Magnificent Achievement

Rating: 10/10 (24 November 2005)

Most people will not agree with me or this review. But I defend it only because it is only my opinion. You can chose to agree or disagree but I will not disavow it merely to save face because I believe it through and through.
As much as I despise Stone's personal politics, with a passion that I cannot fully explain here, I must separate my disdain for his life from his work on this film as I regularly separate my disgust for the person of Richard Wagner from the glory of his grand and timeless music.
There is much to laud in this film which has been derided so much.
It has images and moments that will stay with me for a long time.
The imagery alone in the last battle in India should have permitted this film to join the ranks of the greatest movies. It reminds of that great battle in Kurosawa's RAN. Full of poetry, pathos, light and color.
The music of Vangelis must be heavily praised here for its amazing power and beauty. A finer score has not often been heard without instantly recognizable "tunes and catchy songs" which is so much in vogue today in "Hollywood". Vangelis did not resort to this until the movie was over and we were treated to two very finely spun melodies during the final credits. Let's not confuse the music when young Alexander subdues his horse as a melody, that, my friends, was orchestration of the highest caliber.
For these and other virtues in this film, the general populace failed to recognize this greatness. They could not see a movie that moved differently from they had been accustomed to and called it "good". That is the great failing of art in these times. We have been fed so much tripe that we have come to hunger and thirst for it, not knowing that there are other ways, better ways, to approach the film medium.
Take those criticisms of Farrell's performance. If any performance has moved me in the past few years, it has been his. At times his conviction and ferocity in this role was a sheer pleasure to behold. The power of Farrell's sensitivity brought me into his world and to the world that we might imagine that Alexander lived and suffered.
Hopkins was the perfect narrator, Jolie was deliciously imposing as the cold, power-lusting mother of Alexander. Fine too were Val Kilmer as Alexander's father, and Jared Leto, Jonathan Rhys-Myers, Joseph Morgan
To compare this movie to recent historic epics is tantamount to a treason to our generation's legacies. They have called this movie of Stone's a failure. To paraphrase Hopkins' speech at the end of the movie: "What failure? His failure towers over other men's successes!" How could one even compare this to BRAVEHEART, TROY or GLADIATOR? They were all wrought with a heavy hand and a predictable, mass-marketed touch. (I remove the LORD OF THE RINGS trilogy from this comparison because this series is in a class all its own.) But perhaps the most important reason that Stone's movie did not seem palatable to the masses was the obvious mainstream disdain for same-sex love. In this age of more sexual freedom than has been seen in hundreds of years, it is ironic that such truths that Greek society was different from ours in their acceptances of sexuality, should have relegated this movie to the ranks of curiosity and banal criticism and not the popular success which it deserves.
If you have not seen this movie before, I entreat you to experience it. It is not art-house by far. But it will move you into a place you may have seldom seen or heard.