Why you should wait and rent it, to be shown on TV, or spend your time on something else.

Rating: Null/10 (12 February 2005)

This is not a historical movie. You can say it's an epic, or a somewhat entertaining movie. But it misses too many things to state it was a faithful movie about this character or what he did.
Reasons and spoilers, below.
The main problem here, is that if Stone really consulted any expert, he certainly didn't pay attention to the part where the erudite told him why is Alexander an important character in world history. And if he did, he obviously ignored it, being rather delighted to show the audience what his sexual preferences or psychological traumas were, as if rejoicing to show he was a human and not a myth. And even when those things are needed and definitely add an important depth to the character, it's not because of that that he's remembered to such an extent these days. And thus, valuable movie time was wasted, basically repeating the same scenes over and over again.
All of his military feats, brilliant political decisions, his amazing leadership and way of acquiring and holding the people he ruled's loyalty are reduced to just a bare mention by a distant Hopkins in the background along with an Indiana Jonish map, or to some speech or two where instead of showing the personality of the natural born leader he was, Alexander actually looks like a child in a tantrum that leaves us thinking how he could actually get at least a guard to pay attention to him.
He mentions and shows, time and again, how much he liked men, like saying "hey audience, did you know Alex was gay?".. then some Olympia's shot "and he had some pretty nice traumas, too".. and then again some Hephaiston and Alex scene so he could say "but look, he was *really* gay!" then the camera switches to some horses riding, some arguing with his officers, just to come back again to say "but look, if you didn't believe me yet (cause I consulted some history experts!), now I'll show you his homosexuality even further with this gay dance and even more, you'll see his eyes pop outta his face when the dancer spreads right in front of him!!!"...
"Oh and by the way, yes he was in the military I think.. a general or something, here, look at him leading this 5 minute battle... sorry if the battle was sorta confusing, I left that part to my assistants, I had to be paying attention to some other scenes, lest the audience walks outta the theater without knowing Alexander the Great liked men.."
The movie says absolutely nothing/ barely mentions/ totally lies about:
-The Gordian Knot: Not only a tale, but something that actually happened, that would've shown more details about his personality than over 80% of the movie.
-The battle of the Granicus.
-The battle at the Pinarus.
-For God's sake, the conquest of Tyre!! Couldn't Stone have spared ourselves a bit of the sexual preferences/ family issues and showed instead at least 5 minutes of this mastermind designing not only this, but any other of his brilliant plans? Nah, don't say there's "something" before Gaugamela, cause that pathetic chessboard scene looks more like a mad scientist trying to convince his friends about something he just came up with than an already by then known military genius explaining the plan.
-Not so important, but definitely more important than some crap they left in: Darius mother, wife, and two daughters were taken prisoners after the battle at the Pinarus river, off of his camp. Not off of some Babylon's harem after Gaugamela.
-Alexander didn't meet Darius for the first time in Gaugamela, as the movie shows. Darius was present at the Granicus, and also according to Plutarch, he even fought hand to hand with him at the Pinarus battle. Darius also lost his chariot and bow there.
-Etc..
We're talking about some important details here, not just some nerdish nitpicking. This person conquered the whole known world by then, and that fact's barely mentioned in the movie. And it's not like there're so many Alexander movies out there in a way you could say: "oh but wait, you don't understand, Stone wanted to portrait another side of Alexander with this one".. If you advertise the movie saying you've been advised by experts and saying you're going to show the life of this genius in such a complete way as they did, you simply can't miss or ignore so many facts. Case anyone still needs a spoon-fed clarification, no, I don't have any problem with the director showing his sexuality neither with it, I just don't think it was needed to devote so much time to it. Anyone would've gotten the point with just a scene or two. He exaggerated so much with the time spent describing those things in a way that the character simply doesn't make anyone believe he could do what he did, nor can it consistently be seen.
Pretty much like doing a movie about Walt Disney, without saying how the hell did he come up with Mickey Mouse, or a movie about Christopher Columbus, where after three hours of describing what he liked for dinner, some voice in off says "oh, and by the way, he discovered America"...
Props to Hopkins, however.