Posted on 11/27/2004 6:36:33 PM PST by quidnunc
Well, I thought it was simply terrible. The film goes on for nearly three hours, but we hear nothing of what either supporters or detractors of Alexander, both ancient and modern, have agreed were the central issues of his life. Did he really believe in a unity of mankind, and were his mass mixed marriages, Persian dress, and kowtowing cynical, sincere, or delusions of megalomania? We see nothing of the siege of Tyre, Gaza, much less Thebes or even the burning of Persepolis. Other than the talking head Ptolemy, none of his generals have much of a character. There is nothing really in detail about the page purging other than a single reference; Stone, I would have thought, could have had a field day with Alexander’s introduction of both crucifixion and decimation.
-snip-
(Excerpt) Read more at victorhanson.com ...
just below "The Spongebob Squarepants Movie".
Nor stars. How many flops has Madonna had in the past twenty years, yet she still gets handed starring roles in movies. Granted, her most recent role had her husband as director, but still.
Stone excells at making films that are contoversial. That does not equate with great. They generate a lot of discussion and press, but they are of minimal lasting influence.
Compare this movie with Lawrence of Arabia - another film about a larger than life military hero in the Middle East, also with homoerotic undertones. David Lean was a great filmmaker. Stone is just a workmanlike cinamatographer who occasionally releases a controversial propaganda opus.
Liberallarry, what nonsense you talk.
Maximus in "Gladiator" and John Wayne or Humphrey Bogart in any of their movies were men of heroic stature. Sometimes they were sad or discouraged, like Rick in "Casablanca". But their essential heroism was something they could never deny. Rick in "Casablanca" can't stop being a hero, can't stop fighting bullies like Strasser even when he wants to sink into inconspicuous mediocrity in a gin joint in Casablanca.
Alexander the Great stood out. His extraordinariness stood out all his life. It is the nature of the heroic character to stand out. Even as an arena slave Maximus is as revered by the other gladiators as he was as a general by his soldiers. Somehow, Hollywood has lost the ability to depict such people without wanting to diminish or belittle them in some way as if to reassure us that they were no different from us.
Perhaps you should think before typing in the future.
History is more interesting and subtle than Hollywood has time for.
You know, Hollywood has done some great things with music. The use of opera in "Someone to Watch over me" was magnificent. So was the movie IMHO.
Funny you mention it, Lean's Dr Zhivago is on AMC right now as I type.
They dont make em like they used to.
It is hard to make a story about a prodigy boring. Alexander was someone whose extraordinariness was apparent at an early age, someone who struck everyone who encountered him. Notwithstanding the fact that he had a colossal mean streak at times as was shown at Thebes, Tyre, and Persepolis and to trusted comrades like Parmenion and Cleitus.
Larry replied:
You mean like Maximus in Gladiator, or John Wayne or Humphrey Bogart in any of their movies, or John Travolta in Get Shorty, or Mel Gibson in Payback or most of his movies, etc., etc.
Larry, you are confusing fictional everyman characters played brilliantly by actors like Crowe, Wayne, Bogart, Travolta, and Gibson with the Oliver Stone-driven dumbing down of an actual historical figure. Stone made a movie about Alexander the Great, and stripped all the greatness away. There is a difference, you realize?
A few weeks ago, I watched Casablanca for the first time. It was my opinion, and I think you will agree, that he was dead inside, because Elsa left him and he didn't know why. That is something with which we can all identify. He tried to make himself believe that he didn't care for anyone or anything. It was tough for him to carry that out. By opening himself up again, he was able to realize that there were things bigger than himself.
In present dollars, "Lawrence of Arabia" cost a mere $60 million.
The taking of Aqaba. One panning shot as the camera sweeps from the Arabs overrunning the Turkish pickets to them surging through the streets of the town to the final image of the Turkish naval gun pointing futilely out to sea.
I'm afraid Hollywood botches epics more often than not, lately. I saw both "Troy" and "King Arthur" over the summer and, while I have appreciated both directors in the past, they obviously had to answer to a higher studio power this time around. "Troy" deviated from The Illiad so much, even my 14-year old son was disappointed. Brad Pitt seemed surprised that he actually had to ACT, while Peter O'Toole stole the movie, IMHO. As for "King Arthur", I hope it inspires young people to read the traditional story, because this was not it. The cinematography was pretty, but the storyline was a snoozer. The Arthur just seemed depressed. Realism shouldn't overcome our myths and legends---this dulls their original purpose, which is to stimulate and inspire one to greatness.
Oh, my. What other essential American experiences have you been denying yourself?
Maybe the French would understand us better if they were to realize that Americans are still Rick, while the French have abandoned the last good qualities of Renault. They have all gone Vichy, now.
The point of heroism is that you can never lose it. Even when Rick was sunk in bitterness and self-pity he could not help instinctively sticking up for the helpless.
I have to disagree with both of you. Wall St. was great. Salvador was great. Conan was a hell of a lot of fun. Midnight express, 8 million ways to die, Scarface were wonderful. Born on the Fourth of July was extremely powerful.
Exactly. Hollywood likes heroes as well as anti-heroes. It makes all kinds of stuff. Mostly crap...but some truly great stuff as well. Like any other human endeavor.
I have been trying for months to see Dr. Zhivago, but always miss it, somehow.
Ever see it on a big screen, full cinemascope? It just doesn't have the impact on TV. The most important character in the whole movie is the desert, against which every man is a speck.
The Hollywood of pre-1970 liked heroes.
"Gladiator" was a throwback to the sword and sandal movies of the 50's. Aside from that Hollywood wants self-doubting whiners, Woody Allen's with guns.
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.