Average Film

Rating: Null/10 (28 November 2004)

Spoilers. I am a fan of some of Oliver Stone's films. I think that they are generally hit-or-miss and this is a miss. When I think of Alexander the Great, I always ask the question 'What made him great?', and I don't think that question was ever answered. Was he a great leader, a great strategist, a great thinker, a visionary? What was his impact on the world? In the end I saw Alexander as a bi-sexual, world traveling, confused leader, who was a product of a dysfunctional parents. I think that Oliver Stone's approach to film making is to take a subject, spin it into an odd direction, and add something controversial for shock value. This is especially true in his movies that deal with historical figures. Too much time was spent on his bi-sexuality. I don't think that it was that important and I think it was done for shock value and box office draw. Alexander spent more time lounging around watching exotic dancers than he did conquering cities. Stone also seems to have a fascination with ghosts from people's past. He also has a penchant for conspiracy theories  'We killed him. No, write that he died of a fever'. In the end this is a very average movie.