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 

Has any body scene the Director's cut
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
OBCFORLIFE888



Joined: 24 Jul 2005
Posts: 2
Location: Aliso veijo, California

PostPosted: Sun Jul 24, 2005 11:42 pm    Post subject: Has any body scene the Director's cut Reply with quote

I've never been curious before about something in such a long time. Does anybody have a vivid description of what will be in the director's cut. Or if anybody has seen it, it will be very appretiated from me if you tell me about it. Thanks
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Adriv



Joined: 17 Jan 2005
Posts: 1144
Location: Maryland, USA

PostPosted: Wed Jul 27, 2005 4:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Not me, just yet.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
rockahillyrebel



Joined: 07 Aug 2005
Posts: 1

PostPosted: Sun Aug 07, 2005 11:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi, I just bought the directors cut having never seen the original. I watched it with my wife, daughter and brother - in law, and we all got very confused by the film as a whole. I was expecting something along the lines of Troy, an action type blockbuster, and was very disappointed. I guess it was never meant to appeal to the masses. I'd rather watch a documentary about Alexander to find out more about the guy, and not be confused by a film when I just want to basically be entertained for a couple of hours. After about an hour and a half, we actually turned it off.
Something I found very curious, was the fact that most of the actors were speaking with their native accent! I couldn't work that one out.
I have read very few of the postings on this site, so have no pre-conceptions based on other people's view. I will read some now, as I'm curious to know if many people actually like this film!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
birdiemom94



Joined: 06 Jul 2004
Posts: 195

PostPosted: Mon Aug 08, 2005 3:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think a lot of people had misconceptions about this film (I am glad that you saw it with no pre-conceptions, rockahillyrebel, thats good). That was the big problem. People loose patience quickly with a film like this, that is not 'Gladiator'. They want this or that in a film and I guess you can't please everyone, especially with a film like this.

'Alexander' is actually a decent film. It is a bit easier to see the theatrical version first and then compare it to the Director's Cut. It's not a film that will please everyone, but many were so quick to dismiss it as being garbage, when they didn't really try to see what Stone was trying to present. He showed a flawed man, not just the "Great" man with all the battles and victories that everyone wanted to see. It was a study of a man that was not only the greatest warrior (you would need a 9 hour film to show all that), but a man that had other issues that made him "human", as well. Thats what I liked about it.

Granted, I would have loved to see more battles, the Gordian Knot, Tyre, Alexander and Hephaistion's tribute to Achilles and Patroclus, but there was only so much you can put into three hours. The original film was cut down from five hours. It does help if you know a bit about the subject, I will say that. Stone tried his best to be historically accurate as he could. But for a film that is hard to do, but he gave it a good try. He may not have succeeded on every level, but he did on some, I will give him that.

I think the editing process was where the film fell down. It's true that things could have been edited together in a more clearer fashion. The Director's Cut does try to do that more, but there are really good scenes that should have been paired with other scenes just as strong to weave the story together better and make it a bit more cohesive and many times that didn't happen.

But overall, I found it to be an interesting film (I have seen it a few times and I get something out new out of it each tme I have seen it). I like historical epics, so I guess that helps. I am glad you tried to take a look at it, rockahillyrebel and didn't listen to the critics. At least you made up your own mind about it. I am just giving my opinion, so please take it for what it is worth.

All in all, I guess we have to remember that it is just a movie and it is one man's interpretation of events that happened thousands of years ago. So it's subjective, at best.

Dara Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rothalion



Joined: 02 Dec 2004
Posts: 73
Location: USA, Florida

PostPosted: Mon Aug 15, 2005 8:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I find the Directors Cut to be an appaling failure. A sad example of a formally proficient director apparently conceding to a gross example of censorship; driven by a small yet very powerful self centered, narrow minded overlly moralistic lobby. The editing is horrible, the flashbacks only serve to confuse the watcher, it dumbs-down the initial intent of the movie and tries to sell it to a 'mass' audience yet still remains elusive due to its poor conception. Alexander was never intended to be a TRoy or a Gladiator. If I had to equate it or relate it to another movie I would have to say it tried to possibly emulate Lawrence of Arabia. It mollifies the relationship btw Hephaistion and Alexander to such a point that the scene when Heph. dies makes no sense. You hardly know that the man exists until he dies and then Alex. goes ballistic in his grief then dies in the next scene. Why not cut it entirely? I also want an explanation as to why the scene where Alexander beckons 'Bagoas' to his bed was left in if they were, by Stone's own admission, trying to remove any homosexual referances. I find it troubling that I cannot rent or purchase the Theatrical Version within 60 miles of my town, short of getting it online. I feel that a lot of folks want to be spoon fed their movies and this film does not do that. It crosses the boundries of good and evil, destroying and building, love and hate, godhood and mortal existance. Alexander was and still is not an easy man to discuss.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail MSN Messenger
windwalker296



Joined: 15 Aug 2005
Posts: 3

PostPosted: Mon Aug 15, 2005 11:48 am    Post subject: boring! Reply with quote

I have already written my own thoughts on this film but yes this film is tedious to the extreme. Ok its a historical film and not a action affair but even history can be made interesting, it is intersting. Heres a guy who conquered most of the globe yet there was no sense of this in the film it was as exciting as a 12hour drive across a barren dessert!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Rachel25



Joined: 14 Aug 2004
Posts: 68

PostPosted: Mon Aug 15, 2005 2:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I rather enjoyed the directors cut. A lot of the scenes that were shot, while beautiful scenes, I didn't feel flowed very well, in the linear format. They off-set each other much better with the back in forth, IMO.

And, no I don't feel that the cuts to the character of Hephaistion make this a 'straighter' film. Because it just isn't. If that was indeed the intent then we wouldn't be seeing Bagoas dropping his robe when ATG gets into bed naked. My only problem with the cuts to Hephaistion is that they left out the night before Gaugamela, which I though was beautiful and went straight to the point if Stone and RLFox really believe that Alex and Heph ended the physical aspect of there relationship. I personally would rather have lost 'the ring' scene, (sorry folks), which IMO moderizes the relationship too much. And all I could think at the time was "Really, Heph MUST have gotten use to the idea that Alex was going to marry by then. People have only been at him to marry for near a decade!"
But seeing as the theme of the ring keeps coming back, yeah, they might want to keep it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Leonnatus



Joined: 06 Feb 2005
Posts: 124

PostPosted: Mon Aug 15, 2005 10:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have not seen the Director's Cut but I'm fearing the worst since most Director's Cuts of movies give increased viewing time not less. Why hasn't the oringinal 5 hour cut been released instead? Alexander was an original in the most profound meaning of that term. He shaped the lives of millions who came after not least some of the people who wrongly get more credit in the public mind eg Julius Caesar. I believe that The Great has got a raw deal from History and deserves the maximum compensation from art when it portrays him in the eyes of the public. But this is Hollywood's take, with everything that involves, not least moolah. 'Gladiator' was received critically, Oscar-wise and at the box-office as a brilliant movie. A movie of fiction. An historical take on it would have presented Commodus as the really interesting character because in reality he was the Gladiator not the Russell Crowe character.On Jan 1st 192, he would become consul of the renamed Rome (Colonia Commodiana) dressed as a Gladiator. The senate were afraid it would stir up trouble among the populace and had a wrestler strangle him. Earlier, identifying with Hercules, he had dressed up as a Gladiator to fight lions in the arena. This guy was far more interesting than his movie character or Russell Crowe's character combined. This is the kind of template which seems to fall on all Hollywood takes on historical themes and in general the result is mauled horrendously by it. The real history is far more interesting and so it is to the max with Alexander. It's a great movie but it could have been infinitely better.But what it certainly has done is driven millions to seek further for the truth on one of History's supreme trail-blazers. Seen in combination with the 1955 movie 'Alexander The Great' helps to see how much better it could have been. His relationship with Hephaestion was underdeveloped in many ways not just the love relationship but primarily his role as The Great's prime co-thinker. And for me the ring scene was a criminal distortion.In reality, that ring was passed from Alexander to Perdikkas with the former compos mentis and in full possession of his political faculties not in delirious death throes. Perdikkas did not get a word in the whole movie yet he was Alexander's true historical, successor not least in terms of Alexander's radical global vision. And, finally, although this would have hammerd its box office impact, I believe the movie should have been in Macedonian/Ancient Greek and Persian dialogue with subtitles.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
clorin



Joined: 19 Aug 2005
Posts: 11

PostPosted: Fri Aug 19, 2005 9:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've never seen the original, just saw the director's cut, and I love every minute of it!

I think it's a much better idea to show the two scenes of 18-year old Alexander in flashback instead of in linear fashion as the first scenes of colin. Because in those scenes he came across as a naive and whiny mamma's boy, as if he had taken steps backwards from the brilliant horse-taming 12-year-old. Also Colin does not look 18! If this was the first impression he gave me, it would have been hard for me to care about him.

In the director's cut the first time the grown Alexander is on screen is at Gaugamela. I immediately fall for the dashing young king and compassionate leader. Later his gowing pains in flashback and the daemons that gradually devours him as years go by make him all the more endearing to me. I just love him to death!

I'm really glad I saw the director's cut first, but I'd still want to see the theatrical version because there's more of Hephaistion.Smile And I can only dream there will be a 5-hour original released someday...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Alexandros_19



Joined: 15 Feb 2005
Posts: 1230
Location: Argentina

PostPosted: Sat Aug 20, 2005 12:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

clorin wrote:
And I can only dream there will be a 5-hour original released someday...


Me too!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail MSN Messenger
apelles



Joined: 12 Mar 2005
Posts: 1152

PostPosted: Sat Aug 20, 2005 7:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Leonnatus wrote:
I have not seen the Director's Cut but I'm fearing the worst since most Director's Cuts of movies give increased viewing time not less. Why hasn't the oringinal 5 hour cut been released instead? Alexander was an original in the most profound meaning of that term. He shaped the lives of millions who came after not least some of the people who wrongly get more credit in the public mind eg Julius Caesar. I believe that The Great has got a raw deal from History and deserves the maximum compensation from art when it portrays him in the eyes of the public. But this is Hollywood's take, with everything that involves, not least moolah. 'Gladiator' was received critically, Oscar-wise and at the box-office as a brilliant movie. A movie of fiction. An historical take on it would have presented Commodus as the really interesting character because in reality he was the Gladiator not the Russell Crowe character.On Jan 1st 192, he would become consul of the renamed Rome (Colonia Commodiana) dressed as a Gladiator. The senate were afraid it would stir up trouble among the populace and had a wrestler strangle him. Earlier, identifying with Hercules, he had dressed up as a Gladiator to fight lions in the arena. This guy was far more interesting than his movie character or Russell Crowe's character combined. This is the kind of template which seems to fall on all Hollywood takes on historical themes and in general the result is mauled horrendously by it. The real history is far more interesting and so it is to the max with Alexander. It's a great movie but it could have been infinitely better.But what it certainly has done is driven millions to seek further for the truth on one of History's supreme trail-blazers. Seen in combination with the 1955 movie 'Alexander The Great' helps to see how much better it could have been. His relationship with Hephaestion was underdeveloped in many ways not just the love relationship but primarily his role as The Great's prime co-thinker. And for me the ring scene was a criminal distortion.In reality, that ring was passed from Alexander to Perdikkas with the former compos mentis and in full possession of his political faculties not in delirious death throes. Perdikkas did not get a word in the whole movie yet he was Alexander's true historical, successor not least in terms of Alexander's radical global vision. And, finally, although this would have hammerd its box office impact, I believe the movie should have been in Macedonian/Ancient Greek and Persian dialogue with subtitles.

Leonnatus,this is such a perceptive post.I particularly agreed with the lines I,ve highlighted.Personally,although I love this movie,I think that Alexander and his incredible story are just too vast and complex to fit into a commercial film format.Think how much is missing by necessity. His life and character are too crowded, dynamic and multi layered to lend themselves to a medium relying on telling the story through visual images in a limited time frame, to an audience who may have no background knowledge.It,s a "no win" situation.If he simplifies it,he offends the anoraks (that,s Britspeak for fanatics Laughing )If he makes it too *** and complicated,he alienates those who have no prior knowledge.
I,m not criticising O.S.here,because he,s attempted the impossible and it,s a courageous man who would stake his reputation on something as ferociosly difficult as this.I wouldn,t know where to begin.
If this movie inspires people to go away and find out for themselves about this remarkable man and his truly incredible life,then,for me,it must rate as a success.
I,ve just noticed on the preview that some stupid glitch in the system has blown up my font size to epic proportions. Laughing Honestly,it,s not me making a bid for world domination. Laughing
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Alexandros_19



Joined: 15 Feb 2005
Posts: 1230
Location: Argentina

PostPosted: Mon Aug 22, 2005 3:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

apelles wrote:
I,ve just noticed on the preview that some stupid glitch in the system has blown up my font size to epic proportions. Laughing Honestly,it,s not me making a bid for world domination. Laughing


Good that you clarified that! Laughing
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail MSN Messenger
apelles



Joined: 12 Mar 2005
Posts: 1152

PostPosted: Mon Aug 22, 2005 7:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Alexandros_19 wrote:
apelles wrote:
I,ve just noticed on the preview that some stupid glitch in the system has blown up my font size to epic proportions. Laughing Honestly,it,s not me making a bid for world domination. Laughing


Good that you clarified that! Laughing

Laughing Laughing On second thoughts,it sounds like a good idea. Laughing
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Alexandros_19



Joined: 15 Feb 2005
Posts: 1230
Location: Argentina

PostPosted: Tue Aug 23, 2005 12:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

apelles wrote:
Alexandros_19 wrote:
apelles wrote:
I,ve just noticed on the preview that some stupid glitch in the system has blown up my font size to epic proportions. Laughing Honestly,it,s not me making a bid for world domination. Laughing


Good that you clarified that! Laughing

Laughing Laughing On second thoughts,it sounds like a good idea. Laughing


Laughing Laughing
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail MSN Messenger
Savanna



Joined: 13 Dec 2004
Posts: 70
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada - USA

PostPosted: Fri Aug 26, 2005 12:15 am    Post subject: careful when ordering the DC online Reply with quote

I bought the DC by accident - ordered the theatrical release at amazon and was sent the DC by mistake, that is. When I caught that label on the DVD, I was pretty upset - convinced the recut would be missing too much material, removed for the worst possible reasons.. and when I finally decided to watch it, I stopped at the scene where ATG surveys the battlefield for Gaugamela. I was just too frustrated to go on, thinking they had scrapped all the material that originally appeared before that point in the film, and I was thrown off by the transition to that scene.

A few days later I went back to it and watched the rest, and now I don't feel that critical of the DC. The beginning didn't flow as well, and the flashbacks felt like they should've been set up more deliberately, but I agree with clorin that Alexander's adolescence is easier to swallow after we've seen him win a battle, spare a princess, etc. Maybe if O.S. had just gone the rest of the way to reorganizing the epic as actually starting AT Gaugamela, and inserted the earlier material in fewer (longer) flashbacks after arriving in Babylon and then after the battle in India, or if he'd been budgeted for a third battle that could've been used to separate them out without over-extending the anticlimax, a movie in that general structure but with all the same elements might have worked even better than the theatrical release. I wish upping the pace hadn't been such a priority in the DC though, at the expense of coherent, deeper character development.

Still, I'm happy to have a copy of the film, and I'm glad I ended up with the DC, since I'd have been curious about the differences but reluctant to buy two copies of the same movie. Now I have to go get the theatrical cut, if I can find it.

One thing I liked better about the DC was the second part of the caves scene, which flows better than in the theatrical release - even though I really loved the moment they removed, where Alexander reaches out for his father. Sure, it was redundant with what he said just before his father died. But it gave that line more credibility, and made Alexander's vision of his father later (at the announcement 'we're going home') resonnate more clearly. Wish they could have resolved the scene both ways.

p.s. I thought this forum had disappeared! I was looking for you guys on google and this site never came up, a few months back. Then I got an e-mail notice that one of the threads I posted in was still active, and found my way back. Very happy you're all still here!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
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