Director Oliver Stone has made a career out of controversial films. "Kennedy" implied that there was a dark conspiracy behind the President's murder and so on.
It's difficult, however to stir up much controversy over someone who's been dead for 2000 years and lived about as heroically as possible. Stone makes a few feeble feints in that direction, but gets nowhere. Apparently, in the Stone universe, Alexander the Great was an emotionally unstable child who lucked into all his victories and ultimately over-reached because he had daddy issues. God forbid that some legendary figure from the past actually was heroic and manly! Much better to pull him down and paint a portrait of a petulant overgrown child.
|The movie's lagging, so throw in a pretty face!|
I went into this movie with fairly high hopes. I was favorably impressed by "Troy" and was in the mood for another historical epic. In some ways, this was an interesting movie, but overall, it was a major disappointment. At best, we get some overheated and obviously dramatized visuals such as the one above. Once the film turns toward actual human relationships, though, it falters badly.
|The director, making a point|
While Colin Farrell clearly put some effort into the title role, pretty much everything else about the movie is a let-down. The prime problem is the screenplay, which is disjointed and lacks coherency in places. At times, the movie tries to be a quasi-documentary a la "The Longest Day" with title cards during battle scenes announcing "Macedonian Left Flank" and "Persian Center" and nonsense like that, but more often it degenerates into a tale of backbiting and "Why doesn't daddy love me" soap opera melodrama.
|We get it, there were a lot of spears|
I will say this, in places the film is very colorful. You get an idea of what it might have been like to actually walk through some fabled towns of the age. There are stunning shots of eagles and jugglers and incidental bits like that. The battle scenes, while utterly confusing from any kind of strategic viewpoint, captured some of the desperation and despair and confusion and sudden elation that perhaps was the case in real life.
|Is this from the same movie? Who cares!|
But then Alexander gets into pissy little shouting matches with his soldiers and we jump from one continent to another with absolutely no continuity and any kind of momentum is lost. The director Oliver Stone is good at showing Alexander's inner turmoil - hey, he must have had some, everybody does at some point, right? - by having him in extended scenes on frozen mountaintops and the like looking distressed, but then another battle scene pops up and it's time to move on.
|Rosario Dawson is thrown in for two good reasons|
I thought Angelina Jolie was terrible, affecting a "Boris and Natascha" accent that grated against the Irish and English accents of pretty much everyone else in the cast. While Peter O'Toole stole "Troy" out from under Brad Pitt, here Christopher Plummer manages a weak cameo and Anthony Hopkins just serves as a kind of overwrought museum tour guide. Val Kilmer actually looks alive in a few scenes, but his role is utterly thankless and, given the way it is written, one can only wonder how his character made it to middle age alive, much less became a king.
|Have you done your homework?|
Too long, too disjointed, too dull. If Alexander was gay or at least bisexual, that's wonderful for him I suppose, but he also won a few campaigns, too. It would have been nice to learn a little bit about them other than that elephants can be big and scary and that war is hell. Showing a map here and there and highlighting a few triumphant city entrances along with scenes of grumbling underlings does not do the man justice. If you are history buff this film might be worth seeing, but otherwise it might be difficult to sit through.