What is everyone whining about?

Rating: Null/10 (27 November 2004)

The critics really tore this movie apart, and I have yet to understand just why. They said it was long and boring, homoerotic, and that all characters were vastly miscast.
The long part, I can't argue with, but when was the last time anyone has seen an epic drama under two hours? It's simply not possible. As far as boredom goes, I disagree entirely. There have been several comparisons to "Troy", and that movie, I found an absolute bore-fest. Now, structurally, the two films were very similar, and there were few reasons to make me enjoy "Alexander" so much more.
That brings me to my next point: Above and beyond all else, however, I felt everyone was perfectly casted, Colin Farrell in particular. I did not see him as a "pretty boy" nor did his blonde hair (with the roots everyone complained about that actually only appeared for a mere five minutes of the film) phase me. His performance as Alexander was stellar, at worst.
The so-called "homoeroticism" was scant. There was far more verbal evidence than there was physical and the heterosexual scenes were far more explicit. (I don't know if this could be considered a spoiler, but I am going to cite an actual scene in the film). It was funny to me, the ignorance of American audiences today. In the beginning of the film, the boys are being lectured in class and the teacher explains to them that if man lays with man in passion, he will reap bad results, but if man lays with man in love and in virtue, he will be rewarded. Audience reaction? Nothing. Later, Alexander professes his love and undying devotion to his dearest friend Hephaistion. Audience reaction? Groans. Alright, I've got it. A man can have sex with a man, as long as he doesn't have any feelings toward him. Makes tons of sense, huh? What a sad little narrow-minded world it is in which we live.
It is my firm believing that the critics were simply too caught up in their dislike of Oliver Stone, a director, mind you, that is entitled to far more respect than he is getting, for, in an industry that is all to consumed with the idea of a commercial success, he is one of the few directors more concerned with making his statement and I, personally, applaud him for it.
While I do believe that frequent moviegoers ought to read the reviews to see what kind of reaction a film received, I also believe that one ought to formulate one's own opinion after viewing. In this particular case, I find myself highly juxtaposed to the critical reaction, with, I feel, good reason. At the end of the day, it's up to the potential viewers, and in this case, I think people should give it a chance for themselves.