# Alexander (2004)



## tonic (May 27, 2004)

*Alexander Trailer*

If you want to view the Alexander Trailer (The movie with Colin Farell and Angelina Jolie) then go here: 

http://www.apple.com/trailers/wb/alexander/

Though Quicktime is needed.


----------



## fallenstar (May 27, 2004)

*Re: Alexander Trailer*

When is it on? I want to see it! Is it this year's November or next year?? After all, it hasn't been rated yet.


----------



## Lacedaemonian (May 27, 2004)

*Re: Alexander Trailer*

Two versions of Alexander being made and they both look like they will be crap.

Film One:  Colin Feral as Alexander - Painful.

Film Two:  Baz Lurrrrrrmannn as Director - Suicidal.

I love Alexander too but I hold no hope for these two films.  I wish Baz was dead.


----------



## Hypes (May 27, 2004)

*Re: Alexander Trailer*

I can't see it here, but that has to be some of the worst casting I've seen.


----------



## Brian G Turner (May 27, 2004)

*Re: Alexander Trailer*

Actually, Colin Farrell could be a pretty inspired choice - especially as it's getting away from the "pretty boy Hollywood look". Even better that Val Kilmer has full make-up to look how Phillip of Macedon actually looked. In my opinion, if Hollywood can forsake vanity for some degree of historical integrity then we could have a hell of a film on our hands.

 Frankly this is *the* film I am watching for. Troy and King Arthur will be pretty wardrobe pieces - but Alexander promises to be the nearest thing to "historical epic" this side of Cleopatra and Lawrence of Arabia.


----------



## Hypes (May 27, 2004)

*Re: Alexander Trailer*

If this movie flops, Brian, I shall hunt you down and spank you for comparing it to _Lawrence of Arabia_.


----------



## Lacedaemonian (May 27, 2004)

*Re: Alexander Trailer*

Fingers crossed Brian.


----------



## Brian G Turner (May 27, 2004)

*Re: Alexander Trailer*

Darn it, it doesn't show much. But enough to be uncertain. I should try and cocoon myself from the hype so that I can simply enjoy the film as that, but I have a funny feeling I won't be able to.


----------



## Lacedaemonian (May 27, 2004)

*Re: Alexander Trailer*

I am currently wiping my mind of all knowledge of the Trojan War for the hope of a similar result.


----------



## Hypes (May 27, 2004)

*Re: Alexander Trailer*

It looks all right enough.

If they can contain Angelina Jolie's breasts, it might amount to something.


----------



## Brian G Turner (May 27, 2004)

*Re: Alexander Trailer*



			
				Hypes said:
			
		

> If this movie flops, Brian, I shall hunt you down and spank you for comparing it to _Lawrence of Arabia_.


 Indeed, Cleopatra is a great costume flick, but the Anthony and Cleopatra section simply unfurls into melodrama. Up to the death of Caesar is best watched no it's own. And Lawrence of Arabia - truly one of the greats. All it takes is a little imagination to make an ancient epic work. Stone might be able to pull that off so long as he avoids being _too_ pretentious - but I'd better not hold out too much hope. Actually, just as a point of note, in one of the riding scenes Farrell doesn't half look like the famous mosaic of Alexander. Scary.


----------



## Hypes (May 27, 2004)

*Re: Alexander Trailer*

_Lawrence of Arabia_ easily ranks in my Top 5 list of Best Movies of All Time. If Stone manages even half of that, he'll be set to go. I've learned my lesson though, with directors. Wolfgang Petersen and Troy... brr.


----------



## fallenstar (May 28, 2004)

*Re: Alexander Trailer*

It better be a historic one. This year seemed to be a "Legend and Myth movie" year, but the problem is that everything is wrong.....Troy without gods and tons of weird plot, and King Arthur is.......a Roman. Though I have decided to watch that one, I am off to find some historical record of that legend and hopefully the movie will not make my history mark drop.................


----------



## Brian G Turner (May 28, 2004)

*Re: Alexander Trailer*

Maybe I should just say I hoping Alexander will rank among the historical greats - but I wait with trepidation.

 As for Lawrence of Arabia - I erally shouldn't have brought that film into the argument, as there are very few films that can match it on any level. Definitely agree it's in my "best 5 films" list.


----------



## Sage Orion (Jun 2, 2004)

*Re: Alexander Trailer*

I know a good movie when I see it!  

This one is a will be a good movie!!


----------



## Ivo (Jun 10, 2004)

*Re: Alexander Trailer*

Well, I'm looking forward to Stone's version, not so much the Baz one.  The trailer looks pretty good, a lot less CGI than Troy.


----------



## silvercloak (Jun 10, 2004)

*Re: Alexander Trailer*

Whoa, this is weird too. I was listening to Alexander the Great by Iron Maiden right when I saw this.


----------



## Brian G Turner (Jun 10, 2004)

*Re: Alexander Trailer*

Ah, yes - Steve Harris, the great bass-playing book-to-rock song composer.


----------



## Ivo (Jun 11, 2004)

*Re: Alexander Trailer*



			
				I said:
			
		

> Ah, yes - Steve Harris, the great bass-playing book-to-rock song composer.


 

That was good.


----------



## Alexa (Nov 29, 2004)

*Alexander*

Did anyone see "Alexander" yet ? I've just got back from the cinema and I cannot make up my mind if it's a good or a bad movie. My first impression is to put it in to a middle position : not really bad, but not good either. It makes me think at Cleopatra, but with less taste for decoration. 

The casting was not bad. I liked Colin Farrell and Angelina Jolie's interpretation.


----------



## Brian G Turner (Nov 29, 2004)

*Re: Alexander*

I've not seen a single film at cinema yet - so I'm hoping to make sure that this is the one. I was sort of hoping for something on the old 60's epic scale. Maybe I should blank out all comments and reviews and try and see it fresh?


----------



## Alexa (Nov 30, 2004)

*Re: Alexander*

Brian, I know Alexander is your favorite. So, please ignore my bad comments and go to see it. The movie has good parts, too. The landscapes cut your breath. There are a  lot of maps, as the empire grows and I'm sure they are authentic. The musis is not bad. The casting is good. I didn't recognize first Anthony Hopkins. Only his voice told me I knew him. I'm not sure what his role is : a scribe, a priest or an historian. Angelina Jolie  impressed me in her role as a witch. Val Kildmar' interpretation was interesting. You can see determination in Alexander as a child. And you can see his thirst of glory later. 

Just don't forget to tell me what your impressions are, whenever you have the chance to see it.


----------



## erickad71 (Nov 30, 2004)

*Re: Alexander*

I haven't seen this one yet, I'm not sure if I'm ready to see Colin Ferrel in a bad, blonde mullet.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't Angelina Jolie and Val Kilmer play Alexander's parents?


----------



## Alexa (Nov 30, 2004)

*Re: Alexander*



			
				erickad71 said:
			
		

> Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't Angelina Jolie and Val Kilmer play Alexander's parents?


You are right. Not a very happy family. Stone underlined Alexander as momy's son.

I just want to add I know finally who was Hopking's character : Ptolomey Soter. I guess I have failed on this history lesson. 

"I would rather live a short life of glory than a long one of obscurity." (Alexander The Great )


----------



## Brian G Turner (Nov 30, 2004)

*Re: Alexander*

If I remember right, Ptolemy was one of the generals (an old bloke, too) - after Alexander died, he took the kingdom of Egypt for himself - his dynasty only falling with the suicide of Cleopatra VII when Octavian/Augustus came after her.


----------



## Alexa (Dec 1, 2004)

*Re: Alexander*

Well, the movie began with him dictating to a scribe the life of Alexander. The scene was funny for me. Ptlolemy walks in his palace and the scribe follows him everywhere writing all the time. Another slave is close to the scribe with the ink-pot. I couldn't help myself and I associated the life of that slave carring the ink-pot and the life nowadays.


----------



## Lacedaemonian (Dec 1, 2004)

*Re: Alexander*

Ptolemy, like all of Alexanders friends became a satrap - and eventually divided his empire amongst themselves.  

Parmenion was executed by Alexander, as his son had apparently plotted to assasinate the Great one.  Still makes me sad.


----------



## polymorphikos (Dec 1, 2004)

*Re: Alexander*

Wasn't there a stink amongst Greeks about Alexander being prtrayed as bisexual? The films isn't out here so I can't be certain, but a silly thing to get irate about. I'm looking forward to it and hoping Lurhman's version isn't as schzophrenic as all his other offerings.


----------



## Leto (Dec 1, 2004)

*Re: Alexander*

If i understood correctly what was said on TV this morning, Greeks blame on historical mistakes (as Alexander bisexualty, although it was already a rumor among Latin historians) to boycott the movie. As they did with Troy and Hercules by Walt disney (the latter I can understand, it's full of confusions and mistakes about the myth).

Anyway, Hollywood is not the best historical source, and it's not its job.


----------



## polymorphikos (Dec 1, 2004)

*Re: Alexander*

Wasn't Alexander Macedonian anyway? And if the Greeks say it's the same thing I'll... well, I'll be irritated, because if you insisted to a Macedonian that it was the same as being a Greek or vice-versa around here you'd be liable to receive a black-eye or scathing reproach.


----------



## Jayaprakash Satyamurthy (Dec 1, 2004)

*Re: Alexander*

Just for no real reason at all, has anyone read Michael Moorcock's short story about Alexander, The Greater Conquerer?


----------



## Leto (Dec 1, 2004)

*Re: Alexander*



			
				polymorphikos said:
			
		

> Wasn't Alexander Macedonian anyway? And if the Greeks say it's the same thing I'll... well, I'll be irritated, because if you insisted to a Macedonian that it was the same as being a Greek or vice-versa around here you'd be liable to receive a black-eye or scathing reproach.


Greece still doesn't recognize Macedonia as an independant country.
But, yes, he was Macedonian.


----------



## Brian G Turner (Dec 1, 2004)

*Re: Alexander*

Sexuality in ancient Europe was a very different thing - in ancient Greece, a lot of the sexual practices there would be roundly condemned by most modern societies.


----------



## Circus Cranium (Dec 1, 2004)

*Re: Alexander*

This is getting bashed by the critics, but I tend not to listen to them. I def want to go see it soon, I love epics like that. Just make sure to pee before you go in...isn't it 3 hours long? Get the small Coke.


----------



## Lacedaemonian (Dec 1, 2004)

*Re: Alexander*

I hate Baz Lurhman - if I was an assassin and was hired to put a bullet in his head - I would wave any fee.   

Alexander was hetrosexual - albeit he was a tad too close to his friend,  Hephaistion Amyntoros.  There is no other record of him having homosexual relationships.  

The Greeks are a strange bunch.


----------



## Alexa (Dec 2, 2004)

*Re: Alexander*

The movie lasts only 2 h.

I agree with Brian about sexuality in the past.


----------



## Neon (Dec 18, 2004)

*Re: Alexander*

I definitely disliked this movie.  While the war scenes were generally well done, there were simply too many slow periods in between.  That and the continual homo-erotic scenes simply gets old.  The movie is actually 173 minutes in length, which is pretty difficult to bear.  I love these types of historical films, with or without great accuracy, but this isn't one I'd recommended seeing.


----------



## Cailleach (Dec 20, 2004)

*Re: Alexander*

I haven't seen it yet. It's going to be released here on thursday. 

I can't say I understand the bad reviews, but that may just be Stone himself. Though i do love the fact that finally someone portrays him as bi-sexual. It was typical for men to love other men, because the male body was perfect. (which is of course arguable ) I hated it when they didn't do this in Troy...I mean Patrokles Achilles cousin? COUSIN? But they probably did that to be on the safe side. 

Anyway, befor I go ranting on again, I can't wait to see this movie!


----------



## Cailleach (Dec 24, 2004)

*Re: Alexander*

Oh man, this movie is great I loved it! 

But I can definitely see why some hate this movie. Boy, I have a feeling th egay scene will love this movie.

ohhhh Hephiastus...Yum Yum Yum

Right now...too tired, will write longer review later!


----------



## FeedMeTV (Dec 26, 2004)

*Alexander*

Who's looking forward to this one? I'm not too sure about Colin Farrel taking the lead role but it has promise. It's supposed to be quite bloody and gory, particulary when compared to King Arthur which I suppose it will be quite often being along the same 'ancient leader' line.


----------



## Alysheba (Dec 29, 2004)

*Re: Alexander*

The gay scenes didn't bug me. Mostly because it didn't really affect me if Alexander was or was not gay. Either way he ruled most of the known world in his time. What irked me the most is they had Angelina Jolie play Alexander's mother. I couldn't buy it. Even with the make-up. The snake thing became kind of creepy after a while and I like snakes. Knowing that Angelina in real life is kind of odd herself, I guess it makes some sense, but no one picks up a poisonous snake and plays with it. It just rubbed me the wrong way I suppose.


----------



## Leto (Dec 29, 2004)

*Re: Alexander*

According to the legend, the snake in question was Alexander real father....
Could have been worse, they could have selected Jon Voight to play Philip, Alexander's father...


----------



## Cailleach (Dec 29, 2004)

*Re: Alexander*

LOL that would have been bad. 

The snake question. Yeah, well that was kind of a Dionysus thingie. According to writings, Priestess and followers shared their bed with snakes. (If I'm right) Snakes were held in high honour. 

You could also see the snakes on Alexander's armour, because they were the symbol of Zeus and Dionysus. 

Hmmm, I actually like Angelina Jolie. As long as I'm not reminded of Tomb Raider. I think she's a good actress. 

Heh, we can safely say I'm now obsessed with this movie.


----------



## Alysheba (Dec 29, 2004)

*Re: Alexander*

I love Angelina as an actress personally, but this role wasn't believable enough for me. Maybe I just couldn't put out of my mind that she was a very young actress playing a role that was older. Or maybe she was just too "pretty" for it. I'm not sure. Maybe it was the sexual tension that ruled throughout the film. I just ended up leaving the theater wanting it to be more than it was and the one thing I notice about Olvier Stone's movies is that I often like them much more after a while. "The Doors" and "Born On The Fourth Of July" were both films I didn't really care for at all when I first saw them. Now, I think they were both brilliant concepts. Maybe his movies are just so complex my tiny brain can't keep it all in and really appreciate some things. The man creates very deep and complex movies.


----------



## Cailleach (Dec 30, 2004)

*Re: Alexander*

The sexual tension. That was mostly because Alexander had a sort of Oedipal relationship with his mother. Remember when he said to Roxanne "If only you were not such a pale reflection of my mother" It was like that with the real Alexander too. 

It also had to do with Dionysus and Zeus. 

I think the thing people hate most about this movie, is that it's (for the most) part historically accurate and only for a small part entertainement. And I think that's what Oliver Stone is good at. He captured Vietnam perfectly in Platoon and Born on the 4th of July. 

And in those days in Greece, people were thought beautiful and depicted so. Olympia was very beautiful according to some historical records. Because of that she was able to claim that Alexander was a son of Zeus.


----------



## Leto (Jan 6, 2005)

*Re: Alexander*

Ok, the film's finally out here. Saw it yesterday. 

Basically a good Oliver Stone movie. A bit too long (especially the battles) but well done. And full of beautiful men (Cleitus among them, Colin Farell in blonde with black roots lose a lot of his sex-appeal for me). 
Except than that and the omniprescent Oliver Stone political monologue (mostly through Ptolemee's narration and basically a rehash of the one in Platoon, Nixon, JFK, and so on), it's a very good movie.


----------



## Neil040 (Jan 8, 2005)

*Re: Alexander*



			
				Cailleach said:
			
		

> The sexual tension. That was mostly because Alexander had a sort of Oedipal relationship with his mother. Remember when he said to Roxanne "If only you were not such a pale reflection of my mother" It was like that with the real Alexander too.


As Colin Farrell said about the movie.. having Angelina Jolie play your mother is enough to bring out the Oedipal in anyone!   haha   I can understand that as I think she is super sexy.. despite any oddness about her habits..   lol

I think the Greeks went nuts about the sexuality of Alexander cos they are all hairy and macho these days.. (apologies to smooth liberal Greek members) whereas in ancient times they perfected the art of not caring what sex you were so long as you were tasty!  In fact they had no such word as 'homosexual'.. simply did not signify as a distinction at all...   its crazy tho since its so well documented within their written history.  I agree that it was hilarious in Troy that Achilles preferences were distorted to turn his boyfriend into his girlfriend.. but I reckon that was Brad Pitt's agent at work there.. 'no freaking way is my guy going to play a poofter!'      I still enjoyed Troy tho quite a lot...

I am def going to see it tho since I think a large amount of the panning of it in america is down to the current right wing religo trend that is all the rage these days...  

The funniest critique I have heard thus far is that there are too many Irish accents in the film!!   oh my lord!  haha  That is soooo funny coming out of the land of hollywood historical movies!   From Moses to Robin Hood I have grown up with the idea that historical characters speak with an american accent!  And have I ever complained?   Well....  not often... err....


----------



## Leto (Jan 8, 2005)

*Re: Alexander*

About the accent, it was the first time I've heard Angelina Jolie in english, is it her  usual voice, or did she try to get some greek accent ? I think the latter, but I'd like to be sure.


----------



## Neil040 (Jan 9, 2005)

*Re: Alexander*



			
				Leto said:
			
		

> About the accent, it was the first time I've heard Angelina Jolie in english, is it her usual voice, or did she try to get some greek accent ? I think the latter, but I'd like to be sure.


Well... she is american of course... so usually she has an american accent... but.. in filming Tomb Raider she played a brit and developed a pretty damn fine english accent I thought..   now she lives in england full time I believe (according to my son who knows about these things!)

So.. the other night there was the european premiere of Alexander in Dublin and the tv spoke to her and I swear she sounded like an english rose!  I reckon as she now lives in england.. and cos she can do a perfect brit accent.. she has decided to sound english as a matter of course!

I am yet to see Alexander but I would guess she is using that in the film... which of course would make her sound upper class (Brit) amongst all those Irish accents...   haha


----------



## immortalem (Jan 15, 2005)

I hated this movie.  It was so overly done.  The only thing that was good about the film was Angelina Jolie.  The rest was horrible.  The audience was actually laughing when Colin Ferrall was talking to Jared Leto about how they may die the next day when they fight.  It was such bad acting and writing.


----------



## Amber (Jun 11, 2005)

*Alexander*

I'm sure there is a thread relating to this film, somewhere here, but being a lazy sod I've just started a new one 

I saw it last night... and my first thought was 'this is okay. Terrible dialogue, and Alexander's hair is terrible, but hey it's watchable.'

Then I got more frustrated. Alexander's relationships were terribly messed up by Hollywood, and I really feel that if Hollywood can't portray thinsg as they really were, but have to sanitize it for the audience, that they shouldn't make films at all...

Anyone else agree?


----------



## Brian G Turner (Jun 11, 2005)

*Re: Alexander*

I generally find it hard to understand how someone could mangle the Alexander history/myth, but by all accounts, Hollywood found a way.

I'm sort of tempted to buy this on DVD when finally released, on the grounds that even if the film is as bad as generally reported, then at least it may have some decent sets worth looking at.


----------



## The Master™ (Jun 12, 2005)

*Re: Alexander*

Brian, I think mangle is a strong word for it... They "re-work" the story until it bears no resemblance to the original history and try to put a spin on it that makes it acceptable for the target audience... Who are usually those people who have no grasp of history and may never find the truth of any interest...


----------



## Leto (Jun 12, 2005)

*Re: Alexander*

We're talking about which movie ? The Oliver Stone movie or the other one with pure straight Alexander ?


----------



## The Master™ (Jun 12, 2005)

*Re: Alexander*

The latest...


----------



## Leto (Jun 12, 2005)

*Re: Alexander*

Not even heard a word of it here, not sure it will be released. The Oliver Stone one wasnt the best of the movie, but quite accurate and very enjoyable.


----------



## The Master™ (Jun 12, 2005)

*Re: Alexander*

When was the Oliver Stone one??? I don't remember their being an Alexander film before the Colin Farrell version - excpet maybe in the 60's...

[EDIT]Okay, colour me embarrassed... Didn't know that the Colin Farrell version WAS the Oliver Stone version.. hehehe... Seems to me I really should check the facts before opening my gob...


----------



## Amber (Jun 12, 2005)

*Re: Alexander*

Well Hollywood did extensively sanitize it- all those you're my best brother moments between Alexander and Hephaestion.....


----------



## Leto (Jun 12, 2005)

*Re: Alexander*

Strangely best brother weren't the word used here. But clearly lover.


----------



## Amber (Jun 12, 2005)

*Re: Alexander*

Yeah he was clearly a lover. Trust Hollywood to sanitize it out


----------



## Alexa (Jun 12, 2005)

*Re: Alexander*

I didn't see anything than long glances between the two of them.

Brian, you should see the movie first before buying the DVD. I know Alexander the Great is one of your favorites, but this doesn't mean all Hollywood production deserves the credit.

Hollywood is not Hollywood for nothing. Don't forget they are interested by the profit. I always panic when a person see life through the eyes of a movie.


----------



## Blue Mythril (Jun 13, 2005)

*Re: Alexander*



> and I really feel that if Hollywood can't portray thinsg as they really were, but have to sanitize it for the audience, that they shouldn't make films at all...


I think The Master had it in one when he pointed out that it really boils down to profit and audience. I can almost respect "Hollywood's" (if we're going to generalise here) stance on leaving true history to the historians. After all, the students of history who get agitated over these things are a minority in profit target terms. Basically, it also comes down to it that if you know your history, or more than that are an active historian, it doesn't really phase you as you know whats what (or your particular stance anyway, nothing is strangely ever certain in history).
In some cases its almost good how film makers reinterpret history for a particular audience or contemporary context, kinda like Virgil's aenid... the idealisation or story-telling of film histories is often needed more than an acurate retelling of history.

Basically, if I left history behind I was able to mostly enjoy Alexander (even if it was a touch long). The tenuous link to history was enough to grab my interest and also allowed me to not get frustrated as it was quite clearly not meant to be an accurate portrayal of history.

Its things like Troy which really get me worked up, where they completely screw things up and underestimate the contemporary audience. I think it would have been more successful if they had have retained Homer's mythic elements rather than turning it into a cardboard action flick. Alexander had much more in the way of characters and development than Troy did. In fact one could argue that the problem with Troy was that they were trying to present a cultural tradition as historical fact...


> Yeah he was clearly a lover. Trust Hollywood to sanitize it out


 
I'm not too sure that it was sanitized out. If we continue with the Troy comparison, where the relationship of Patroclus and Achilles was clearly altered. I think there was much more suggested in Alexander, or at least I can remember gaining the distinct impression in the movie that they were lovers. If 'hollywood' wanted to sanitise this realtionship there wouldn't be any hint of such a relationship, and the jealousy of Alexander's wife at least provides that hint (if i'm way off and got the wrong impression from the movie).


----------



## Brian G Turner (Apr 8, 2006)

*Re: Alexander*

Okay, finally got around to watching this last night - what a complete waste of time.

It's a pretty appalling film - it looks nothing better than a student director with a student cast and a huge budget...

The Alexander and his mom scenes were absolutely dire - I couldn't tell if it was aspiring to be a low-grade soap opera, or whether they just got a kick out of paying tribute to Bollywood ham drama.

The general directing was pants, too - lots of pretty scenery, then lots of student film director touches. The eagle? Oh, come on! 

The underlying complaint is that somehow, somewhere, Oliver Stone managed to make the story completely boring. I'm impressed that he managed to achieve that feat.

As for the gay issues - that was funny, because we had repeated ham-acted scenes with Alexander and Hephastion professing their love - then hugging. You could see Hollywood just didn't want to have to do any real gay love on the screen. Although we got one gay kiss later on, it was really just a token - the way the film wanted to state there was gay love but was too prudish to really get with the issue was just humourous. 

Also - the idea of playing all the Macedonians with Irish accents was just plain hilarious. They could have barely achieved more comedic effect by having them with Welsh accents, and saying "Boyo" all the time.

Definitely one of those films to not waste money on - even when it's in the bargain bin at Tescos.


----------



## Alysheba (Apr 8, 2006)

*Re: Alexander*

I, Brian you crack me up. Seriously, you didn't think the eagle's view was fantastic? LOLOLOL Perhaps they should've had Ang Lee direct. He seems to be quite comfortable with the issue of homosexuality on screen with two hot male actors. I can see it now. Alexander help me unsheath my sword.


----------



## GOLLUM (Apr 9, 2006)

*Re: Alexander*

I've seen this film and thought it was fairly average.


----------

