Why is this movie rated so bad?? *mild spoilers*

Rating: 9/10 (27 July 2005)

Before i watched Alexander yesterday i looked on IMDb.com to see how it was rated. after seeing that it had an average of 5,5 i was rather disappointed. This all changed when i saw the movie yesterday.
I've read in a comment somewhere that the first 45 minutes were boring and that the movie only got exciting after the first battle-scene. I don't agree with this. The movie had me when the title first appeared on the screen and the time that it took to get to the first battle-scene didn't look so long to me because in my opinion the movie was very interesting. I thought the introduction by the old ptolemy was well build up and throughout the movie it somehow reminded me of Salieri telling his story about Mozart in Amadeus.
As for Colin Farrel, in whom i didn't have much fate before watching this movie, he really surprised me as Alexander. He displayed a very believable character who was an extraordinary general, a great king and at the other side a sensitive lover of both sexes and a man who was still a boy when he thinks of his father and mother.
In my opinion Oliver Stone and Colin Farrel did a great job to bring this movie to a deeper emotional level by, for example, not covering up the fact that Alexander also had male lovers and was in love with Hephaistion. Unlike in Troy where Brad Pitt portrayed Achilles as an American rather than a Greek. In my view this movie was more European than American and with art that can only be a good thing.
I'd like to hear what others think of my view on this movie and maybe explain why people gave this movie a 5,5 and not more.
Greets from the Netherlands