't really find it in him to exude toughness and hardness, or to be inherently, or even superficially, intimidating. So I'm expecting that aspect to be missing from his acting in the movie. Maybe he will seem more that way after shots of him severing limbs and so forth; I hope so.Those who have seen it can tell us what they think...Warmly,
Karen

[ruthaki]

I thought "Becoming Alexander" was very interesting and it gave me a new respect for Farrell and Oliver Stone for what they went through to try and put over some authenticity into the role. I do agree that sometimes Farrell doesn't see 'strong' enough, but I think when you see him covered in blood and screaming his head off in the battle scenes it makes up for what you didn't get in this docu. And in the movie the phalanx looks much more awesome too.

[justme]

Yes, I saw the special too. And I agree with Ruthaki that seeing Farrell on screen, in blood and gore, gives him much more of a sense of power. But then again, while Alexander was obviously a great leader, wasn't he also one of the boys? He was in the front lines with the men, he drank with his companions, and he knew his men well. They had to love AND respect him, so I think you need someone to play him who can be one of the boys as well as the ferocious battle leader. Lois

[marcus]

It's interesting that a number of articles have talked about how Farrell emerged as a 'true leader' of the cast; and how he personally shipped a whole load of extras to the premiere. If these stories are true then perhaps Farrell did display some of the things that made Alexander such a hit with his men - added, of course, to Farrell's willingness to knock back a few beers with the boys.Whether this translates to the screen, of course, can only be confirmed by those who've seen the film ... but if they are true then perhaps Alexander's spirit imbued Farrell as much as all the spirits he imbued in those Thai bars!All the bestMarcus

[karen]

Yes he was "one of the boys" but he also needed to be the commander whose orders were instantly followed without question. So I'm sure he was both, and could probably switch from one to the other seamlessly. That takes an actor with a lot of range. Did Colin do that? Both? I'm hoping so.Warmly,
Karen

[xxx]

Not if you read any of the reviews, and believe me, the critics adore him normally. The clips I've seen were not impressive. He does not have that kind of presence or authority required for the role.

[jan]

I am sorry to disappoint you. I have seen Colin in Tigerland and Hart's War. I really like him in those movies and thought him fantastic. But Stone ruined him as his portrayal of Alexander is so bad that one who likes and respects Alexander would like to make him the target on a dart board and throw darts at him. He is NOT the Alexander that a real Alexander fan would want to see. I saw Discover Channel's t.v. version of the Death of Alexander, and they used an actor who did give an image that was much more acceptable, as at least he stood up straight and tall, shoulders back, in a commander position. NO, Colin is truly dismal and insulting in his badboy presentation. Karen got it nearly right, too sweet, and too weak and pitiful. He is a crybaby and can't get served at the San Francisco bar. An inside joke as the bar uses its slogan as crybabys don't get served here! It is no longer in business here at Fashion Square in Scottsdale. Colin may get a piece of Stone for Christmas!

[justme]

I think if anyone is looking for "their Alexander" they are going to be disappointed. It's Stone's Alexander through and through. It must be remembered that this is one man's vision of the complexities of Alexander - a man of contradictions and strong emotions (including sadness and weeping). The weeping does NOT make him weak in my view.
Everyone needs to see the movie to make their own judgement on it. Obviously, we aren't all going to agree.
LoisP.S. Editing to add some feedback from an article I just read:FEATURE - Adding Up ALEXANDER
Tuesday November 30 12:53 PM ETBy Susan Michals, FilmStew.com"...But on screen in Alexander, Farrell possesses enough charisma and believability as a leader of men to suggest that it is perhaps the directorGÇÖs vision that ultimately sunk the three-hour film.'Colin is the only actor I feel could have played Alexander,' Jolie maintains. 'Because he is the everyman, he supports other people, he loves the guys he worked with, he was their best buddy, they would have followed him into battle, they would follow him anywhere now if he asked them. He comes from a very good place.''He doesn't need to be the center,' she continues. 'He's not arrogant, he's not selfish. He's a really hardworking, wild free-spirited person. It looks like when he gives the speeches as Alexander you just kind of feel he can inspire a group of people.' "...'ItGÇÖs maybe the toughest thing IGÇÖll ever do,' he (Farrell) admits. 'I read a lot about Alexander, I thought a lot about him. I fell in love with him in many respects. I found him to have had an incredibly sad life. A life filled with great glory and great promise and great achievement and massive wealth, king of the f*cking world.'

[ruthaki]

Yes, Lois, I agree. That is the Colin Farrell I saw (and have seen on various interviews). He loved Alexander and I believe he did his best in the portrayel Sure, some of the script was weak (It wasn't Shakespeare, after all) but in general I thought he pulled it off alright. I'm going to see the film for a second time tonight. I'll pay more attention to details this time and see if my opinion changes. ruthaki

[luisfc1972]

colin is getting too much shit. it is oliver stones portrayal of the great one. colin did the best he could with the material. i thought colin was damn good as stones alexander.