Review of Alexander (1996) by Michael M — 08 Nov 2012

Alexander, the (not-so) Great!

An award-winning, critically acclaimed director; a controversial, fast-rising Hollywood actor; the 'sexiest woman' in the world (according to a magazine poll); a well-respected, versatile veteran actor; and a supposedly innovative scriptwriter. These are not necessarily the ingredients to a good film. "Alexander" proves this.

I had high hopes coming into the theater to watch Hollywood's latest foray into the big-budget epic genre. After all, it's the story of one of the greatest conquerors the world has ever known--it's a great material to begin with. And what's more, it's Oliver Stone at the helm! Oliver Stone! How could this miss or mess up?

Half-way into "Alexander" I was left searching for something to jump off the screen and captivate my attention, waiting for something to happen that would undo the tedium of the past hour and a half. Sadly, nothing ever jumped off the screen and nothing ever happened. It was like this all the way to the last frame. I didn't even stay to finish the end credits--and for a movie buff, that's saying a lot!

The thing I didn't like about the film is the fact that instead of making the Alexander mythology clearer to those who aren't well acquainted with history, it ended up confusing viewers even more. Or maybe it was just me. I don't know. But I felt like the film lacked coherence through and through, as I wasn't quite able to piece together an unambiguous perception of who the title character was. Okay, okay. I'll go read books on the subject matter. XD It's just that looking back on the recent similar epic films (Troy, Gladiator, even The Passion of the Christ), they have managed to paint a clear picture of who their main characters are and the 'why's' in their lives. I somehow missed this in Alexander. Or perhaps it wasn't there to begin with. ;o).

I don't know if I set my expectations too high (because it's a Stone film) or didn't get enough sleep the other night (only four hours), which made me a bit drowsy while watching, but this movie just didn't quite meet the standards set (or raised) by the aforementioned epic films.

Acting wise, I take my hat off to Colin Farrell who went all the way (hahaha! watch the movie and see what I mean) with the material given him. I've never seen the guy this good and this compelling. His performance here reminds me of Brad Pitt's acting in "Troy". However, I felt like Oscar winners Anthony Hopkins and Angelina Jolie weren't really given much to do here other than narrate portions of the story (for Hopkins) and pout (for Jolie).

The only other thing worth watching here, other than Mr. Farrell's acting, is the beautiful locales that doubled as the places Alexander conquered. Other than that, I suggest you watch this film with lowered expectations or don't watch it at all. =o).