Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Oliver Stone laments 'Alexander the gay'
World Net Daily ^ | Jan 1, 2005 | (none)

Posted on 01/01/2005 8:03:33 AM PST by BobL

Oliver Stone laments 'Alexander the gay'

Director admits: 'There was clear resistance to his homosexuality'

© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com

Hollywood director Oliver Stone is lamenting the poor box-office performance of his latest film "Alexander," citing the homosexuality of the lead character as one of the detrimental factors.

Colin Farrell, right, stars as Alexander the Great, with Angelina Jolie and Val Kilmer as his parents. (Courtesy Warner Bros.)

"I still think it's a beautiful movie, but Alexander deserves better than I gave him," Stone said, according to the London Telegraph. "There was clear resistance to his homosexuality. It became the headline to the movie. They called him Alexander the gay. That's horribly discriminatory, but the film simply didn't open in the Bible Belt."

Stone, who also directed films including "Nixon" and "JFK," said he should have sliced the length of his latest movie from three hours down to 2 and a half, "and taken out the homosexuality for the U.S. market and for countries sensitive to such things, like Korea or Greece."

"Kids weren't comfortable with men who hugged, a king who cries and expresses tenderness," he added.

"Alexander," which recounts the life and times of the famed Macedonian conqueror, has been unable to slay the public despite a $195 million budget and well-known stars including Colin Farrell, Angelina Jolie and Val Kilmer.

The film has raked in $33.9 million in its sixth week, grossing just $41,000 on only 232 screens over the Christmas holiday weekend, translating into $177 per show.

As WorldNetDaily previously reported, reviews for the film have been harsh to say the least.

Reviewer Jeffery Westfoff of the Northwest Herald in Crystal Lake, Ill., wrote "'Alexander' often seems a couple of heartbeats away from turning into a gay porno film."

Philip Wuntch of the Dallas Morning News said, "'Alexander' has aspirations of greatness, hoping to be christened an intellectual super-spectacle for brainy moviegoers. The sad truth is that it will probably numb more brain cells than it will stimulate."

Wuntch notes that in the film, "Alexander prefers the after-hours company of men, considering women to be necessary primarily for reproductive reasons. His true soul mate is boyhood companion Hephaistion [Jared Leto], to whom he says softly, 'I'm nothing without you.' They never exchange an onscreen kiss, but their eyes constantly caress each other."


TOPICS: Business/Economy; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: alexander; alexanderthegreat; movies; olivernitwit; olivernutcase; oliverstone; stonethecommie; stonetheloser
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 141-143 next last
To: Always Right

Makes me want to see the Richard Burton Elizabeth taylor movie.

I find it VERY odd that the TV/Cable media types did not show that version while this one was out. The always seem to show older versions at teh same time as remakes or Movie I when Movie II is about to hit the big screen.

It is also very apparent that Alexander the "gay" was not accepted in the EU or Asia. (Will studios ever let themselves get Oliver Stoned again?)


61 posted on 01/01/2005 9:45:34 AM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant

(sarcasm on)

You are all wrong, Alexander the Great was a METROsexual. It is a documented fact as produced by the SanFranceeeesco Abraham Lincoln Center for the Study of Historical Figures.

He had such a fashion sense. As documented by "some guy" and those blond highlights were just to die for.

More proof of his Metrosexuality.

(/sarcasm)


62 posted on 01/01/2005 9:49:11 AM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: BobL
"There was clear resistance to his homosexuality. It became the headline to the movie. They called him Alexander the gay. That's horribly discriminatory, but the film simply didn't open in the Bible Belt."

Maybe you just suck altogether, Oliver. You've jumped the shark, mate. Think about it, eh?

63 posted on 01/01/2005 9:53:25 AM PST by Caipirabob (Democrats.. Socialists..Commies..Traitors...Who can tell the difference?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Caipirabob

"didn't open in the bible belt"?

Does he mean redstates? (aka Jeeeeesusland) I suspect "didn't open" to Oliver Stone means the movie played to an empty theaters. It is probably the case in the rest of the world if this story is comming out now. The movie was DOA globablly not just the USA.


64 posted on 01/01/2005 9:56:39 AM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: BobL
This has to rank among the dumbest marketing decisions in this Red-State year.

Stone was so blatant about pushing the homosexual agenda with this movie that I have to believe that offending Red State movie goers was part of his marketing plan. It seems to me that he was counting on outrage from us driving Blue Staters and Europeans ("Look at this, the Jesus humpers hate it, so it must be something we have to see!") into the theaters in droves.

Unfortunately for him, it appears that Stone got so caught up in pushing our buttons that he forgot to make a watchable film. It also looks like he seriously misjudged just how "progressive" the Greeks are. He seems surprised that they could get all worked up over his turning one of their greatest historical figures into a weepy little gay blade.

I just have to wonder how long the studios are going to put up with this garbage - making a real expensive, top quality film, and then letting the director sabotage it.

I've wondered about that one myself for years. But the studios never seem to lose their infatuation with "artistes" like Oliver Stone, despite the long trail of stinky eggs they lay at the box office.

65 posted on 01/01/2005 9:57:22 AM PST by CFC__VRWC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BobL
'I'm nothing without you.' They never exchange an onscreen kiss, but their eyes constantly caress each other."

You know, scrap the film and you might salvage the soundtrack with more noteworthy celebrities:

"What are you looking at, Beavis?"

66 posted on 01/01/2005 10:01:15 AM PST by Caipirabob (Democrats.. Socialists..Commies..Traitors...Who can tell the difference?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BobL
Even if you take out the man love episodes, the battle scenes were weak, they had Angelina Joli (sp?) attempting some type of accent (French maybe?) and the rest with Irish accents (what the hell was that all about).

Bottom line, the movie sucked. You could not have edited enough out of it to make it better.
67 posted on 01/01/2005 10:01:58 AM PST by lt.america (Captain was already taken)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper

That's right. We don't know much about what Alexander's sex life was like because THERE ARE NO SOURCES that detail this. The history doesn't exist. We do know he married at least one woman. Stone's effort to protray Alexander as homosexual is pure speculation based on virtually nothing.


68 posted on 01/01/2005 10:03:53 AM PST by scory
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

"Take the LI out of OLIVER and it's OVER."

ROTF...very good!

I just love to see left wingers in Hollywood charge off 100,000,000 on a lousy film!


69 posted on 01/01/2005 10:05:39 AM PST by international american ((Pray for the millions of lives disrupted by tsunami.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: lt.america

Oliver stone is trying to further find excuses for loosing 100 million for his bosses. (lets not forget the DVD salses have not occured and the homosexual movie on DVD will have a similar reception)

Will malmart or target or blockbuster put "Alexander the 'gay'" out of reach of children?

Stone and the Suits were under the impression that controversy by perversion would sell tickets. Not surprising considering the hollyweird types still don't understand Passion of the Christ was not controversial except to those opposed to Christianity.


70 posted on 01/01/2005 10:07:44 AM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: international american

You forget he has to salvage DVD sales. He is still spouting the "controversial" line to entice people to buy the DVD.


71 posted on 01/01/2005 10:08:52 AM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: scory

Name a great man of history and the left eventually gets around to saying he was secretly a homosexual. Long after we're dead and gone some future lefties will say that Ronald Reagan was really gay but it was a well-kept secret. They'll cite they Hollywood lifestyles of the time and that he called Nancy "Mommy".

Heck, there's already a whispering campaign saying Dubya's really gay.


72 posted on 01/01/2005 10:09:00 AM PST by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: Restorer

Exactly. And its why Stone was foolish to make such big deal out of something that has no modern-day relevance, and why homosexual activists are just wrong to try and claim Alexander (or any other prominent man from antiquity) as champions for their present-day agenda for which their was no counterpart in ancient Greece or Rome.

If someone were to go back in time and tell the Greeks that the present day agenda of equal legal standing for sexual relationships between two adults of the same sex should be granted, they'd look at him as if he were an alien. Moreover, if any of the great military leaders of antiquity (Alexander, Trajan, etc) who were said to have relations with boys, had not come up during a time when there was no stigma to that type of behavior (as you said, among elites), then they most likely would have been your run of the mill heterosexuals.


73 posted on 01/01/2005 10:09:25 AM PST by Aetius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper

Don't be surprised if 10 or 20 years from now they Hollyweird homosexuals say Ronald Reagans was a homosexual because he was from California AND (gasp!) was an actor.


74 posted on 01/01/2005 10:10:42 AM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory

LOL

See my post #72.

We have their number. haha


75 posted on 01/01/2005 10:12:28 AM PST by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: BobL

I hape Oliver Stone is finished! I'm surprised someone would back him. I wouldn't, and I admit to being a fool.


76 posted on 01/01/2005 10:13:21 AM PST by shamusotoole
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BobL
They called him Alexander the gay. That's horribly discriminatory, but the film simply didn't open in the Bible Belt."

Granted, I don't live in the Bible Belt, but I've never heard the movie dissed for that reason. I just heard it was a real STINKER!

I believe Oliver Stone is trying to shift the blame for it from his own abilities as a film maker to the 'stupid' potential movie viewers who didn't choose to spend their money on his tripe, since his reputation preceeded the film.

77 posted on 01/01/2005 10:14:51 AM PST by SuziQ (It's the most wonderful time of the year!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Aetius

Actually there were sever stigmas and consequences to being caught engaging in homosexual acts in Ancient Greece. In ancient athens, it was punishable by death or exile.

Conquerors used accusations of homosexual behavior to discredit any heirs to the conquered throne.

It was always seen as a perversion and deviance, elite or not.


78 posted on 01/01/2005 10:15:51 AM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper

ah the infamous skull and bones initiations ...

(what would that have made John F'n Kerry?)


79 posted on 01/01/2005 10:17:57 AM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: BobL
"I still think it's a beautiful movie, but Alexander deserves better than I gave him," Stone said, according to the London Telegraph. "There was clear resistance to his homosexuality. It became the headline to the movie. They called him Alexander the gay. That's horribly discriminatory, but the film simply didn't open in the Bible Belt."

I've had enough of Mr. Stone
80 posted on 01/01/2005 10:20:30 AM PST by Vision (The New York Times...All the news to fit a one world government)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 141-143 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson