Not fantastic, but entertaining and quite nice to look at

Rating: 8/10 (19 January 2005)

Before watching the film I heard some good but mostly bad things about it. But as I like to make my own opinion about things in general and movies in special, I went to see it. Besides  Colin Farrell, Angelina Jolie, Anthony Hopkins, Jonathan Rhys-Meyers and Jared Leto  OF COURSE I WANTED TO SEE IT! After the film was over I was dead impressed. By Alexander's achievements. On the one hand he had conquered 90% of the whole territory as it was known at his time (by feet and on horses!) and made himself king over  what was it?  four countries and three continents? On the other hand he had the same problems we have today  jealous lovers, jealous wives, a weak father and an overprotecting mother. Pity he died at 33  he may have achieved even more.
And I must say that I was really entertained by the film. Because from the cineastic point of view it's a great motion picture  talented, mostly young and good looking actors, beautiful costumes, gorgeous sets (e.g. the "hanging" Gardens of Babylon, one of the seven world wonders), hot battles and a fantastic music score (by Vangelis). Also, Alexander's life was told very interesting and although Stone jumped back and forth in time now and then you always knew what was going on and what happened after what. Respect for that! Yet there are two things I want to criticize about this movie: 1. The battles. OK, Stone had to be politically and historically and whatever correct and basically those battles had everything a battle needs  fights, horses (and even elephants!), spears, blood, tears, losses and gains  but come on, DID they have to be that long and detailed and pathetic? In my opinion Stone could have shorten them and concentrate on other aspects of the story. And this brings us to 2. The way Stone portrayed Alexander's relationships. I know, many people have already criticized that but I wanted to say my opinion. First: His wife Roxanne. OK, Alex was married to her but she was neither his only wife nor the most important one. He merely married her to demonstrate his alliance with Asia, where she came from. So it was simply unnecessary to concentrate on this relationship too much and even more unnecessary was the love scene between her and Alexander (although the scene was nicely portrayed). Second: It's a fact that Alexander had mostly male lovers and the movie at least mentions the two important of them: His best friend and companion Hephaistion and the dancer Bagoas. But what I don't get is: When it comes to Bagoas and Hephaistion Alexander gives them obvious looks of lust etc. yet all you see is a kiss between Bagoas and Alexander and between Hephaistion and Alexander there's nothing going on but hugging. Come on  that's the relationship niveau of two thirteen-year-old buddies exploring their sexuality, but not a relationship between two adult lovers. I know, the reason was once again the homophobic American audience, but it's just an insult towards Alexanders' feelings and the viewers' expectations. Speak of historical correctness!
Nothing to complain about the main actors though. Farrell gives a nice and sensitive performance though his best performance was in "Phone Booth" and his most sensitive in "A Home at the end of the World". But he is nice to look at and tries his best. Besides, I've read a book about Alexander the Great and somewhere in this book found an image of the king which totally resembles to Farrell so I guess he was a good choice. Val Kilmer is good as usual  he's like Tom Hanks  a good actor who does fine work in every role. Angelina Jolie was the one who impressed me most. Up to "Alexander" I thought she's no more but a pretty Hollywood slut but she really is a great actress and truly royal. She's all grace and beauty and dignity here. Special credit goes to two other, up to now unknown actors who will probably become famous after "Alexander": Connor Paolo and Francisco Bosch. Connor plays Young Alexander and is truly a great actor for his age. Besides his resemblance to the looks and his imitation of the moves of Farrell is just stunning. Or was Farrell imitating him? Francisco Bosch, a Spanish ballet dancer who currently works in the UK was graceful and beautiful as Bagoas, Alexander's lover. He didn't speak at all but his eyes told a story of their own. Amazing! So after all one can say that "Alexander" isn't as bad as it's told. It just depends on the reasons you want to see the movie and the expectations you have for it. Just go in, lean back and let them entertain you  you will enjoy most of it.