Alexander: Director's Cut is not all that bad.

Rating: 7/10 (12 December 2005)

So I finished Alexander: Director's Cut today. And yeah, it wasn't great, but it wasn't bad either.
The first 90 minutes was very well done, and very well paced. But after that, it just becomes meddled in confusion, with the two plot lines of him growing up, and his rule showing up every 5 minutes. Like at least Godfather Part II had many moments pacing, this was strictly back-and-forth type meddling. And none of the characters are all too memorable, other than his gay lover, so you never know who's talking or who's being killed for defying the King.
The acting isn't anything to jump up and down about either. Rosario Dawson and Jared Leto are criminally underused (although the sex scene between Farrell and Dawson was pretty hot, showing everything you could ever imagine), while Angelina Jolie shows up a little too often. Colin Farrell tries his very best with his awful hairpiece, but falls short due to some of the silly dialog that Stone comes up with for his characters to use. Historically accurate or not, the characters don't have to come off as retarded.
The obvious standouts are Val Kilmer and Anthony Hopkins in a basic cameo role. They both do well for what they have, and show off the acting chops that nobody else can.
The prevalent homosexual elements did not bother me all that much, but yes, they are prevalent. I had heard Farrell and Leto kiss, but did not see anything of the sort other than horrendous flirting. I did however see Farrell hop into bed naked (yes, everything is shown to the camera), and then gets another male lover to hop in. While not disturbing, it did come off to me as the key gayest moment in the film.
The action scenes are all very well done, showcasing the gore and violence that Troy missed out on. With the exception of the final moment's of the scene with Alexander's army fighting the India army with their elephant, they're all well coordinated and well filmed. Yeah, there is some pretty fast cutting, but not to the point of Batman Begins. As for the fight scene in India, it starts off well, but when it comes to the conclusion, everything goes red and its totally hard to see or understand just what was going on. Yeah, this may be a great effect, but neon red Stone? To the point where it's so bright you can't see a bloody thing?
Another misplaced item is the score by Vangelis. It's totally not epic, and some of the battle scene music seems a little too upbeat for people murdering each other on a battlefield. There were a small amount that did fit the music, but the majority was totally inappropriate, bringing up the "wtf was Stone thinking?" question.
Now here is what I don't understand.
The real person, Alexander, was a bi-sexual. History tells us that. And history also tells us that Oliver Stone is a hack, exploitive film director. So does it come to anyone's surprise that he upped the gay level? Because it sure does not surprise me.
And why the hell did he need to chop out about 18 minutes of this bloated epic, and add 9 more back in for this Director's Cut? Because that doesn't make sense either. From what I heard, the music is in different places, and some of the scenes have been moved around too. So maybe I will have to watch the Theatrical Version to fully see Oliver Stone's original vision.
It's not a bad movie at all, it just could have been done much better and much smoother than it was. And of course, I still face the obligatory knowledge that Oliver Stone still has yet to impress me as a director.
7/10.