Alexander anyone?

The reviews are starting to dribble in…

So far, not so good…

Anyone out there still planning on seeing this one? (or seen it yet in a prescreen and cares to comment…)

  • Rebekkah

I am not so interested despite generally loving historical biopics and/or epics. The commercials for it look rather mundane and I guess I’m still a little bummed by the less than stellar *Troy *(and I like it more than most).

Is the DiCaprio version still being planned? I’d like to see it… I really like Leo.

I figure I’ll catch it on video. I’ve rarely had any good feelings toward an Oliver Stone film, and I just can’t get excited about this one. The trailer looked cool, but the more I hear about it, the more it sounds all crappy. My time and money are more valuable than it sounds like it’s worth.

Just out of curiosity-

I heard they cast Anthony Hopkins as Ptolemy…wouldn’t it have been a better choice to cast him as Aristotle? Supposedly Aristotle was Alexander’s teacher and mentor, and I think Hopkins would have fulfilled that role very well.

CNN pretty much panned it. And everyone keeps thinking they are so smart by saying stuff like “Alexander the mediocre” or “Alexander the so-so” :smack:

Yes, we get it. Its supposed to be “the Great”, and you changed it.
We get it.
[/mini rant]

I’d been excited about this movie since I heard they were making it a year and a half ago. It’s a little depressing to read the reviews on this considering how excited I was about an Alexander the Great project (the movies before this have been less than stellar). Despite the fact that the reviews are by no means glowing, it appears that there are enough positives to make me at least watch it in theatres…

As for the Baz Luhrmann project, I heard about a month ago that it was no longer going forward. Maybe now that it appears the attempt by Oliver Stone is going to be less than successful, Mr. Luhrmann will give it another shot…one can only hope.

I see everything Oliver Stone does. Even though a great many of his movies are less than successful, and indeed many of them outright suck, he’s always going for broke. See, when Stone makes a bad movie, he almost invariably finds a way to make a bad movie a new way. I find Stone’s work frequently frustrating, but at least he’s trying new stuff and swinging for the fences. Or to look at it another way, I see so many movies, and so many stupidly bad movies at that, that I find a lot of value in interesting failures.

Besides, Rosario Dawson is naked. Hubba hubba.

I retract my previous post.

Whether or not I see it is directly proportional to whether the same can be said of Francisco “Bagoas” Bosch.

I’m beginning to think Jonathan Rhys-Meyers (Cassander) is cursed.

I have an unreasonable soft spot for the poor lad, and I’m always hoping that his next film will put him on the A-list. Or at least the B-list. Yet somehow he keeps managing to end up in supporting roles in movies that sound promising, and that have Big Name directors and stars attached, but nevertheless fail to succeed. This year he’s managed to make two movies that even I don’t feel inclined to spend my money on – Vanity Fair and Alexander. No matter who’s naked in 'em.

I initially had no interest, but if I read one more article about people complaining about the guy-on-guy action, I’m going to have to check it out. Colin Farrell and Jared Leto? They can be riding a giant earthworm to the centre of the Earth for the rest of the movie for all I care.

(what a poorly constructed sentence. I’ll hang my head in shame then go straight to bed)

I’m waiting for the book.

Not a book about Alexander of Macedon - there are enough of those out there already. No, I’m waiting for the behind-the-scenes Hollywood tell-all, which will hopefully explain how this movie got greenlighted in the first place. There has to be a good, juicy story behind this.

Velvet Goldmine, anyone?

I quite like that one, actually. However, despite a Promising Director and some recognizable names in the cast (Ewan McGregor was not yet a Big Star, but he was getting there), it still tanked at the box office.

Of course, there was guy-on-guy action in that one too. Can’t expect the American public to go for that.

I adored Velvet Goldmine, guy on guy action and all.
Back to Alexander: I am not thoroughly well-read on Alexander the Great, but the man fascinates me. I have read all the Mary Renault books and was excited about Stone’s movie until I heard that Colin Farell had the title role. I do like Farell, and love his dark looks, but just did not see him as the charismatic Alexander.
And now with the reviews lukewarm or negative I might wait for the rentals.
Might still see it in a theater if someone reports back that at least the battle scenes are worthwhile.

From what I’ve read, the only sex scene is between Alexander and Roxane. No actual guy-on-guy action, just alot of meaningful looks and bear hugs. And maybe one kiss.

He was plenty big in that one stage scene. :slight_smile:

Saw the movie early this afternoon, not TOO crowded as you may suspect. The beginning and ending are a bit weak,but the vast middle section is quite good and some scenes are riveting. The “choreography” necessary for the battle scenes
is amazing.No wonder it cost 155 million. I’m sorry I read the reviews before seeing the film, it was better than I was led to believe. Colin Farrell WAS inconsistent, mostly believable but in some scenes it was “you-can-see-the-wheels-turning” type of acting. OK, Angelina Jolie was a bit of a scenery chewer[it’s tough padding these things out to 3 hours(my apologies to Month Python)] Her and Anthony Hopkins’ scenes provided the continuity. The supporting cast did a very good job. I’d recommend it.

Just returned from seeing it. “Alexander” committed the greatest sin a movie intended to entertain can make: it bored me. It bored my traveling companion. It bored the random guy in the seat next to her (he mentioned this on the way out). Of all the reactions I could have anticipated, boredom wasn’t even on the long list of contenders. I can’t speak as to the historical accuracy of the film - most of my knowledge comes from the recent cable documentary, but even with that scant background a lot of points made me go “Hmmm” - but as entertainment, it jumped over some of the most interesting occurrences, and dwelled on aspects that just didn’t seem all that important. I really wonder about the number of rapes that occur on screen, especially when they felt gratuitous.

If a spoilerific Alexander thread pops up, I’ll go into detail. Short version: not worth my money, even as a bargain matinee.