Posted on 01/05/2005 6:57:39 PM PST by deaconjim
LONDON (AFP) - Oscar-winning writer-director Oliver Stone blamed "raging fundamentalism in morality" for the frosty reception that his new film "Alexander" is getting in his native United States.
In London for its British premiere, Stone, 58, said that after a career full of cage-rattling work, he thought a biopic of Alexander the Great, the 4th century Macedonian-born conquerer, would be "a safe subject".
But he said he was "quite taken aback by the controversy and fierceness of the reviews" which greeted its US release, including outrage at the film's suggestion that Alexander was bisexual.
"Sexuality is a large issue in America right now, but it isn't so much in other countries," he said.
"There's a raging fundamentalism in morality in the United States. From day one audiences didn't show up. They didn't even read the reviews in the south because the media was using the words: 'Alex is Gay'."
"Alexander" stars Colin Farrell and Angelina Jolie, both seen at the London premiere, but its US box office take so far has been less than a quarter of the 150 million dollars that it cost to make.
Very interesting.
Pay no attention to me. I was misunderstanding the part of your post about "Or, am I being too harsh, once again?". FReegards
Word spreads fast, and if a movie just sucks, people will tell their friends to warn them not to go.
I think you are wrong that people won't go to movies set in older times.
Remember Troy earlier this year, which I saw and loved.
$133,378,256 domestic.
Compare this with the much-hyped Alexander, which could only muster 30 million.
People did not go see the movie because it STUNK and made homosexuality the focus.
BTW, as a history major, I have to cringe at your comment "This guy reigned 2400 years ago. And that matters now, why?"
Remember: THOSE WHO DO NOT KNOW HISTORY ARE DOOMED TO REPEAT IT.
I confess to catching a few minutes of that show, and it is pretty funny.
I hate saying that because usually, with thet exception of Seinfeld, I seem to have some complex of being "aloof" to popular shows and paving my own path.
Some weird psychological desire to be independent of the crowd I guess. But, I have to admit, Will and Grace is funny.
only by comparison. I think most american films make their big money here.
RW--your point on Troy is well taken.
There was an element of romance, and the story of Helen of Troy and her beauty is something most people are at least aware of.
Alexander is not well known to most Americans. You know about him, I know about him---but it remains a fact that most people in America know squat about him.
The homosexual angle, no pun intended, was the movie's death knell. Most Americans go to the movies to escape life, and be entertained, not be hammered by politically correct morality themes.
I commend you on being a history major. I, too, am a student of history. But you failed to understand that my question was one of rhetoric, as if an average movie going American was asking the question.
In the absence of the lack of popular knowledge about the subject,the hype about the homosexuality, and the prescreening hype that the movie was too long and boring, most people decided to spend their movie money elsewhere.
Now since you know the comment was rhetorical, no cringing allowed.
It crinkles your nose.
A co-worker of mine - definitely not a conservative - said he had no problem with the movie portraying Alexander as gay or bisexual. The problem was (in his opinion) that was pretty much the crux of the film.
Just love the title of this article, it makes me all giddy.
fundamentalists make much ado about nothing, don't they? i'm with Stone on this one.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.