Good research by Stone, bad film by Stone

Rating: 4/10 (20 March 2005)

When you'll look up information on Alexanders life, it'll show that Oliver Stone has done the research for this project thoroughly. Still it results in a film that neither provides us with a fascinating experience, nor with a strong portrayal of this Macedonian legend.
The weakness of this movie lies somehow in the ambition to cover too many aspects of Alexanders life. The result is just too predictable: a film in which none of the aspects of Alexanders life, all capable of bringing us a brilliant film theme, is properly worked out.
Alexanders relationship with his mother: not done fully The homosexual side of Greek society: not done fully Alexander the great conqueror/general: idem Alexander as an enigmatic figure: idem Alexander the ruthless: idem
Each of these theme's, and numerous others, is only briefly touched by the filmmakers, resulting in a heap of scenes, that's hardly knit together by either storyline, plot or character development.
The character of Alexander the great doesn't stand out as a result either. it's pretty much 'Alexander the weak', neither human, neither the half-god. It's just another role in the long and sad history of Hollywood autobiography.
Oliver Stone has studied his subject thoroughly, i will agree on that. but he forgot about his actual job: making a film. How historically correct everything in 'Alexander' may look at first sight, there's simply no point in spending your money on this loose collection of scenes.