Could sink like a Stone

Rating: Null/10 (16 January 2005)

I had awaited this movie eagerly: the story of a man who conquered most of the known world by the time he was 25 is truly epic; I have recently read one of the many new biographies of the Macedonian warrior; in his time, director Oliver Stone has produced some fine work; and here he has spent no less than $150M, making it Europe's most costly film. One could not fail to be aware of the panning given the work by the critics, but I figured that it really couldn't be that bad. But, believe me, it is. "Gladiator" showed what an epic should look like and "Troy" was a good effort, but Stone - who, at his best, has given us such impressive work as "Salvador", "Platoon" and "Wall Street" - will be fortunate to survive this plodding and pedestrian debacle. The first hour is utterly tedious and one cries out for the sort of battle sequence which opened "Gladiator" while, towards, the sprawling end, we seem to be revisiting the manic ending of "Apocalyse Now" without Brando's style.
So, when did it go wrong? Well, seemingly at every stage of the production process. First, Stone - and his producer Moritz Borman - rushed the whole thing in order to beat a rival production (now unlikely to reach the screen) planned by Australian director Baz Luhrmann. Then the script - co-authored by Stone himself - overdoes the theme of Alexander's bi-sexuality which is death at the US box office and becomes somewhat histrionic for the rest of the world. Some of the casting is odd - most notably the choice of Angelina Jolie (only one year older than Colin Farrell in the eponymous role) to play Alexander's mother. Next we have the appalling decision to have most of the lead actors deploy incongruous Irish accents just because lead Colin Farrell (who can do other accents) hails from the emerald isle. The whole structure is a disaster with a boring, and largely redundant, narration, confusing flashbacks, and a total bum-numbing, mind-bending length of just under three hours. Finally the editing is all wrong, as Stone made three major cuts to slice away close to an hour, but slashed too little and disjointedly. The essence of cinema is storytelling and this work utterly lacks a compelling narrative which, given the heroic feats and complex character of the man, is a special kind of achievement.
Surely the film has some redeeming features? Well, the two battle sequences - the defeat of Darius and his superior forces at Gaugamela and the encounter with Indians and elephants at Hydaspes in India - are genuinely large-scale and exciting, although it is difficult to follow Alexander's tactics. The Moroccan and Thailand locations are exotic, the richly-designed sets are grand and the CGI creations, especially of the glory of Babylon, are well done. The attention to historic and military detail is commendable and thanks to Oxford academic Robin Lane Fox who gets to lead the battle charges as a reward. Angelina Jolie has the best accent (not Irish) and gives the best performance. But this is far from enough to justify the price of a theatre ticket. Can the work be rescued for the DVD or is it destined to sink like Stone? Often the DVD offers us a longer version of the movie, but this time we need a shorter, reordered account with a linear narrative, less talk and much more action.