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 

Not a bad Movie,But Military Depictions woefully incorrect!
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    alexander-the-great.co.uk Forum Index -> Discuss 'Alexander' the Movie - Post Release
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
caspar



Joined: 08 Jan 2005
Posts: 7
Location: Edinburgh

PostPosted: Sat Jan 08, 2005 1:44 am    Post subject: Not a bad Movie,But Military Depictions woefully incorrect! Reply with quote

I kind of liked this Movie,lets face it, he WAS a ***,so what ? Lets not attibute our modern hang ups. People back then were not like us.Are we better than they were? That is still open to question.
.
As something of a military historian several points dissapointed me. The Macedonian Phalanx. The greatest military innovation of its time. We encounter it briefly,as if it was of little consequence to the main thrust of the great mans story.WRONG! Yes he was a Military Genius, but he was one with the awsome power of this formation at his disposal.The Companions.Again too little is made of the sheer physical power of these, for their time ,super-heavy armoured horsemen. Too little is also made of the military aspect in general. At one point,in one of the many dialogue heavy duets a soldier says "the fifty battles we have fought". Where? I saw one and a half. There were far to many dialogue episodes which actually said little. The vast distances covered were only really hinted at. The chronological order was needlessly tinkered with. It tried to hard to be an Epic.

Mr Stone should just have told the mans story, it was Epic enough.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Cora



Joined: 02 Jan 2005
Posts: 16
Location: Jounieh, Lebanon

PostPosted: Sat Jan 08, 2005 2:49 am    Post subject: Yep Reply with quote

You're right, there is too much characterization at times, under the pretext that Alexander was a man before he was a leader. But this ended up undermining him somehow. And when the battle scenes finally came, they were so impressionistic that all the intricate strategies which were, to say the least, artistic in themselves, were lost in a huge cloud of dust and noise. In addition, Alexander really came out as an idiot in India... Mpff, that was messy. And last but not least, what bothered me the most was that if characterization were so important, the long and passionate rivalry between Alexander and Darius III would have been a great canvas to work on! That's what made me have mixed feelings abt the movie as a whole, but i tried to keep an open mind, especially that it is still a great movie technically, and some of the acting is impressive. Well, that's what i think.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
caspar



Joined: 08 Jan 2005
Posts: 7
Location: Edinburgh

PostPosted: Sun Jan 09, 2005 3:36 pm    Post subject: Reply Reply with quote

All valid points Cora, I admired the technical aspect of the Movie too. The siege of Tyre should have been included, it was no where near as big as Guagamela but much more interesting.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Cora



Joined: 02 Jan 2005
Posts: 16
Location: Jounieh, Lebanon

PostPosted: Sun Jan 09, 2005 8:07 pm    Post subject: Sure! Reply with quote

The siege of Tyre is also something I would have loved to see enacted, especially that Tyre is a 2-hour drive from where I live Smile And the relics there are starting to be nothing but stone; I would've liked to see them come to back life in the movie... Anyway, if we were to start counting the episodes that were overlooked, we would really end up stripping the movie of any value in justly portraying Alexander Confused Mmmm... I really don't want to do that, especially that the only way of achieving a fair depiction would be by making a documentary! (that too is questionable!) So let's just call it OS's centuries-after vision of Alexander and be done with it Wink Anyway, how about breaking the pattern and talking about the stuff we actually did like in it? You go first Very Happy
Ciao
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
caspar



Joined: 08 Jan 2005
Posts: 7
Location: Edinburgh

PostPosted: Mon Jan 10, 2005 5:28 pm    Post subject: Good Points Reply with quote

Ok, here goes, I thought it was generally well acted, the script mostly good, I especially liked Ptolemy, the uniforms and national depictions were accurate, I even liked the irish theme which has come in for a lot of stick. There are many parallels with the Macadonians and the Irish, if they were to speak english then made sense for them all to have the same accent. It sounded better than posh British or drawl USA accents would have sounded, in my opinion.
Your go.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Cora



Joined: 02 Jan 2005
Posts: 16
Location: Jounieh, Lebanon

PostPosted: Mon Jan 10, 2005 7:32 pm    Post subject: Okay my turn Reply with quote

Laughing Good one about the accent. Something kinda similar made me laugh for a good hour: the overly stressed cliché that oriental men wear a ton of kohl around the eyes (or that their eyes are naturally like that and the make-up artists are praying they would come out as such _ not sure! Laughing ) And then, you get a close-up of Darius's kohled-up, rough, arab, OCEAN BLUE eyes Laughing (As a historian you most probably know that coloured eyes and light hair are post-crusades features in the Orient) Oh well, serves them right to waste so much kohl on a turkish model-slash-porn Laughing Laughing Laughing
Now seriously, Ptolemy (A.Hopkins is naturally excellent, but I mean Elliot Cowan) is also my favorite! (btw, isn't he the one who gets killed off "Ultimate Force"?) I also liked Colin's "war faces", the SETS and especially Babylon, and the the lighting effects(the play on darkness/light relatively to the periods in his life; you feel a marked difference between the low points and the peaceful stages, through the switch from the heavy darkness at times, to relieving bright lights and colors, like in Babylon, or when he has the flashback about Philip's murder...) which accentuate the impressionistic thing OS has going on, all throughout the movie.
So Mr ruthless historical movie critic, any other movies actually have lived up to your standards?
Ciao
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
caspar



Joined: 08 Jan 2005
Posts: 7
Location: Edinburgh

PostPosted: Mon Jan 24, 2005 12:16 pm    Post subject: Late reply Reply with quote

Sorry for the late reply but gets busy here in the winter. All the motorists get stuck in the snow! Well, my fav historical films, content wise its hard to fault Zulu, although characterisation is a bit sus.Cross of Iron, one of the only Hollywood mainstreams to feature the real theatre of WW2, the Russian front. Hard to fault that one, Sam Peckinpahs finest moment I believe. The original Alamo, similar to Zulu,The 300 Spatans the same.
Good point about the eyes though, never thought of that one! Mine are green! Shocked Laughing And the eye make up, what WAS all that about ?
Whats your favourites?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
galatasaray



Joined: 17 Jan 2005
Posts: 177
Location: england

PostPosted: Mon Jan 24, 2005 1:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
And the eye make up, what WAS all that about ?


i loved the eyemakeup Very Happy

personally im gald there wasnt more battle scenes, otherwise i woulda jus been boooooored but thats jus me i suppose people like different types of movie and im not really a 'battle' scene type. i liked the fact that the film had other issues goin on other than the takin over of civilisations. ive said it before in another post but if someone wants accurate information about something like this then they should read a history book, i myself didnt kno anythin about the great man but now that ive seen the film its got me interested and now want to find out more. aaaand i also think that however 'historically accurate' a film is there is always goin to be someone that says its wrong, because there are so many different interpretations of the past.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
Catherine X



Joined: 17 Jan 2005
Posts: 814
Location: England

PostPosted: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
I even liked the irish theme which has come in for a lot of stick. There are many parallels with the Macadonians and the Irish, if they were to speak english then made sense for them all to have the same accent. It sounded better than posh British or drawl USA accents would have sounded, in my opinion.


Hi Caspar and Cora [and anyone else reading]

I am reading 'The Making of Alexander' by Robin Lane Fox, and it implies that Oliver Stone wanted them to speak with a completely different accent to American because he wanted to emphasize that these people were NOT Californian or American, they did not hang around with their analysts all day, they were COMPLETELY FOREIGN. We are so used to hearing American accents these days that they wash over us unnoticed. If Alexander and co had American accents they would just merge into other American films, being Irish makes them stand out. And also, I expect the Irish accents means that Americans can distance themselves from Alexander and his bisexuality [yawn yawn, get over it]. This is just a thought, I don't know if I'm right about it. Smile

Galatasaray- as usual I agree with every word you say. Do you think we're related? Laughing

Can someone tell me how to write things in bold please?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
galatasaray



Joined: 17 Jan 2005
Posts: 177
Location: england

PostPosted: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

hey catherine, glad you agree, great thing about this forum, really like minded people!! Very Happy to write in bold you do exactly how you do the quotes but click on the B button instead..... hope it helps Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
Catherine X



Joined: 17 Jan 2005
Posts: 814
Location: England

PostPosted: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks m8
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
lardvaark



Joined: 13 Jan 2005
Posts: 169
Location: Southampton, UK

PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2005 12:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hey hey hey
Catherine and Galatasaray (spelt it right this time) - I also have a tendency to agree with anything you say, so can I be in the family too?

Y'know, people really should say what they mean more - and for the record I'm not talking about the posters above, in case anyone gets all offended. The number of times I read "The film was really innaccurate...(fades out in random bleating)" when what people really mean is "I didn't like the way they focussed too much on....".

For what it's worth, one of the very best things about the film IMO (of a non-visual nature Wink ) was the fact that it conveyed "Well, we're aware of Alexander and Co.'s military achievements (and for those who aren't, we'll give you some coverage), now let's explore the individual". Result = absolutely cracking, unusual film.

I mean, I love battles myself and didn't find the film lacking here either. Way too much other good stiff to concentrate on.
With me?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
lardvaark



Joined: 13 Jan 2005
Posts: 169
Location: Southampton, UK

PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2005 12:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes I know, it's hilarious that I spelt "inaccurate" well, inaccurately. Really, I'm not obsessed with spelling as much as it might seem, I just have a get-in-there-before-someone-else-does philosophy. I might be more sensitive than I'm letting on.

/shuts up
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
galatasaray



Joined: 17 Jan 2005
Posts: 177
Location: england

PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2005 5:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ah man lardvaark your posts are a joy to read, they cracked me up!! you sound like me Laughing

Quote:
"Well, we're aware of Alexander and Co.'s military achievements (and for those who aren't, we'll give you some coverage), now let's explore the individual". Result = absolutely cracking, unusual film.

couldnt have put it better myself, (no really i couldnt, im rubbish at sayin what i mean cause i end up rambling on and still not able to get my point across, then it sounds like i duno what im talkin about, but i do, really!) thank God for our new family on here who can speak for the rest of us Cool Razz
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
Catherine X



Joined: 17 Jan 2005
Posts: 814
Location: England

PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2005 7:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
I mean, I love battles myself and didn't find the film lacking here either. Way too much other good stiff to concentrate on.
With me?


Laardvark, did you REALLY mean to write STIFF? Or is it a Freudian slip and you meant STUFF? Laughing Laughing Laughing
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    alexander-the-great.co.uk Forum Index -> Discuss 'Alexander' the Movie - Post Release All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
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