Alexander the Movie

    I saw the movie Alexander when it came out in theaters.  The entire movie was a let-down.  In response to this flop, Director Oliver Stone "remade" the movie and released it on DVD.  I decided to give it a try, and found that it is still bloated with three main problems (Think of one as a fat, and the other as 'fat-free' fat.  You can say it is something different, but unless you change the nature of the entity, it will remain the same).

I encountered three main problems:

1.) Homosexuality: Homosexuality in and of itself does not bother me.  Nor does two men kissing (like they did in the movie), speaking to each other romantically, etc.  My problem with Alexander is that Oliver Stone took a theory (that Alexander may have been bisexual), and blew it up to such a giant sexual conflict within his character.  Instead of homosexuality being a part of Alexander's character, it became almost his defining characteristic.  I felt smothered by Stone; it was too much to handle.  Had they cut back on the homosexuality image and made it a part of his character as opposed to "him", the new Director's Cut would have been decent.  But they didn't, and thus it isn't decent.

2.) His Mother: In order to heighten the conflict, Stone portrayed Alexander's mother Olympias as this psychotic witch who used her words to poison the mind of Alexander.  Instead, it poisoned the movie.  While Angelina Jolie's acting was actually very good, the character she played was overbearing in her violence, outrage, darkness, and manipulation.  Instead of a strong and manly Alexander, we get a weak and torn, slavish Alexander chained to the whim of his mother.

3.) Lack of Battles and Military Conflict- This is a movie about Alexander, the greatest conqueror in history.  You would expect that a movie about him would show why he is so famous.  Besides one good battle scene and a psychedelic battle scene in India, the movie lacks battles and warfare.  The reason? It spent too long talking about his homo/bisexuality and his overbearing mother.  What battle scenes I saw, I liked.  I was expecting more of a "Troy" than a psychological film about a deranged homosexual.

Though these faults are enough to ruin the film, it does actually have value.  What I enjoyed most about this movie was the constant reference to "Greekness".  In fact, I would call this movie more Greek than any Greco-Roman historical film I've seen.  Stone seems to have gone to great lengths to add many features of Greek life, such as birds before battle (good omen) to Aristotle's lectures on moderation and temperance.  These elements are very ingrained into the movie however, and only somebody familiar with the Greek world will be able to pick up these treats (it doesn't say that eagles are good omens, it just expects you to know).

Overall, I'd say, "Don't watch it."  It's a waste of your time unless you have a serious interest in the Greek world.  Then again, I should have expected as much from Oliver Stone.  Let's hope that his next movie (about 9/11) is decent enough to not be an insult and mockery.

-Jason Roberts

Comments

[Petter Sandstad]

I would recommend Alexander the great (1956). This is truly a great movie, with a lot of conflicts. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0048937/

[Jason Roberts]

Thank you Mr. Sandstad,

I haven't even heard of this movie. I'll be sure to check it out :).