I have tried to limit this list to proper period dramas (no animated features or alternate histories) and arrange them…
The greatest legend of all was real.
Alexander, the King of Macedonia, leads his legions against the giant Persian Empire. After defeating the Persians he leads his Army across the then known world venturing further than any Westerner had ever gone all the way to India.
Since we don't actually know what ancient Macedonians sound like let's each pick a different accent!
I see Angie's gone with the "crazed gypsy accent" while Mr Farrell went with the "vaguely European mumble accent", Val decided on "mostly Californian" and Anthony went for "jolly old British".
"Directed by Oliver Stone"
Are you EVER.
"Music by Vangelis"
Is it EVER.
The further back into history you delve, the more mythical some figures become. Stories about legends handed down through the ages that get embellished until the waters about what is truth and what is fiction get murkier and murkier.
Alexander The Great was a military leader and King Of Macedonia who conquered large parts of Asia Minor, Egypt, and the ancient Persian Empire. This account of his more famous exploits including his fractious relationship with his father and his quest to conquer the known world is at times thrilling, but historically suspect to say the least. Oliver Stone's film came in for criticism from all fronts. From Colin Farrell's performance as the bi-sexual Alexander, to the casting of Angelina Jolie…
Every movie enthusiast is familiar with the feeling of admiring a movie that everybody else seems to despise. Most of us have quite a few of those. I certainly have my fair share, but the movie that immediately pops into my mind in such discussions is Oliver Stone’s "Alexander".
Most critics panned the theatrical version, the box office was a letdown and it even got 6 Razzie Award nominations. This movie was on almost every level a complete failure. Flawed as it was, I did not quite get why. But then again I was only a teenager, what did I know?
In 2007, Oliver Stone released his Final Cut, which he called "Alexander Revisited". I only got around to watch…
There are some interesting ideas in the 'Revised' final cut of the film and Stone does have a bold and grand vision for the story, but the execution of those ideas just doesn't work as well as he may have hoped for.
Three re-edits later and the movie still cant survive it's often boring script and messy narrative structure. The casting is also off at times, most notably with Farrell, who tries to give it his all, but just doesn't have the screen presence or grandeur to pull of such a huge role. The movie also contains so much screaming! why do all the characters yell all the time?
I respect Stone's passion for the project and the film has a few highlights here and there, but overall it's just trying to do too much at all once.
The Ultimate Cut.
Speechless right now.
Maddeningly over-expository and boringly under-explained, in equal measure!
Two great tastes!
Had to check this out after listening to Dan Carlin's Hardcore History's take on it - did not disappoint www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-58-kings-kings-iii/
Having been disappointed by the theatrical version, I admit that I was hesitant to revisit this film. But curiosity got the best of me. When I found out there was now an "Ultimate Cut" my interest increased even more. I was surprised to discover the Ultimate Cut is actually GOOD. The film is easier to follow, the timeline and story make more sense, the characters are more fleshed out, Alexander's bisexuality is given more depth; it all just works so much better. The run time is almost 3 and a half hours but it goes by so quickly. It really is an Epic.
Now Oliver Stone has done some truly iconic movies in the past (Platoon, JFK, Wallstreet to name a few) which makes one wondering what the eff happened?
Now for my 2004 rewatch I decided to actually try and watch the 3,5 hour long version (probably to torture myself even more).
I have a huge respect for history, I study it myself though my focus is on the more recent centuries and what I know about the ancient times is mostly what I learned in high school.
Is it just me or are some of the cuts bad? Like in one shot a person is standing with arm around Alexander and in the next he's standing two meters behind him. I…
This movie was awful. Almost three hours of awful if I remember right. Three hours of grand, sweeping, lovely to look at awful.
Sokkal jobb mint a híre, olyan érdekes kérdésfelvetésekkel, mint a nyugat és a kelet eggyesülése. De a legjobb mégis az benne, hogy a legkevésbé sem amerikai, egyedül a csatajelenetek emlékeztetnek a Hollywood-i mivoltára.
This review may contain spoilers. I can handle the truth.
Oliver Stone's historical epic, Alexander, was supposed to be the big holiday release and Academy Awards magnet of 2004. It was being touted as a sure thing, the film to beat. The anticipation was tremendous. Then critics and audiences finally got to see it, and they all ran gagging from the theatres in droves. What happened?
Alexander was a perfect storm of cinematic disaster. Here was a talented director ill-suited for the genre, a completely miscast group of actors who were allowed to swallow the scenery, a confusing screenplay without a narrative drive, and an editing job that gave new meaning to the word 'incoherence.'
This is the story of the rise and fall of the conqueror from ancient Macedonia,…
It's bombastic and all over the place and historically inaccurate; it's basically a huge trash feast, which always delights my heart.
Watch it for Colin Farrell, whose face seems to be constantly caught between looking forlorn and completely mad, for the (terrible) accents, the monumental soundtrack and for the overdramatic gestures.
Don't watch it, if you want an authentic portrayal of Alexander the Great or if you would like to see a proper representation of the relationship between Alexander and Hephaistion, who were not only close friends but also lovers.
Whoops! Watch out for that banana peel, Ollie! Arguably the best looking picture of Stone's varied career, it's too bad the rest of this sludge is so boring. This is Kilmer on the verge of Hollywood extinction, Farrell growing tired of "leading man" work, and Stone spiraling out of control. Which version am I reviewing? Who knows.
Not "gay with exceptions". Not "curious". Not doing it for the sake of a plot twist or a neat ending.…