|
Movie Reviews
|
What's Running
in Theaters? |
Showbiz News
|
Picture
Galleries |
On TV
|
Live Radio
Actor/Actresses
Profiles |
Actor /
Actresses Websites
Box
Office: $34,264,081
CONSENSUS
Even at nearly three hours long, this ponderous, talky, and
emotionally distant biopic fails to illuminate Alexander's
life.
CAST & CREW
Colin Farrell, Angelina Jolie, Val Kilmer
Directed by Oliver Stone
MPAA RATING
R, For violence and some sexuality/nudity.
RUNTIME
2 hours, 53 minutes
RELEASE COMPANY
Warner Bros.
GENRE
Action/Adventure, Action, Epic, Period Piece, Historical,
Historic Figures, Battles
OFFICIAL SITE
•
The Official Alexander Site
SYNOPSIS
Director Oliver Stone chalks up an ambitious entry on his
biopic resume (past entries include films about Jim Morrison,
Richard Nixon, and JFK among others) with this cinematic
treatise on the life of the mighty Alexander the Great.
Whatever
you're expecting from “Alexander,” the odds are high you'll
be in for a huge surprise. Oliver Stone’s Alexander the Great
story is more about the man himself and his relationships
with the men in his life, than it is about Alexander’s
conquests and life as a ruler.
Anthony Hopkins serves to narrate “Alexander” and fill in
parts of Alexander’s life Stone chose not to act out on the
screen. After Hopkins’ opening narrative sets up Alexander’s
backstory, we’re introduced to Alexander as a young boy. We
quickly learn Alexander’s mom, Olympias, has a thing for
snakes and has taught her boy he’s the son of a God. We see
Alexander’s dad, King Philip, past his prime and disconnected
from his only heir.
It’s not until Alexander wows his father by taming a wild
horse that Philip even acknowledges Alexander’s rightful
place at his side. The first phase of the three hour film
also sets up Alexander’s close relationship with Hephaistion
and a small group of companions who will fight by
Alexander’sside throughout his reign.
Colin Farrell enters the picture as Alexander at the age of
19. From that point on, “Alexander” transitions to a deeper,
psychological examination of the man who led his armies over
22,000 miles defeating and then uniting countries until he
ruled 90% of the known world.
Alexander’s sexual relationship with his lifelong companion
Hephaistion (Jared Leto) is teased throughout the film, as is
Alexander’s attraction to eunuchs. Despite all the hoopla
over Stone’s depiction of Alexander as bisexual, the only
sexual encounter that takes place on screen is between
Farrell and Rosario Dawson as Alexander’s wife, Roxane. Their
wedding night coupling is rough and raw like a showdown
between two wild beasts, and more about dominance and power
than about sex. The scene gives the audience a look at
Dawson’s fantastic body, which should please the male sector
of the audience who, until that point, may have been left
uncomfortable by the film’s decidedly homosexual overtones.
While the fight scenes are magnificent, and Stone’s fierce
desire to bring as much realism as possible to carefully
staged sequences works to a better degree in this film than
most historic epics, they are too few and far between.
Considering Alexander the Great was known for his conquests
on the battle field, surprisingly little time is dedicated to
actually showing any of his battles. With so many to choose
from, Stone really concentrates on only two – Alexander's
rousing defeat of the Persian army at Gaugamela, and a
vicious battle between Alexander’s army and Indian troops on
elephants.
It’s understood Oliver Stone was interested in not just
showing Alexander as a great military leader, but also as a
tormented man who carried a great weight. But some of the
lengthy dialogue scenes are guilty of covering areas of
Alexander’s personality the audience has already grasped.
Stone’s desire to show Alexander as a man who was raised by a
deranged mother and an abusive, drunkard of a father does
nothing to help us Alexander neophytes understand why men
followed him to the ends of the earth. Full of self-doubt and
obsessed with a desire to conquer lands all the way to the
edge of the continent, Stone's Alexander shows only brief
flashes of the greatness and heroism that earned him a
distinguished place in history.
As for the cast, Farrell’s at his best when he’s addressing
his men or showing his vulnerability. In battle, he’s a
little slight of build and the blonde wig didn’t do much to
make him an imposing figure. But he can say more with his
eyes than most actors can convey with pages of dialogue, so I
can understand why Stone saw him as Alexander.
Angelina Jolie takes it close to over the top, but pulls her
performance back enough to make watching her quite fun. As
the protective mother, she’s a lioness who’ll strike dead any
potential predator who may cause harm to the love of her
life. And Val Kilmer’s easily the best of the supporting
cast. He chews the screen like there’s no tomorrow and you
love him for tearing it to bits.
One of the big questions, at least for me, was why did Stone
choose to use so many different accents? If you’ve watched
the trailers and had your doubts, then yes, they are as
distracting in the full length feature film as they are in
the commercials. Not being a history buff, I have no idea
whether Alexander the Great and his Macedonian cohorts spoke
with an Irish accent. However in the film, the fact they do
seems strangely out of place. And Angelina Jolie’s
indescribable accent seems to be a take off on Natasha from
"Rocky & Bullwinkle." Even at the end of three hours, the
accents still never stopped being an annoyance.
Overall, “Alexander’s” not a bad film, but it’s also not a
great one. There are flashes of brilliance interspersed with
long periods of dead weight. Unevenly paced, “Alexander” is
frustrating as Stone revs things up only to slam on the
brakes once he’s got us engaged.
Read Reviews of
Other Movies on SpiritOfChennai.com...
|
|