What a missed opportunity

Rating: 1/10 (30 July 2006)

I like Oliver Stone's work, some of his films are real favorites such as The People vs. Larry Flynt, Any Given Sunday, The Joy Luck Club, Salvador. I am also a history buff with particular interest in ancient military history. Thus when this film was announced I eagerly anticipated its release and came to view it bringing a fair amount of positive partisanship before I opened my $20 DVD.
However the fact is I couldn't even finish watching the DVD. I actually thought almost anything else I could do with my time (even falling asleep) would be a more constructive and pleasurable use of my time. I cannot remember the last time I stopped watching a film (after 2 hours) because it was nauseating to watch.
It is simply a bad film. Sorry but there is nothing redeeming in it. I read reviews by a number of people who liked it because Stone allegedly made a historically accurate film, used experts like Robin Lane Fox etc. Those people don't know what they're talking about. There are few extant primary sources that offer insights into the life of this military genius and all of them detail mainly military and political matters. The idea that Stone's film somehow accurately portrays Alexander's personal and family life is laughable. Those aspects of the film are an exercise in artistic license. The relationships between the characters are this director's creation not a historical fact. That by the way is fine - but don't argue we are supposed to like the film because of authenticity. Even viewed as fiction however it isn't interesting.
The tragedy IMO is that this enterprise had the money and the talent to make a great film about a fascinating life. Many people have little understanding of the "great" qualities of this man as a warrior general, a leader, a statesman. That is something they will emerge from viewing the film still understanding little. The battle of Gaugamela is the one part of the film where Stone tried to recount some military events. There is a reason that battle is first year teaching at military academies to this day. I'm not sure that it was clear to people from viewing this film what happened there. The exercise of military genius and the mixture of diligence in preparation, audacity and courage that marked Alexander's military career would be the most historically accurate aspects of a complicated life the director could have captured. This battle was certainly a part of the film where those themes could have been developed, but were not.
Ultimately it is not a crime that Stone didn't make the kind of film I might have enjoyed more. Something with more time on military and political adventures that are based in fact, with the character studies woven into that story. I don't expect a historical documentary, it is fine to make art. But it is boring and a failure as art as well as historically deficient.