Alexander, the so-so

Rating: 5/10 (11 August 2005)

I was surprised that this movie actually wasn't good. I usually don't agree with the critics, and I'm not sure if I do here either. I may dislike it for entirely different reasons. My problems are basically that there was too much narration, too many close-ups, and just too many people.
The narration. For the record I should say that one of my major complaints about The Grinch (2001), was Anthony Hopkins' narration. I'm not a fan of his voice and don't get why everyone else is. So if it was just your normal average amount of voice-over work it would have been bad enough for me. But here it seems as though they took away the story from most of the other actors and gave it to him. I dunno. When I watch a movie, it's to "watch" a movie. I don't put on movies to have the story told to me. So my thinking is that the decision to give Hopkins the major storytelling duties was the main reason why this film went wrong.
The close-ups. This surprised me. As I watched this I felt like at every moment I was only looking at a face, or an arm, or a mane. I couldn't tell what was going on in the battle scenes because they were too close. You see an arm and some dust and hear a clank, and what does that tell you? I have no idea. Usually when someone gets close-up happy it's because there is some huge star in it and they want to sell the movie based on how good-looking they are. But in this case there were scenes where I was looking at extra, after extra, after extra, who had no lines. And I'm thinking, gee, all the time that I'm wasting looking at these random people could have been spent advancing the story. But god knows if I wasn't staring at these people I'd be listening to more Ptolemy yikkity-yak.
Too many people. I already brought up the extras. And I think it's great to actually hire people instead of CGI but, geez, not if that's going to happen. And beyond that mob scene, there is the problem of Alexander's posse. I'm no history buff, but I can't believe that Alexander constantly had a group with him every second. That's at least what it seemed like in this movie. I wondered if he even went to the toilet by himself. You didn't get any sense of who the characters around him were because it was like every actor in the scene got one line and they were always together, like they were a chorus or something. Did no one ever pull him aside for a private moment? Just his mom and his boyfriend? And speaking of his boyfriend, he hardly had anything to do with him. And I'm sitting there trying to figure out why. Gay or not, he was supposed to be his best bud and yet for the most part he was lumped in there with the rest of the posse. That didn't make any sense. I think Harry Potter and Ron Weasley have had more tender moments alone, not to even mention Frodo and Sam. So the idea that the audience can't handle a close male relationship on film without thinking it's sexual is really ridiculous at this point in time. So if it's an projected homophobia onto the audience that caused that relationship to suffer, that's silly. My other thought was that maybe they had so little faith in Colin that they dulled every other character down to avoid anyone outshining him.
Too many people, part deux. I watched the behind the scenes stuff on the DVD and there seemed to be way too many people on the set looking like they were on a coffee break. I like huge productions, I like watching 'making of's. I've never seen anything that had a movie set resembling a mosh pit before. So I actually think this movie was doomed early on.
I liked the cast, which makes the whole thing even more tragic. Maybe they could have picked a more obvious person for Alexander but Colin Farrell wasn't bad at all. (I disagree with Stone on who he resembles. Peter O'Toole, my foot. I personally kept being reminded of a late 80's Agassi). Jared Leto was underused. Jonathan Rhys-Meyers, was horrifyingly underused. Rosario Dawson was basically naked. (I personally think her nakedness bordered on exploitation, and I'm not one to normally think things like that). Angelina Jolie's role was great somehow. And Val Kilmer was wonderful as usual, even if he looked exactly like the Ghost of Christmas Present in one scene. And I'm giving 4 of my 5 points to those actors who I feel got gypped. And everyone else on the production can split the other point. Was there set direction or costume design? I couldn't see any behind all the giant heads. And since everyone seems to want to compare this to Troy, I definitely am in the Troy camp.