I know this thread quite possibly should be here, but since I want to mention and talk about the historical aspects of the movie I thought it was the most proper place. Don't read on if you haven't watched the movie... It could ruin it for you.






Let me say it outright.
The movie is worth the money you pay, at least for me. It is long (almost 3 hours) and covers his entire life, at the end you don't feel as if important things has been skipped (but they have, though most reasonably). There is a long time where he grows up, where we see Phillip as a rather brutish ruler, quite probably right.
It is interesting and it underlines Alexander's future life, and this without beeing too long.

That we don't see Chareonea, the fight against the Thracians, the crushing of Thebes, Grannicus or Issus was in my mind disappointing, but understandable. All the important things happen at Gaugamela, which btw is one damn impressive battle. So more a few men on a hill, this one was massive and to make certain people get it they (producers) have us following an eagle along the battlelines and it soars on for quite a while, and it is obvious that the Macedonians are very much outnumbered.
The Persians only fire two volleys of arrows, they blacken the skies, true enough but they are far too effective. It was almost like watching Troy over again. If they were that effective why did Darius send in his troops? He could have devastated the pikemen easily like this. Btw, where were the elephants he had?
The chariotcharge is impressive to say the least and it is very very nice to see peltasts and slingers dash out of the lines to do their job and to fill the holes. The Hypaspists are hoplitish, they are equipped like them but they fight far more independantly unless ordered together. A nice combination given we know so little about them really.
When the Persian infantry finally connects with the pikes it is spectacular, they are simply moved down, I think I even saw a guy that got impaled and then slided down the pike towards the wielder (dead of course).
Alexander and his Companions do a nice maneuver and bring out the Persian cavalry, but that was not how I remembered him doing it. Anyway it makes for a spectacular show when they clash with the Persian cavalry and of course infantry. The Companions are indeed equipped correctly, no saddles and no stirrups (though I'm not so certain about the not saddles for real history), the xyston and kopis. Plenty of nice little features.
It was after the cavalry charge things happened at great speed. Darius was chased off (quite nicely) and Alexander had put himself in danger and was only saved by his bodyguards time and again. The famous incident that happened at Grannicus happened here, Glaukos saved Alexander from an axeman after he had recieved a number of hits that had brought him to his knees (for the first time in movies to we see armour actually having an effect, as Alexander is struk repeatedly on the cuirass). A fair enough compromise to save time.
That battle is absolutely bloody... arms flying, blood everywhere, a guy actually beating others with a severed head. It was horrific and yet fascinating.

What I didn't like is how the Parmenion and Philotas rebellion has its seeds set already. Their flank is almost crumbling and they ask for help, and Parmenion talks about treachery to his son. No way! Not already.

That the movie didn't involve many of the interesting stories of Alexander, but had a whole deal about his mother and his relationships with Hephaestion, Roxanna and Boagras, well that left me a little let down. I find it completely ok for them to show that Alexander was very much to both sides, but to me that isn't a big issue and need not get brought up time and again. It is not for his sexuality we remember him, but for his outstanding actions. Make certain the public knows what he was like, but beyond that let it rest.
Oh and let me say Roxanna was quite a woman... Not beautiful, but rather one of those where you think "this is going to be fun", and of course she had a body to match her fiery temper.

Hydaspes is a big jumble and mess. And not quite correct as suddenly the central phalanx is surrounded by elepgants and cavalry, it is in a forest.
It is possibly even better than Gaugamela for its closeup badass action, but it is worse when it comes to scale and impressiveness. But those elephants are nasty! Guys get gored by the tusks, gets trampled, gets thrown around and finally guys are struck flat by the trunk, and there are lots of elephants, all nicely decorated and armoured with big scale mats. When the elephants are struck back it is quite gory, one has its belly slit another its trunk nearly cut off. Nasty once again.
Again the troops are perfectly equipped.
Bucephalos has a major part in the battle and we see why Alexander founds a city in its name though it isn't mentioned.

All in all a great movie, but Alexander himself is only shown as arrogant, not as the hooligan he also was, neither is his paranoia shown. Yes he kills a number of dissenters, but we don't see the decimation of a unit (where the Romans got the idea). We don't see the sack of Tyre or the destruction of Persepolis, which was done in a druken rage.

So what do you guys think?

Reply