Go to the alexander-the-great.co.uk homepage
alexander-the-great.co.uk
Talk about the Oliver Stone movie "Alexander"
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Alexander is a BAD movie - with a lot of $$....

 
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    alexander-the-great.co.uk Forum Index -> Discuss 'Alexander' the Movie - Post Release
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Ariobarzin



Joined: 11 Jan 2005
Posts: 29

PostPosted: Tue Jan 11, 2005 10:49 am    Post subject: Alexander is a BAD movie - with a lot of $$.... Reply with quote

Alexander is a boaring movie full of historical inacuracies, poor acting, poor scenario, and poor action.
Collin Farrel is just not convincing as Alexander character with his baby face and poor acting. The only good performance was done by Angelina Jolie.
Also the dialogs are empty and uninteresting, just to fill the gaps between poor action.
Also the overall scenario is uninteresting.
Alexander is presented like a dreamer but the dream is not clearly exposed and presented. One just does not get WHY Alexander did all he did. Also, he is presented as the world conqueror and savior, when the "only" thing he did was to defeat the Persians and to take the lands they had conquered before him.
Also the darkest side of his character is not at all presented. After all he was a drunk and dangerous man, who distroyed many cities and sent to death many people. He was not a freedom fighter as Mr Stone puts it. What a joke!!!
Also, the action side is realy bad. Only one of the three main battles between the Greeks and the Persian Army is presented (Gaugamela). Alexander Strategy is not at all clearly presented. It is just confusion and blood.... ridiculous...
What do you expect from a film shut in just 80 days!!! (this was just to go faster than Lehmann who was also starting to shoot his own Alexander movie....). What a low class behaviour.
Not mentionning the extreme lack of respect and accuracy with which the Persians are depicted (wrong dressing, faces, language, behaviour, etc...). They are presented as Barbaric people, when they were certainly more liberal and civilized than the Barbaric Macedonains at that time. The slavery was used by teh Greeks not by the Persians... Persian Achamenide kings were the first to promote human rights (see Cyrus Cylinder, for example). They gave freedom of worship and language to all people living under their domination. Jews were liberated by teh Persians and were allowed to return home and build the Jerusalem Temple (money paid by the Persians). So what a low class western propaganda by Mr Stone and his advisors...
Also, the destruction of Persepolis (which was the true capital of the Persians and not Babylone as Mr Stone depicts it) by the hands of a drunken Alexander is not shown at all.... Persepolis ruins and the traces of the fire set by Alexander are still visible if you go to IRAN.
The parallel between this movie and what USA is doing in Irak is evident.. What a low class way of amalgamating and confusing minds....
In the mind of American people, now Macedinians represent the civilization and the freedom fighters (read americans) and the Persians are the corrupt backward middle eastern crapps (read Iranians, Irakis, etc...).
Congradulations Mister Stone! Another Crapy movie on your account. I am curious to know when the hell do you get your huge movie budgets from?
But please stop playing with the truth just for the sake of backing American imperialism and behavior in the Middle East....
I would have a lot more things to say about this disgraceful movie but have no time and better things to do....

My advice is: DON'T GO AND SEE THIS CRAP.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vulgaren



Joined: 06 Jul 2004
Posts: 140
Location: Skopje, Republic of Macedonia

PostPosted: Tue Jan 11, 2005 1:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You are correct about the pro-american-pro-macedonian bias towards the Persian culture but it follows the saying - winner takes all.
However, there will be a huge Persian exibition in London this year to show that Persian Kingdom was the first known Empire and hopfully put some light on this civilisation.
Don't forget - Alexander forced his Macedonian solders to marry Persian women - yet they were his enemy. He wanted a mixed socity open for all - very much what USA is today - so the analogy is alreadfy there!
Lastly, Iran, Iraq...etc should come forward and show us their Persian culture which I fear is hidden by their present islamis authorities.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ariobarzin



Joined: 11 Jan 2005
Posts: 29

PostPosted: Wed Jan 12, 2005 1:34 pm    Post subject: I respect your opinion but I disagree with you Reply with quote

Dear Vulgaren,

Thank you for your reply.
Having a backward regime representing a minority of fanatic Islamists in IRAN does not allow Mr Stone to freely mess around and change the glorious past history of IRAN (Persia).
For your information, Persian culture and language are alive in today's Iran, parts of Azerbaijan, Afghanistan and in Tajikistan, not in Iraq. This is a common mistake people make. Actually, Iran and Iranian was the name Persians used to give to themselves not Persian. Persia was the name westerners, starting from Greeks, used to give to Iran and Iranians.

Coming back to the movie, even if you forget about the huge amount of miss-interpretations, miss-representations, and historical forgeries you find in it, again I insist on the fact that the casting (except Angelina Joly), the scenario, and the action (except may be the imaginary fight against the Indian king) was poor.
This movie was done quickly just to optimize the investment and to prevent Lehrmann to finish his own version of Alexander...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ariobarzin



Joined: 11 Jan 2005
Posts: 29

PostPosted: Wed Jan 12, 2005 3:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Also something very characteristic:
During the Guagamela battle, when Mr Stone makes a zoom on Darius the Persian king, someone from behind me in the theater said spontaneously: "Bin Laden!" with a laughter... That was so correct! Darius was depicted as Bin Laden....
Also, what about the fly which kept on flying around him and the Persian generals during that short zoom? Was it realy needed? What is behind this disgusting image?
For your info, Oriental people were the first to build (and to use!) public baths and they invented soap.... Mad
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vulgaren



Joined: 06 Jul 2004
Posts: 140
Location: Skopje, Republic of Macedonia

PostPosted: Wed Jan 12, 2005 5:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi my persian friend.
Stone's is a holywood movie where as by book you got to have a negative antagonist - Darius on this instnace. I agree with you that this could have been done as war of the worlds, who's gona rule the world instead of setting sides picturing the winner and loser in same grace!
I also think you are influenced by todays reality in Iraq as you draw an analogy with Bush very often. You are not the only one, there are several film critics that did that as well and certanly the film studio moguls.
Yet - you would agree with me - Let Iran do a film about Cyrius or Darius - that will be just as great.

regards
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ariobarzin



Joined: 11 Jan 2005
Posts: 29

PostPosted: Wed Jan 12, 2005 7:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi there!

Got your point.
Unfortunatly, not much is known about Darius III and Cyrus lifes, apart from some inscriptions and buildings they have left behind and what we know from Greek Historians.
Alexander life is more documented and interesting, that is why it is a shame that in the movie there are so many changes in historical facts for obscure reasons.

Another commentary made by Alexander in the movie which angered me was that said that "Persians were Barbaric because they even didn't bury their deaths on the battle field"!! Stone's Advisors should know (and they certainly do know) that Persians were Zoroastians. Zoroastrians (followers of one of the most ancient monotheistic religions) do not bury their deaths, because they believe they should not polute the Earth or the Waterways. They usualy leave the bodies on top of what they call "towers of silence" to be eaten by vultures. this practice was followed until recently (1950s) in IRAN.
There was also the same division between the good guys (Romans; read Anglo-Americans) and bad guys (Germans and North africans) in Gladiator.
Germans and North Africans were also presented as Barbaric hords whilst Romans were protrayed as the civilized one. Nevertheless, Gladiator was a much better movie than Alexander in terms of acting, scenario, and, and.... I enjoyed watching it. The war and fight actions, for one thing, was much better done. Russel Crow was much more convincing as Gladiator than Farrell as Alexander. etc...
sorry for my english...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
EllyZ



Joined: 24 Dec 2004
Posts: 14
Location: Malaysia

PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2005 5:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

i've watched this movie twice. But sadly enough, the 2nd time watching it..i fall asleep. Sad and the same with my bro and my fiance. So as a conclusion , i think, this movie is not what i expect it to be. Even my bro tell me that its a boring movie. He told me that he enjoyed Troy more than Alexander the movie. But of course he wished that Alexander is more interesting.. Honestly, i think Colin isn't suit to be Alexander. I think he's baby face is not suitable with this character. But thats only my opinion.... Embarassed
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vulgaren



Joined: 06 Jul 2004
Posts: 140
Location: Skopje, Republic of Macedonia

PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2005 11:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yeah Ariobarzin - I thought Gladiator was more compact movie even though its story was even further than the truth.
Stone made a mistake of getting a *** on the Hellenic history but not one on Persian as well and even a team of historians instead just RL Fox.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pleb



Joined: 20 Nov 2004
Posts: 11
Location: United Kingdom

PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2005 6:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I agree that Alexander was a poor movie but I think that its flaws were not so much with the portrayal of Alexander or the sexual orientations etc but of substance.....it seemed that just as the movie was about to move into epic level that it stopped all too soon.
What did OS wish the moive to be about? Was it an investigation of his life in chronological order? or a study of the man himself? As he mashed both aims together what you get is two halfs of movies stuck together in little bits. One minute Alex is discussing his dreams but his goals and ambitons are never really explained....then a great battle or mission became apparent only to be quashed by a movie which jumped to a personal moment.
It was frustrating as it never really tried to maintain an aim....was Alex good, bad or ugly? As a historian I welcome any movie which, regardless of content, encourages people to go and read up on the history being portrayed (ie Troy or Gladiator) but I think that the Alex movie has made people not wish to read up about a great figure as it is hard to know where to begin, such a disjointed movie!

PS I would pay money again though just to see the Macedonian Phalanx in the flesh.....that was awesome!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ariobarzin



Joined: 11 Jan 2005
Posts: 29

PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2005 11:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pleb wrote:
I agree that Alexander was a poor movie but I think that its flaws were not so much with the portrayal of Alexander or the sexual orientations etc but of substance.....it seemed that just as the movie was about to move into epic level that it stopped all too soon.
What did OS wish the moive to be about? Was it an investigation of his life in chronological order? or a study of the man himself? As he mashed both aims together what you get is two halfs of movies stuck together in little bits. One minute Alex is discussing his dreams but his goals and ambitons are never really explained....then a great battle or mission became apparent only to be quashed by a movie which jumped to a personal moment.
It was frustrating as it never really tried to maintain an aim....was Alex good, bad or ugly? As a historian I welcome any movie which, regardless of content, encourages people to go and read up on the history being portrayed (ie Troy or Gladiator) but I think that the Alex movie has made people not wish to read up about a great figure as it is hard to know where to begin, such a disjointed movie!

PS I would pay money again though just to see the Macedonian Phalanx in the flesh.....that was awesome!


Good Post,

I share your views. No substance, no clear direction...
Alexander and his story deserve much more than what Mr Stone delivered.
What angers me is that he and his colaborators know perfectly that they have done a bad and poor movie. But they don't care! They are 100% sure that despite bad critics, millions of people like myself will go and pack the theaters to see this movie just because of its title: "Alexander" and because it comes out of Hollywood! Sad....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vulgaren



Joined: 06 Jul 2004
Posts: 140
Location: Skopje, Republic of Macedonia

PostPosted: Fri Jan 14, 2005 4:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Alexander was just a man, not a god - who wanted to conquer the world, just like stone.
Nothing more.
I admire both of them...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
manos



Joined: 04 Dec 2004
Posts: 68
Location: london

PostPosted: Sat Jan 15, 2005 9:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I saw the movie yesterday for first time.
I expected to be really bad, cuz of the critics but it was just a bad movie. I can't even be bothered to be in a lot of details. So I write just a few:
-I didn't like Collin Farel.
-Seeing Angelina(always young) and Colin, as mother and son looks funny.
-Battles suck. Sometimes they try to make the panning camera effect (like gladiator,or private Ryan) but it looks so amateur.
-Alexander doesn't convince as conqueror,general,king, warrior. He always misses the target when throws a spear, he just riding his horse in the battle.
-Historical incorrect.

One of the few things that I liked were the pillars of doric rythm, which means that the producers had made some research about these things. Macedonians are originated from dorians.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ChristianMacedon



Joined: 08 Apr 2004
Posts: 211
Location: Portsmouth, United Kingdom

PostPosted: Sat Jan 15, 2005 3:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Macedonians are originated from dorians.

no they dont.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Lala



Joined: 22 Feb 2004
Posts: 324
Location: Thessaloniki, Macedonia, Greece, Europe, Earth

PostPosted: Sat Jan 15, 2005 9:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

and where do you think they originate from?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Kevin
Site Admin


Joined: 30 Sep 2003
Posts: 630
Location: United Kingdom

PostPosted: Sun Jan 16, 2005 12:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Way off topic - locked.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    alexander-the-great.co.uk Forum Index -> Discuss 'Alexander' the Movie - Post Release All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum



Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group