Guts beget glory, gore begets cruddy film

Rating: 5/10 (13 January 2006)

QUICK REVIEW: Bloody, wacky telling of a legendary world leader not really worth the plastic it's imprinted on. Think "Natural Born Killers" for the sandal-wearing era.
If this film presents what makes a man great, I'll take unaccomplished and pray that there's an afterworld where I can find some satisfaction out of my existence. That said, this movie seems to have skipped most of what made Alexander so great, going straight for the mental issues and blood lust. I would think that most of what showed in this film was the bad side and Stone's idea of a true story skipped most of the greatness in the man.
Movie where the only interesting acting (beyond film staples Hopkins and Plummer) was from Ms. Jolie. Serious historical look at Alexander? OK, the blood parts. Look up Alexander the Great on Wikipedia.org, guaranteed to get a better idea of who he was than this grisly, obtusely and graphically violent film. (The digital abuse of elephants in this film alone ruins the attempt, frankly.) Blood was part of his story, certainly, but my gut feeling is Stone may have imagined this a "Saving Private Ryan" or "Braveheart" with the staging of these battles for world dominance. He was wrong, as it is tiresome to sit through the warring scenes.
I find it not only hard to believe, but troubling, that Stone took years to develop this disparaging freak show. What's next? Rather skip it, myself, Ollie.