Alexander (2-Disc Widescreen Special Edition) (2004)

 

 

Create your own review

I liked this movie so much when I saw it in the theatre I went back and saw it again a few days later. This is not just another war movie. By the time you see Alexander standing at the top of the Hindu Kush telling Ptolemy that every time he goes to a new country he peels away another layer of illusion, it is obvious that this movie is portraying Alexander's conquest as a creative and spiritual quest driven by deep personal needs. I liked the feeling of destiny, the exhilaration of vicariously enjoying the success of someone who is not afraid to go after what he wants, tempered by the awareness that everything has its limits and that ultimately "all men reach and fail."

Another thing I liked was how Alexander's mother Olympias puts her own strength and ambition into him. In her intense love for him, as well as her horrible manipulativeness the movie shows (whether Oliver Stone intended to or not) what can happen to the energies of a strong woman in a society where she has no outlet for her ambitions except through her son. I liked too how Alexander's relationship with Hephaistion provides him with a balancing factor to his obsessive need for achievement. Hephaistion reminds him that love is important too. He is very supportive of Alexander, but provides a balancing perspective. Theirs is as close to an equal relationship as a king at that time could have, a spiritual-sexual friendship of the kind approved in the movie by their teacher Aristotle. I like a lot of things about this movie but I'll only mention one more. I liked the way the symbolism of the eagle appears throughout the movie and underlines the major themes.

I give the Theatrical Release version five stars.

I give the new Director's Cut only four stars because of excessive flashbacks that interrupt the flow and shape of the story, and some things taken out that I think should have been left in.

So, according to Oliver Stone, who's never met a piece of history he didn't want to distort, Alexander the Great was a girly man crybaby who let his own men insult and belittle him throughout his whole quest for greatness. The very fact that Stone sensationalized the homosexual malarkey of his Alexander cut the rug out from under this film's feet before it ever hit theatres. Alexander the Great is a name that has resounded throughout history for over two millennia - but the history of that story somehow wasn't good enough for Stone. I think even Freud would shudder at the thought of someone who is not a psychologist or even an historian trying to psychoanalyze a man who died over three hundred years before the birth of Christ. It's unfortunate because this could have been a powerful film.

Skipping back and forth across Alexander's life (Stone apparently thinks is a devilishly clever way to tell a story), we follow the great conqueror's story from his childhood to his death through the eyes of Ptolemy (Anthony Hopkins). Born to Philip of Macedon and his exotic first wife Olympias (Angelina Jolie) -who claimed Alexander was the son of Zeus -Alexander (Colin Farrell) had a complicated childhood. Olympias groomed him to be the next king, worrying all the while that Philip would not recognize him as the legitimate heir. Interestingly, Olympias doesn't seem to age a day between Alexander's birth and his ascendancy to the throne at the age of nineteen. We're talking about Angelina Jolie here, so I couldn't get past the thought that this is an Oedipus complex just waiting to happen. Anyway, Alexander replaces his murdered father, sets off north to establish his control over the tribes there, and then just keeps heading east conquering everything that gets in his way. After his daring defeat of Persia's King Darius, he fights his way all the way into India, farther than anyone before him had ever gone. If he had known those Indian tribes had war elephants, I daresay Alexander might have just turned around at the border and headed back home early. Instead, his military exploits extend over seven years. We hear him talk about assimilating the conquered peoples, and he certainly likes to build Alexandrias all over the place, but this grand vision theme of Alexander's life doesn't get enough play in the movie to sufficiently explain his motives.

The movie does have some strengths. The battle scenes are very impressive (except the end of the final one, when Stone decides to get artistic with it), especially Alexander's ill-fated fight with the elephant-equipped Indian tribes. Blood and guts are spilled on an epic scale. Angelina Jolie is mesmerizing as Alexander's devious, snake-loving mother - but I have no idea where that accent of hers was supposed to have come from. Speaking of strange accents, Colin Farrell sometimes sounded to me like he should have been leading Braveheart's forces. He never became Alexander in my eyes - there just wasn't enough substance to his character. If the film had been nothing but battle scenes, Farrell would have been more convincing; it's the scenes taking place between battles that leads this film astray. Most of this time is spent watching Alexander exchange meaningful glances with pretty boys wearing more makeup than Jezebel. The rest of the time consists of all those loyal men who supposedly adore their brave king whining about the length of the campaign, criticizing Alexander's motives and strategy, and making snide remarks about his heritage. There's no way Alexander the Great let his men talk to him the way they do throughout this film. There's really not much leadership on display by here. Alexander's brave, certainly, but he's no Patton.

Basically, Oliver Stone does a great disservice to Alexander the Great, passing him off as a dandy with little strategic genius and even less control over men who supposedly loved and respected him enough to fight and die for him thousands of miles from home. Stone's characterization of Alexander is just plain weird - and that's the whole problem with this movie. Let's hope that the youth of today and tomorrow don't see this film and actually believe they're seeing an accurate picture of Alexander the Great because Stone's Alexander ain't all that great.

This film has been much maligned but I don't quite understand why. While I wouldn't say that it's among Stone's best, it is still a pretty good movie. Colin Farrell plays a pretty low key Alexander. One might argue that his is a lackluster performance, but I think somewhat low key was Stone's intent. I must say that I didn't like Anthony Hopkins' role that much, but Val Kilmer had a memorable one. The battle scenes played out well, but may have been a bit perfunctory. Maybe the main reason the film didn't do well is timing, namely coming on the heels of other ancient battle movies such as Gladiator and Kingdom of Heaven. Author of Adjust Your Brain: A Practical Theory for Maximizing Mental Health.

Share your thoughts with other customers: Create your own review

› See all 10 customer reviews on Amazon.ca

 

5.0 out of 5 stars Alexander DVD
the dvd was in new condition, never opened and had a good price. it was delivered in the mail when it said it would be. i would order from them again.

Published 15 months ago by riri

1.0 out of 5 stars Directionless
Alexander is a biopic of the legendary warrior who, by the age of 25, ruled most of the known world and died -- not with a bang but a whimper -- at 32. Read more

Published on Dec 12 2008 by Greg Curtis

5.0 out of 5 stars "CONQUER YOUR FEAR! AND I PROMISE YOU'LL CONQUER DEATH!"
I really enjoyed this movie but this should really only be four and a half because of the annoying, sometimes pointless flashbacks, but this is definetly Alexander the Great... Read more

Published on Jun 8 2006 by RICK

4.0 out of 5 stars The greatest Alexander, brought down to real life
I must confess at the outset that I am picky with most historical films; being an historian of sorts, it bothers me when the story deviates too far from the historical record... Read more

Published on Feb 13 2006 by FrKurt Messick

1.0 out of 5 stars Tried to hard
This movie came off as trying too hard to win an oscar. The reviewer "Rod Beilfuss from Canada" said it best:

Seriously...it's that bad.

i mean it.....
BAD!

Published on Sep 21 2005

5.0 out of 5 stars Alexander, si riche qu'un seul visionnement ne suffit pas..
Certainement le film le plus incompris et sous-estimé de 2004! Quel dommage!

Je lui donne 4 1/2 étoiles sur 5! Oui, j'ai beaucoup aimé ce film. Read more

Published on Aug 26 2005 by Pierre Gouin

1.0 out of 5 stars Terrible disjointed film
This is a terrible movie. Not only is the makeup atrocious on the actors - way too much eye liner and the blonde hair doesn't work, but the film jumps all over the place, going... Read more

Published on Aug 23 2005

Search Customer Reviews
Only search this product's reviews

› See all 10 customer reviews on Amazon.ca

Search Listmania!