Re: Colin Farrell in ATG costume

nick · Post by **nick** » Wed Nov 05, 2003 6:36 am

I have great difficulties with a veiled Roxane here. I don't think our present knowledge of ancient Persia warrants a burka-like dress for Persian women (Persia in a broad sense, I am aware she was Bactrian/Sogdian; still she belonged to Persian nobility).Or did the Taliban actually arrive in Afghanistan before Alexander did? That would explain everything!Best regards -
Nick

s.andra · Post by **s.andra** » Wed Nov 05, 2003 7:55 am

Hey, was she from Afganistane?

Linda · Post by **Linda** » Wed Nov 05, 2003 11:41 am

I think it looks great! I don't really care if it is authentic or not, it is magificent. Lots of exoticness, like some high budget Star Trek. If you've seen Pasolini's Medea, with Maria Callas, he had all these wild, exotic, jangly costumes for his heroine. Heigtened her "barbarity" This looks like being a really beautiful film, in the old style of splendour, Elizabeth Taylor as Cleopatra etc.
Excellent.

Tre · Post by **Tre** » Wed Nov 05, 2003 1:06 pm

And I wondered what happened to that beaded curtain I put in the closet :-)While it has been all over the net that Colin is exposing himself to the cast members by lifting his 'skirt' as a joke, I'll try to remember we didn't pick him for the role.

amyntoros · Post by **amyntoros** » Wed Nov 05, 2003 6:55 pm

Colin hasn't confined his "exposure" to the set. Apparently, he took it out so often in his hotel bar that he upset Angelina Jolie and had to move hotels! (This little gem from the Oliver Stone forum.)As for the costumes - so is this supposed to be Alexander in Persianized dress? More modest than the Persian, more stately than the Median??? Yikes! If he *had* worn something like this, no one could blame his Macedonians for being upset. Ah well, I have to go now - for some strange reason I feel an ABBA song coming on........

romaneyes · Post by **romaneyes** » Thu Nov 06, 2003 12:06 am

Colin is an overgrown boy, I don't take his antics seriously. I think he will do an excellent job as Alexander, when it actually comes to acting. As for the Persian dress, it reminds me an awful lot of high school "spirit week" the day called "clash day" when everything you wear doesn't match. It looks so HEAVY on him. No elegance at all, just plain burden. It's almost "drag queen" like. But then again that might be the point of the director, to show the massive contrast that made his soldiers shudder at the thought of him becoming Persian. As for Roxanne, she's too covered up, too covered up. I've always imagined her a little more freely, where one could see her beauty from afar. The rest of the pictures so far are re-assuring I think. He doesn't look half bad, and some attention to detail has been taken, and that's good. It does look promising.

anna · Post by **anna** » Thu Nov 06, 2003 2:27 am

I have an announcement for my fellow boardmates:I guessed the new movie title!!!!Alexander the King of the Desert!Be prepared for the smashing soundtrack in ABBA style!!! coming soo-o-o-on....

;)OK, seriously... What the hell?!!!

susan · Post by **susan** » Thu Nov 06, 2003 3:02 am

NickI think it's a bridal veil, not a burqa. The Burqa covers the whole body, with just an opening for the eyes.The woman behind Roxane is unveiled, and it's been customary in very many cultures for brides to have their faces veiled at their weddings - in Christian, Muslim and I think Hindu weddings. In the 1800s, the habit of the women of Bokhara was to wear very many layers of clothes, like dressing gowns, so that when they appeared in public no-one could tell what their real shape was.In the medallion of Alexander with Olympias, she appears to have a shawl over her head, although her face isn't covered. It was often the custom for women to start covering their hair on their marriage.RegardsSusan

maciek · Post by **maciek** » Thu Nov 06, 2003 4:26 am

I hope You will! I'm very interesting of pictures You've made in Turkey. I have a very good documented Thermessos, Side, Aspendos and Perge. Also I made a few picts of Alex's road from Faselis to Perge where Sea "let him through" but this is from distance.Regards
Maciek

nick · Post by **nick** » Thu Nov 06, 2003 6:08 pm

Hi Susan -Yes, I know. I know it isn't a burka (I wrote "burka-like dress"). I know the dress is probably quite in accordance with many (and also pre-Muslim) wedding ceremonies around the world - and in ages past.This is just not how I have pictured the wild and unpolished beauty of Roxane in my personal fantasies for all those years. I just expressed my disappointment. Will this movie finally interfere with my highly private universe in which I created and fostered my private images of Alexander, Roxane, Olympias, Sysigambis, Barsine, Stateira...?I suppose that might be one reason that makes many of us react in a 'irrated' (?) way when we see stills from the movie. Does it conflict with our personal, exclusive, secret fantasies about what Alexander's world looked like? Will the movie destort my abilities to create my 'own' Alexander image gallery for years to come?Regards -
Nick

S · Post by S » Thu Nov 06, 2003 6:52 pm

Greetings Nick,
I don't think it has so much to do with any private fantasies, so much as the fact that it is the fantasy aspect that I *don't* want to see. Also, in clothing and jewelry, much of it actually has significance of some sort, so it is important to "get it right".. like in Jurassic Park when the botanist says "You picked these plants because they are pretty, but many of them are highly toxic". What something *means* to another culture is important- I am certain this movie will not only play in one country or culture-like the time I explained to someone that the "wall hanging" they had proudly put on their wall was not a "wall hanging" at all (and they blushed when I told them what it was), and the reason there were chuckles at their necklace, which they had made from "these attractive rings" because it looked "nice" and "made a statement" was something not usually worn around the neck- so to speak
So I think it is less about our fantasies and more about Stone's
Regards,
Sikander

amyntoros · Post by **amyntoros** » Thu Nov 06, 2003 7:59 pm

I do agree - this is about Stone's fantasies. He obviously had the costumers dream up something that would look likely to shock the Macedonian troops. Unfortunately - unless I'm greatly mistaken - it was the simplicity of Alexander's "Persianized" costume that truly disturbed them. Plutarch, describing Alexander before the battle of Guagamela, tells of Alexander wearing a tunic made in Sicily and a cloak made by Helicon (an artist of earlier times)that was presented to him as a mark of honor by the city of Rhodes and was "more ornate" than the rest of his armour.After Alexander adopted a form of Persian dress, we hear of white cloaks with purple bands at the bottom, and vice versa. And Cleitus at the famous drunken symposium makes reference to Alexander's "white tunic" as if it is something to be despised. If Stone was even aware of this, he probably thought it couldn't be translated on screen so that a modern-day audience would understand. So he went for the obvious - a ridiculous excess of ornament. (And don't even get me started on that "thing" around Alexander's head. It looks like it belongs on William Shatner in some Star Trek fantasy of ancient times.) I wonder about the people who will see this movie having never known anything about Alexander before. They will take these images home with them. There are people on the internet today who write fiction (usually erotic) on Alexander and Hephaistion and based on the Reign the Conqueror anime series. They seem to be mostly young girls who know nothing about the real history. Occasionally one of their pages will pop up on an unrelated search and I roar with laughter at descriptions like "Alexander removed the ribbon from Hephaistion's long, lilac hair." However, Stone's movie promises to be a blockbuster and is expected to be seen by millions worldwide. I would have liked just a little more attempt at authenticity!Linda Ann

S · Post by S » Fri Nov 07, 2003 1:31 am

Hmm, I just realized that the posts I put up don't print any of the angle brackets, inside of which I usually add a word to denote whether I am serious or laughing... so I will have to use another mark!
Sooo, my apologies if sometimes anyone has thought I was "serious" when I made light-hearted comments- I only just realized parts of my posts were missing!
Regards,
Sikander

susan · Post by **susan** » Fri Nov 07, 2003 2:45 am

Hi NickI don't think this is anything new - do you remember the story of Lysimachus being entertained with an account of Alexander's meeting with the Amazons, and asking "Where was I at the time?" . I think that the films will have little impact upon how we view Alexander and his friends, because they'll be so far off the mark. A film that was accurate in detail might do more damage to our fantasies.I've been looking at the other pictures on the rumor control site, and it seems to me that Alexander's costumes look rather undignified in some of them - for instance, the grinning face on the breastplate - and this is something that feels out of place.RegardsSusan

beausefaless · Post by **beausefaless** » Fri Nov 07, 2003 6:30 am

It's a funny thing you mentioned William Shatner for he did play the part of Alexander The Great in a film made for TV during the sixtys!

pothos.org