Review of Alexander (1996) by Catherine D — 12 May 2010

Wow is this film aweful. I friend gave me the "final cut" - what would have been appropriate in such a cut would have been an empty film case!

Every single aspect of this film reaks, bad acting (except perhaps Angelina Jolie, who here finally finds a role in which her botoxed lips look apropos), terible makeup (what the heck are all these manly men doing with dark eyeshadow?) and "epic" battle scenes that are nothing but a mess of masses. If the point of the excercise was to show that war was hell and not glamerous, but simply carnage on a wide spread scale, then why bother adding all the titles ("left phalanx, etc.)?

Stone's direction in this "final cut" is all the more mystifying - jumping back and forth - "Bablyon 9 years earlier" - was simply lazy. He could have easily connected the dots with flashbacks (as he attemped to show with the catacomb scene where Philip showed his son Alexander wall paintings of mythological events that showed the gods messing with the fate of men).

The entire enterprise seemed as pointless as Alexanders' continuing to quest into India after conquering Babylon; including the vapid, overly long, tag ending where Anthony Hopkins waxes poetic (in theory) about the titan of a man, who was loved, misunderstood, hated, misunderstood, idolized, and did I mention misunderstood? It was comical watching the scribe following Hopkins around the garden, with the scribes' second holding the ink pot - you've got to be kidding me!!!!! Lost in the detail - perhaps that would have been a better title.