"Braveheart effect (2)"

Rating: 2/10 (27 March 2005)

This movie is a lot bad. Have no sense to find money and create a so ridiculous "thing".
I have a theory which I give the name of "Braveheart effect (2)". Since the movie Braveheart -1995 (which was good) give money to producer of Hollywood, some guys things "Why not make similar movies and so win the jackpot?"
So Gladiator (2000) come, and a "series" follow - King Arthur (2004), Alexander (2004),etc.
Another theory is that maybe Oliver Stone smoke too much Opium or his head come so big that he think all what he can do will be "wonderful"!
Or he wanted to show that "Alexander" was gay. What a new !
A lot of guys in past was gay. Even, IF Jesus exist it was probably gay. So what ? It's not a reason to make a so soporific movie.
Really don't buy neither rent this boring "movie". It's pathetic to create this kind of thing in 2004 and when our name is Oliver Stone...