Oliver Stone's AlexanderOliver Stone's 2004 attempt at a re-telling of the life of Alexander the Great was sorely lacking. With Alexander (Colin Farrell) sporting an Irish accent and Olympia (Angelina Jolie), a strange Hollywood Russian accent, 'Alexander' appeared to be a mish-mash of mis-castings and bad accents. Farrell was unconvincing as Alexander. He plainly did not have the ability to handle such a role and he would have been better suited for a cop show of some sort.
Colin Farrell's wig and heavy mascara were hilarious. The heavy mascara on some of Alexander companion were laughable as well. What gives?
It got worse. Besides the mis-casting, the narrative did not flow from scene to scene, it was more than episodic, the narrative stuttered. The choice of important scenes appear strange as some important episodes of Alexander's life was omitted while others incidental ones were included. Simplifcation? Perhaps. However, the choices did not lend itself to narrative continuity, thus, the narrative suffered.
Then, there was the bad childhood and blame the bad parenting bit. Abusive father. Manipulative mother. Urm....
Is this film meant to be an indictment of Bush and Bush Senior's direction of Pax Americana in Iraq with the emphasis on the conquests in Alexander being a failure? If it is, the film is simply not effective. The message is submerged somewhere.
I saw the DVD last night and I wished I hadn't wasted three hours of my life on this. I had wanted a visualisation of Alexander the Great but this was simply a failure in every sense of the word.
3 comments:
The cast of actors chosen for this of movie was exactly why I have not seen it yet. This part of history was not meant to be ruined by Hollywood. I passed on it and thought "what a shame" because hardly any movies are made about that part of history anymore. When they do, they do this. Oh well.
V, the casting or prominent actors and actresses can sometimes compromise the integrity of the film by being too identifiable. Imagine seeing Colin Farrell rather than Alexander stomping across Persia. Colin Farrell, Tom Cruise, Brad Pitt, Angelina Jolie and others are simply too identifiable. Often, Tom Cruise simply plays Tom Cruise without bothering to adopt a role. No method to their acting. It's sad. Like you said, Hollywood can ruin history. I would have preferred it they were unknowns... There are just so many talented thespians out there.
Sadly, stars have drawing power and without stars, the movie can be a commercial flop.
True! Actors like Tom Cruise and such are better to stick with their action adeventure and silly romantic roles. Though I do think that Russell Crowe did a pretty good job with Gladiator.
Post a Comment