Explore
 Lists  Reviews  Images  Update feed
Categories
MoviesTV ShowsMusicBooksGamesDVDs/Blu-RayPeopleArt & DesignPlacesWeb TV & PodcastsToys & CollectiblesComic Book SeriesBeautyAnimals   View more categories »
Listal logo

An average movie

Posted : 11 years, 7 months ago on 18 September 2012 12:28

Even though it was a huge flop, since I always enjoyed Oliver Stone's work, I was still eager to check this flick. Unfortunately, it does deserve its reputation and it is arguably the most disappointing movie directed by Stone. I must admit that, the first time around, I wasn't really sure what to make of this movie (honestly, I didn't think it was that bad actually) so I watched it again a few months later, and this time around, I understood what was wrong with this movie and I understood that it was not that good at all. Above all, I thought it was just really messy and, frankly, rather poorly written. Indeed, they focus on certain moments, certain scenes which seem rather trivial whereas some other which sound really important or interesting are just rushed or even skipped. And, of course, there was the old homosexual thing which was indeed poorly handled. I mean, if you are going to tackle the subject, you either go for it all the way or you just drop the whole thing all together. What I mean by that, is that, for example, you are treated with a gratuitous naked scene with Rosario Dawson but then, with Jared Leto, they don't even touch each other and those scenes were just terribly embarrassing. Still, the whole thing is not completely worthless. Indeed, it remains a fascinating historical figure , the whole thing looked awesome and there was a nice cast (Colin Farrell, Angelina Jolie, Val Kilmer, Jared Leto, Anthony Hopkins, Rosario Dawson, Christopher Plummer, Jonathan Rhys Meyers). For Colin Farrell, it was yet another disappointing high profile project, just like 'Miami Vice' which was released 2 years later. To conclude, even though it is far from being one of the worst movies ever made, it is still a disappointment and it is not really worth a look, I'm afraid.


0 comments, Reply to this entry

Alexander review

Posted : 12 years, 4 months ago on 1 January 2012 12:27

This was a movie I had wanted to see for a while and I heard that there was a lot of talking so I was excepting that but holy crap was there a lot of talking. I did like how the story took place and unfolded but overall this movie was pretty bad.

+Good action/ war sceens
+Story told fairly well
+Music was pretty good

-Way to long
-To much talking
-Not that accurate
-I hated the back and forth editing


0 comments, Reply to this entry

Fortune favours the Grape of film.

Posted : 13 years, 10 months ago on 14 June 2010 11:07

''In the end, when it's over, all that matters is what you've done.''

Alexander, the King of Macedonia and one of the greatest military leaders in the history of warfare, conquers much of the known world.

Colin Farrell: Alexander

Everyone may remember Colin Farrell taking a moment to urinate upon a religious tree in Jerusalem. It comes to mind generally because Olive Stone, director of Alexander happens to create controversy by effectively taking his own urination session upon History.
Irish accents, shifty wigs, and a perception of Macedonia that would make a grown man cry like a baby.
Who may you ask is to play Alexander the Great? Oliver Stone seems to shock audiences by choosing the ill-cast Colin Farrell into a role he cannot hope to conquer.



Alexander ironically has the likes of talented Angelina Jolie, Val Kilmer, Anthony Hopkins, Jared Leto, Rosario Dawson and even Jonathan Rhys Meyers. Yet Oliver Stone manages to turn the epic into a abysmal waste of celluloid thus creating a travesty and in essence an Irish sounding mockery of History.
Angelina Jolie speaks similar to a Romanian Gypsy with chaotic tones to her lines, while actually asking audiences to believe she is Alexander's Mother Olympias, when in fact she looks more like a sibling sister.
Val Kilmer fails to portray King Philip as anything more than a over weight slob, Anthony Hopkins hobbles around narrating the story in the future while oozing self pretentious offal.
As for the homosexual relationship between Leto's Hephaistion and Alexander, what more can audiences ask for to make them uncomfortable? Oh yes, don't forget that blonde gay wig that Farrell wears. I'm still squirming and writhing in pain doth the agony inflicted upon the very eyes.

In its defence Alexander does indeed feature battle sequences and aerial shots that defy expectations and the appalling dramatics. It also features a couple of cameos that shine a light upon a greatness that could of been; Brian Blessed pops up as a Wrestling trainer and Christopher Plummer makes an appearance as Aristotle.
A sex scene prominently is used half way between Farrell and the newly famed Rosario Dawson, which in turn, wakes one up as the film flags. This is the scene to watch and indeed the pause button was invented primarily for such a joyous occasion. Unfortunately the joy is short-lived, the film's incessant jumping and flashbacks irritate and confuse spiralling audiences into madness and frustration.
I kept asking myself why? Then correspondently looking at my watch for the time, sweating, wondering if this film would be the death of me, before asking myself why again? Why has Oliver Stone made Alexander the Grape? A bisexual hippy whom believes in uniting Asia with Greece and Macedonia. Alexander was ahead of his time yes. But does Oliver Stone capture this fact with bad boy Farrell? The answer is a solid no.

Ultimately, Alexander ironically is a showcase for Persian art, Babylon, and showing off beautiful exotic Asian locations, it could be quite possible to watch the entire film muted. In fact Vangelis whom did the music probably are the victors here, the one constant Oliver Stone does not tarnish with his inadequate film-making sinisterness.
A small decision to watch the 1958 Alexander the Great by Robert Rossen may be a better alternative, or better yet, a Documentary on the History Channel. Books, pictures and films done correctly can tell the story of Alexander, unfortunately Oliver Stone failed and as a consequence wasted time, film, and an ineffective selection for a cast. It had a great assemble, yes, but the right choices? No. Fortune does not favour Mr Stone.

''I've lived... I've lived long life, Cadmos, but the glory and the memory of men will always belong to the ones who follow their great visions. The greatest of these is the one they now call Megas Alexandros. The greatest of them all.''


0 comments, Reply to this entry

A waste of time.

Posted : 16 years ago on 28 April 2008 07:05

"Conquer your fear, and I promise you, you will conquer death."

If you're enthusiastic to waste 3 valuable hours on Oliver Stone's tedious, meaningless, lackluster epic then I won't stop you. But the fact remains that Alexander is a substantially appalling film that should never plague your DVD player.

Before continuing with this review, I must clear up a few things: Oliver Stone is a talented filmmaker. Stone's films for the most part have been masterpieces of the utmost quality, and epics like this are ordinarily excellent...but there is nothing here that engages you and consequently the result is 3 hours of an uninspiring script accompanied with barely any action.

It appears that every single actor is miscast: Colin Farrell breathes no life into the character of Alexander (who's turned into a sexually frustrated arrogant king who spends half the film naked), while Jolie adds absolutely nothing but useless dialogue scenes of philosophizing. And every other addition to the cast does nothing more but talk or get killed; no distinguishing features, and a non-sentimental approach to the whole thing.

And even the battle scenes, the only thing you would think would be redeeming, look dull and lifeless and were shot in a manner that results in the audience having no clue as to what is going on. The shaky cam was fruitless, distracting and all it did was cause the audience to sit there thinking "What...the hell...is going on?!" And if that's not enough, why in the name of god did the post-production crew decide to tint part of a battle in red?! You can't make out ANYTHING! I was struggling just to distinguish who is stabbing who.

There was no point to the movie. All it does is try to outline the life of Alexander the Great (played appallingly by Farrell) but instead the dismal script is hard to comprehend and makes it into something from Shakespeare. After watching the movie I had no idea what point it was meant to make, not to mention what actually happened during the movie, and why it's nothing more than violent manslaughter with horrible acting and a script that could be beaten by one penned by a 5-year-old.

Alexander's life was filled with battles of epic proportion and that is what I was at least expecting. Stone never got close to this. When I first saw the trailers and read the information about the movie I expected good results. All the film returned was a bunch of negative reviews and a poor box office return.

Alexander is the first Oliver Stone film one can honestly describe as boring. Please do yourself a favour and leave this one on the shelf! Don't waste your precious time.


0 comments, Reply to this entry

awsome

Posted : 17 years ago on 30 April 2007 10:21

i love this movie cause of jared leto he is hot!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! MMMUUUAAAHHH!


0 comments, Reply to this entry