Mind-blowing.

Rating: 10/10 (29 November 2004)

When I first went to see Alexander, I was extraordinarily anxious. After all, this film had the potential to be mind-blowing or mind-numbing. I was eager to find out which it would be. At four minutes short of three hours, this film did not disappoint me. It was nothing short of incredible.
Oliver Stone, who directed and wrote the script for the film, did a superb job recreating the life of Alexander the Great. With so much material to cover--Alexander's noteworthy childhood, his tutelege with Aristotle, his conquering most of the known world--the director chose the most important points and highlighted them. Instead of filling us with three hours' worth of limb-hacking and gut-spewing, Stone built Alexander into a man with dreams, with weaknesses, into someone who was human, despite the legend surrounding him. The world of the ancients was recreated with tact, and all the gods, the rituals, the wars and the palaces were established to draw the viewer into Alexander's world. The picture abounded with colorful characters and settings.
The most important people in Alexander's life--his crazed mother Olympias, his overbearing father, Philip, his best friend and lover Hephaestion--were cast well. There were relationships between the minor characters--the rivalry between Olympias and Philip, the affection between Kleitos and Philip--that made ther story real and believable. One could see how each member of Alexander's family and close circle impacted him, and how he felt about each of them. Most satisfying, however, were the passionate relationships Alexander had with his mother and Hephaestion. Although Olympias only appears a couple of times in the film, most notably the beginning, her love for her son, her hatred for her husband, and her greed are all palpable. Alexander's mingled love and resentment makes one pity him. Hephaestion, although a more constant presence in the film, is not prominent but for a few brief scenes. In these scenes, his conversations with Alexander portray his love and loyalty, and he--who knows Alexander best of all--delivers several important points that bring the viewer to a better understanding of Alexander. On the other hand, the viewer can also see clearly Alexander's dependence on his friend, his gratitude and his caring. Two specific conversations build such emotion that I felt close to tears. The sexual undertones between the two men may disturb some, but the sexuality isn't forced, it is very obvious that what Alexander and Hephaestion have is a deep, undying love, and sex is not necessarily a part of their relationship. However, Hephaestion does wear eyeliner, and it sort of make one wish that they would just get it on.
The minor characters, Alexander's generals, and his friends, his soldiers, who may not have many lines in the film, perhaps portray most clearly who Alexander really was. Their admiration of him, their desire to make him happy and proud, and in some cases, the greed that causes them to hurt him, all show how Alexander was different from all other kings of the age. He felt the pain his people felt, and desired most of all to have one world, and one empire, where all would have peace and opportunity. Some resented this, and the racism of some of the characters--most obviously Cassander and Cleitus--makes the world more realistic. But for the most part, he inspired and undying loyalty in all he lead, and it is the fact that he so concerns himself with the common people, and allows himself to be so affected by them, that sets him apart.
The plot, interspersed by narration from an old Ptolemy, moves quickly, and touches on the greatest victories and losses of Alexander's life. The battle of Gaugamela, the conquest of the Persian empire, the revolt of his troops in India, all were emotional scenes that underscored the humanity of Alexander. Stone wastes no time on lengthy battle sequences--although there are violent battle scenes, he does not show all of Alexander's conquests--and instead shows the politics behind Alexander's reign. His generals' names are memorable to even the most uneducated viewer, because each general has a unique perspective about Alexander. Their betrayals, of which there are a few, make some of the most heart-breaking moments in the film.
My only regret is the short time Stone spends depicting Hephaestion's death and Alexander's reaction to it. While elsewhere in the film their friendship and love is well-shown, some of the most telling things about their relationship were in the way Alexander memorialized him after his death. Perhaps the large battle sequence in India could have been shortened to make room for Alexander's grief over his friend. After all, Hephaestion's funeral was the most grandiose in the entire history of the world, and Alexander spent close to thirteen thousand talents on the events. He sheared off all of his hair when the custom was one lock, and spent a day and a night lying on the body, until he was forcibly removed. The movie skips over most of this, and only allows a short fit of rage in which Alexander almost strangles his wife, thinking she has poisoned him. It then quickly moves on to Alexander's own death, and the controversy surrounding that. I regret the loss of such faithful and touching moments, and think that Colin Ferrel and Jared Leto could have had one of the best "NOOOOOOOOOO!" scenes in film.
Overall, the film was engrossing and touching, with enough action for the men and enough romance for the women. I myself was enthralled with the passion and anguish that dotted Alexander's life, and appreciated the dedication each of the actors, down to the smallest extra Macedonian soldier, had to their character. Although lengthy, each minute has significance, and I encourage everyone to see it!
Mind-blowing, most definitely.