Alexander the atrocious

Rating: 3/10 (14 November 2005)

When director Oliver Stone announced that he would be making a huge budget film on the life of Alexander the Great, audiences, understandably, had high hopes. When the casting of Colin Farrell as Alexander was announced, these hopes were further stoked, by the fact that no huge name actor, such as Brad Pitt had been cast. Could it possibly be that Alexander might focus on talent, rather than the kind of big-budget mess that both Troy and King Arthur had turned out to be?
Sadly, the answer is a resounding no. The project turns out to be nothing less than a massive letdown in the end, with surprisingly huge failures in almost every section possible. There are so many places to pick apart at Alexander, it's hard to know where to start. So it may seem easiest to start with the man in charge of it all: Oliver Stone.
Stone has clearly stepped out of his element here - while used to dealing with political dramas based on the lives of past U.S. Presidents, he seems tied up with trying to make reference as much as possible to Greek mythology and tradition. As a result, Alexander comes off almost documentary style, with every character spewing pretentious , cheesy and mostly incomprehensible lines that seem straight out of a badly translated history textbook. How in god's name has Stone suddenly become such a terrible writer? Not to mention that any directorial influence seems totally absent, as the plot sways sickeningly between present and flashbacks in a confusing manner for no real purpose at all, except seemingly to confuse and disorient the viewer. The movie starts out far too slow, and with far too much talking, mostly just pointless glorifying of Alexander, and it doesn't improve much as it progresses through its painfully long runtime.
Accents are all over the place here. While the same was true for Ridley Scott's Gladiator, it comes off as a much more glaring flaw here. Indeed, the characters seem to be from around the world, from Farrell's Irish, to Val Kilmer's blatantly American, to Anthony Hopkins' educated Englishman, to Angelina Jolie... who seems to have decided to make her character Transylvanian for some incomprehensible reason... Stone seems to have lost all control of his production, and given up on it, letting it spiral into disarray and confusion.
Stone also seems to have left his actors entirely free to ham it up as they wish, as many of them give what could have been promising performances, had they bothered to tone it down a few notches. Farrell is the best example: he actually isn't bad in the lead, and indeed seems to surpass the overall quality of the movie, but he still fails ultimately to capture our sympathies and enthusiasm. In the end, we end up not really caring about Alexander, and his 'great' exploits, so, despite a valiant effort, he still fails to do the character justice. Angelina Jolie and Val Kilmer are similarly wasted as Alexander's insane and deranged parents, both overacting to the point of hysteria. Another bit of advice Stone forgot to provide for most of the film's actors: YELLING DOES NOT EQUAL DRAMA! Not to mention inconsistencies, such as the whole accent issue, and the rather disturbing fact that Jolie, playing Farrell's mother, is in fact a year younger than her 'son'. These are miniscule and unimportant, considering the more glaring flaws the film has to deal with.
Other cast members, seemingly given full reign to do whatever they want, turn out equally unsatisfying performances: Anthony Hopkins comes off as a ranting old fool with no purpose in the story save to serve as a sort of narrator, bestowing endless praises on the film's 'glorious hero'. Jared Leto is given next to nothing to do as Hephaistion, Alexander's childhood friend who turns out to be 'more than a friend'. Rosiaro Dawson is similarly wasted, playing essentially a foreign sex object. Despite the fact that her character is pretty much that shallow, Dawson still manages to turn out one of the film's most impressive performances - which still isn't saying much.
However, not all aspects of the film are as terrible as I make them out to be. The costumes and set design are magnificent, and, unlike the film, actually seem truthful to the time and age. Unfortunately, the music by Greek composer Vangelis (at least one influence on the film is actually Greek!) which accompanies it is one of the worst scores we have been forced to behold in recent history - painfully cheesy and overdone at every point. Rather than adding to the quality of the film, Vangelis' score only serves to remind us of how terrible it is.
As you can tell, I'm not exactly providing a glowing review for the movie here. But it's not often that a film manages to insult my intelligence and provide so many additions to my list of things that annoy me as Alexander. Those only with a bit of excitement or historical inquisitiveness might tentatively want to check out Alexander, but for everyone else, I'd have to strongly discourage it. The film doesn't hold together in any sense, and the result is embarrassing. In fact, the one bit of insight in the entire movie is provided by Anthony Hopkins' Ptolemy - the fact that the character of Alexander is overly glorified through tales of his legendary deeds, and is, in fact, nowhere as great as it is said. So very true. And it can also be said that Alexander's film is not nearly as 'great' as it set out to be. Quite the opposite, in fact. Avoid at all costs. You have been warned.
-3/10