Alexander

Mark ALEXANDER

6/6
5
42%
5/6
1
8%
4/6
0
No votes
3/6
1
8%
2/6
1
8%
1/6
2
17%
0/6
2
17%
 
Total votes: 12
User avatar
Chevalier Bayard
semi-god
semi-god
Posts: 27411
Joined: Tue 03 Dec, 2002 10:31
Steam ID: chevalierbayard
PSN ID: ChevalierBayard
Xbox Live ID: ChevalierBayard
Location: Winonist cyber-archbishopric
Contact:

Alexander

Postby Chevalier Bayard » Mon 10 Jan, 2005 01:32

Last friday with few of the forum we've seen Oliver Stone's new movie: Alexander.

Image

An Oliver Stone is quite always an event and, this time again, critics for Alexander are very different from one to another between love and hate.

Alexander is a long time project for Oliver Stone as he and Val Kilmer originally discussed Alexander while filming The Doors in 1991 !

As Oliver Stone was finally working on it, in 2003~2004 there were two projects in Hollywood regarding Alexander the Great. One which is now on screen, the other from Baz Luhrmann, the director of Romeo + Juliet and Moulin Rouge. The second one is still untitled and in pre-production and might be forgotten as in October 2004, Nicole Kidman, a potential star of the movie, asserted to the media that the movie would not be going forward.

No doubt these two films would have been very differents anyway and I wish Baz Luhrmann good luck if he wants to go after Alexander :D

Image

Oliver Stone has choosen a very unexpected angle to present the audience Alexander the Great. If the movie is called Alexander I think, as I've read it also, that it is because the movie is about the man behind the myth.

As Alexander is non a common man (at the height, Alexander's empire covered over 2 million squared miles united by a common Greek language) we see in this movie some epic moments with two battles and the encounter between young Alexander and his to become warhorse, Bucephalus.

As Alexander is commonly depicted in statues, he appears also in many scenes with eyes raised upwards towards the sun, especially in a superb scene at the top of white mountains.

Image

But, as said before, the intention is less to show us the war leader and the conquerer than the man. More than the results, we see in this movie the motivations behind the acts. We see the personnal motivations behind the official ones.

For this reason, if the work of Colin Farrell, who seems really possessed by the role, must be saluted, so do the works of both Angelina Jolie and Val Kilmer playing his parents.

Image

Val Kilmer gained over 50 pounds and stopped working out for the plump role of Philip and the lest we can say is that he delevers the audience one of his best performances ever.

Oliver Stone's work as actors director must be saluted as the result regarding the expectation we could have from this casting is just perfect.

The two worst actors of this movie are a scribe (David Bedella ?)  and Anthony Hopkins but that is explained also by the scenes in which they appear.

Image

To come back to the plot, we see in this movie how trying to please his both parents expectations Alexander slowely becomes one of the greatest military leaders in the history of warfare. How he deals during his childhood between a rude and alcoholic Philip, who is also a very respected warchief, and a very dangerous found of manipulations and conspiracy Olympias who wants her son on the throne.

We see also the influence of his love for Hephaistion (Jared Leto) on his life and how he lives his bi-sexuality. Oliver Stone treats very well the difficult subject of bi-sexuality in a very sober way.

I've only been disapointed with a scene with Roxanne (Rosario Dawson) as we see her completely naked for an heterosexual relation while Oliver Stone had stayed very sobber on the homosexual relations, giving all their meaning to kisses. Even if for a man it's pure pleasure for the eyes (believe me :D ) , it was not necessary I think.

Image

Except this little mistake, quickly forgiven in front of Rosario Dawson arguments in favour of this scene, I have absolutely enjoyed this movie A LOT !

I give it a 6/6 and invite you to see it as soon as you can.

I was hesitating between 5 and 6 but will stay on 6 to counter all bad critics I've seen regarding this movie, bad critics I can't understand :(

Again, don't expect a new The Return of The King. As the poster says it, here it's reality we are talking about, with a few legendary moments in it ;)

Chevvie

User avatar
snake
prince
prince
Posts: 8349
Joined: Thu 16 Oct, 2003 12:57
Location: Green Dragon Tavern
Contact:

Postby snake » Wed 12 Jan, 2005 01:31

Today I seen this movie for the second time and I can say now.....
6/6 ;)
Image

Hitmann47
baron
baron
Posts: 1646
Joined: Mon 02 Aug, 2004 13:13
Location: Belgium
Contact:

Postby Hitmann47 » Sat 22 Jan, 2005 23:21

Got to see this movie at last. Having read good and bad critics, I mostly agree with chevvie's take on it. Great acting from Alexander, Phillipus & Olympia.
What was annoying me at some points are the NUMEROUS gay scenes. Oliver Stone is showing a classical world where virtually every male is itchy to get a little boy to play with ... Sure homosexuality was much less of a taboo back then but this is OTT IMHO.
Also I didnt really mind the nudity scene with Roxanne. Why are female torso's prohibited when the male counterpart is being show constantly? :D
Apart from these minor drawbacks I really enjoyed Alexander
-> deserved 6/6

your hitmann.
Luck is for Losers - Hitt
Image

User avatar
Rawhide
prince
prince
Posts: 8749
Joined: Mon 11 Nov, 2002 19:17
Xbox Live ID: OLAWRawhide
Location: Maple Valley, WA, USA
Contact:

Postby Rawhide » Wed 20 Apr, 2005 01:00

I haven't seen it, but gave it a 0 rating due to the fact that they made Alexander look as gay as the day is long.

User avatar
Chevalier Bayard
semi-god
semi-god
Posts: 27411
Joined: Tue 03 Dec, 2002 10:31
Steam ID: chevalierbayard
PSN ID: ChevalierBayard
Xbox Live ID: ChevalierBayard
Location: Winonist cyber-archbishopric
Contact:

Postby Chevalier Bayard » Wed 20 Apr, 2005 06:29

But he was bi-sexual....

User avatar
Rawhide
prince
prince
Posts: 8749
Joined: Mon 11 Nov, 2002 19:17
Xbox Live ID: OLAWRawhide
Location: Maple Valley, WA, USA
Contact:

Postby Rawhide » Wed 20 Apr, 2005 08:30

Maybe so, but he didn't look like he was fresh out of the closet. Alexander was a fierce warrior, not a pretty boy who flounced around like a girly man.

User avatar
Chevalier Bayard
semi-god
semi-god
Posts: 27411
Joined: Tue 03 Dec, 2002 10:31
Steam ID: chevalierbayard
PSN ID: ChevalierBayard
Xbox Live ID: ChevalierBayard
Location: Winonist cyber-archbishopric
Contact:

Postby Chevalier Bayard » Wed 20 Apr, 2005 09:21

You should see it before telling these sort of things cause on the contrary I can tell you the war scenes are very far to be "girly" and Colin Farrell is impressive in the role even if I was not a fan of his performances till now.

I'll add also that at this time, people use to take care of themselves which you could consider as "to be girly"  :roll: ...

But that doesn't prevent them to take part in horrible bloody battles like the ones you see in Oliver Stone's movie.

User avatar
Liewen
champion
champion
Posts: 649
Joined: Sun 20 Mar, 2005 02:43
Xbox Live ID: Liewen
Wii code: 7822003881806675
raptr ID: Liewen
Location: Lotharingia

Postby Liewen » Wed 20 Apr, 2005 19:55

Rawhide wrote:Maybe so, but he didn't look like he was fresh out of the closet. Alexander was a fierce warrior, not a pretty boy who flounced around like a girly man.


   I do feel sorry for you, and for all the American, because by saying that you confirm the cliché of the stupid-American-without-any-culture (sorry for the other yanks : I said it's a cliché we Europeans have).

   I have studied Ancient Greece for years in University, and actually Alexandre was "bisexual", as all the Greecians were.
   The ancient Greecian society was strongly divided between women and men ; the women had their own world in the house (in the gynécée), and all the same with the men, outside of the house. They were only united in marriage, and, even, sexuality had nothing to do with marriage.
   Indeed, the typical education of a young boy included a sexual initiation around his 15's, made by an older man (he was called the éraste, the one who gave, whereas the teenager was being called the éromène, the one who received).

   So, following your 21st-macho-man philosophy, Alexandre WAS gay  :)

   And, really and once more, I DO feel sorry for you for having such a poor and intolerant attitude  :P

User avatar
snake
prince
prince
Posts: 8349
Joined: Thu 16 Oct, 2003 12:57
Location: Green Dragon Tavern
Contact:

Postby snake » Wed 20 Apr, 2005 20:30

Rawhide wrote:I haven't seen it, but gave it a 0 rating due to the fact that they made Alexander look as gay as the day is long.



you d'ont see the movie but you put it a 0/6 :angry:

this is masterpiece !!!
listen to chevvie and liewen

:D

User avatar
Rottweiler
counselor
counselor
Posts: 5193
Joined: Thu 16 Oct, 2003 08:13
Location: Dans la peau de Sid Marcus

Postby Rottweiler » Wed 20 Apr, 2005 20:39

Seriously Rawhide, see the movie and then come back and tell us about it. There's absolutely no point in telling such dumb things as "Alexander was a warrior, not an all-out poofter" without having even seen the movie. This conversation will only lead to aggravated debate which will prove most sterile.

I applaude Stone's unconcessional take on History and his portrayal of Alexander, Philip and Olympias, all three played by actors I usually despise but who, in this movie, litterally blew my mind.
Image


Return to “North America”



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests