Nothing "Great" about Stone's Alexander.

Rating: 1/10 (26 November 2004)

This film is a complete disappointment. Oliver Stone just couldn't get out of his own way on this film. This film needed to be made by someone like Mel Gibson (a la Braveheart and Patriot). I'm surprised that Troy trounces this movie so completely by comparison, but it does.
Nothing is worse, by definition, than an ordinary "epic" picture. At no point in this film will you be riveted or even substantially interested in the characters. The film wanders all over the place, not because Alexander did, but because of the uneven (and often uninteresting) influences in the film. Alexander's parents are portrayed as a hateful, dysfunctional couple, but this influence isn't well developed in Alexander. Does he love them or hate them? Neither really, so it is puzzling that Stone wastes so much time (in this 3 hour movie) to deal with the issue. The parents show up largely in flashbacks (Phillip a la Val Kilmer) or the constant intrusion of snakes (Olympias a la Angelina Jolie the snake lover), and the only reason they do is because of the need to give the "stars" their screen time. The movie suffers as a consequence.
Another waste of time is Alexander as the gay action hero. As Mick LaSalle of the SF Chronicle points out this is a hazy waste of time. At least 30 minutes of screen time could have been saved by dumping this worthless side story overboard. The history is ambiguous on the issue, and most importantly IT IS BESIDES THE POINT. Alexander wasn't a world conqueror because he may have been bi-sexual, so it merely distracts from what drives Alexander to conquer the world. The other sexual story of Alexander taking an unknown Afghan woman as a wife was unintentionally hilarious. The wedding night naked wrestling slap fight with his new bride (Roxane a la sultry Rosario Dawson...check out 25th Hour) is comical, bizarre and then trite, but she is naked with the ever present snake imagery reminding us of Alexander's mother...yeah yeah Oedipus, got it.
So the movie wanders here and there (just like this review). Colin Farrell tries to be convincing as an Alexander with bug eyes, but doesn't succeed. Maybe he could have if Stone hadn't messed the story up, but he doesn't. Farrell's Alexander is unimpressive and whiny. He needed to rent a few movies to check out any historical warrior done by Mel Gibson, Liam Neeson, or Russell Crowe. Basically, Farrell just can not create the gravitas that these actors can in their historical roles. If he were younger, Kenneth Branaugh would have been ideal if he packed on 20 lbs of muscle. Eric Bana, who was Hector in Troy, could have done a very good job with this role. Besides, the fact that Bana showed he could play such a historical character, he would have been enough of a professional to dump his accent (as an Aussie) unlike Mr. Irish Guy. In order to cover up Farrell's inability to dump his accent, Stone has the rest of the Greek generals speak with an Irish accent. Whatever, it doesn't work.
Jolie is o.k. as Alexander's mother, although her youth makes it appear impossible. For some reason they didn't bother to try and age her with makeup. She plays the role with intensity, and conveys the strategic nature of Olympia. However, she gets too much screen time considering the impact of her character, and the Russian or whatever accent she had is distracting because it sticks out and is inconsistent with the rest of the accents. Oh well, if Sean Connery can do a Russian Sub Captain with a Scottish accent, I guess Jolie can do it too.
The real surprise here is how effective Anthony Hopkins is as Ptolemy, and how he helps move the story along. Actually, I guess it shouldn't be surprising that Hopkins is good. It is just that his abilities are striking when compared with the other's substantial failures.
What a waste, this could have been a great film, but in Stone's inept hands it is mediocre at best. If you must see it, go see a matinÃ©e otherwise you'll feel ripped off.