Alexander

Alexander

Director: Oliver Stone Cast: Colin Farrell, Angelina Jolie, Val Kilmer
3.2 30

DVD

$13.90 $14.99 Save 7% Current price is $13.9, Original price is $14.99. You Save 7%.
View All Available Formats & Editions
Eligible for FREE SHIPPING
  • Get it by Tuesday, November 28 ,  Order by 12:00 PM Eastern and choose Expedited Delivery during checkout.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

See All Customer Reviews

Alexander 3.3 out of 5 based on 0 ratings. 22 reviews.
Guest More than 1 year ago
I don't know what all the complaining is about. I think the negative comments about this film is coming from a little homophobia. Remember, Alexander was Greek. Back then, that was a bisexual society. Men had their male lovers and married for offspring. But aside from all that, this film blows Troy right out of the water--in dialogue, action, and acting. And it stays true to the life of Alexander the Great. Troy turned Patroclus into Achilles cousin (It appears that they were timid about presenting the fact that Patroclus was his lover). And they left out all the interactions with the gods. Troy was disappointing. Alexander was exhilirating. Colin and Angelina were excellent. Most American filmwriters tend to rewrite the book, it was refreshing to have the true story of Alexander told.
Guest More than 1 year ago
I would give it negitive stars if I could. The filming, and camera angles made me nauseous. They left out rather historically important events in his life. All and all the storyline itself was just bad. I dont expect a movie like this to be perfectly accurate but this was just too much
Guest More than 1 year ago
This film has been much maligned but I don't quite understand why. While I wouldn't say that it's among Stone's best, it is still a pretty good movie. Colin Farrell plays a pretty low key Alexander. One might argue that his is a lackluster performance, but I think somewhat low key was Stone's intent. I must say that I didn't like Anthony Hopkins' role that much, but Val Kilmer had a memorable one. The battle scenes played out well, but may have been a bit perfunctory. Maybe the main reason the film didn't do well is timing, namely coming on the heels of other ancient battle movies such as Gladiator and Kingdom of Heaven.
Guest More than 1 year ago
Since we really don't have much to go on as far as factual historical accounts of Alexander, we can only surmise our image of him from what little there is written about him. We know a lot about what he accomplished because the results are evident, but trying to put together a portrait of his "true" character and nature is at best just hypothetcal conjecture. No one knows who Alexander really was as a person. Most people don't even know themselves. Does this movie convey Alexander as he really was or just some Hollywood director's personal idea that has been gleaned from rehashed biograpies of Alexander. From the ridiculous Harold Lamb version to the account of Arrian to the more scholarly Robin Lane Fox's "Alexander the Great" there isn't much that can be added to what scant information we have. Certainly the life of Alexander is a mystery since there is virtualy nothing know about it, and what little is know wasn't even included in the film. For example, his leading the cavalry charge at the "Battle of Chaeronea" which resulted in Philip's hegemony of Greece wasn't ever mentioned in the movie. Instead, sensual garbage including his mother's fetish with snakes and her completely embellished influence on him, in the usual Hollywood manner, is the kind of rubbish that is fostered upon the viewer. Obviously, his mother had and influence on him as all mothers have an influence on their children, but "give me a break". This kind of theatrical emoting is a waste of screen time which should have been spent on showing us what Alexander did in his life, which is what made him "The Great". Almost all of the significant things he did are not even mentioned or so quickly glossed over that they are meaningless. And a lot of what is mentioned isn't even correct. And many of the conclusions made by the director are purely guesswork, and bad guess work at that. Another example of something significant left out of the movie in favor of snake slithering: At the age 16 Alexander was intrusted with the regency of Macedonia while Philip was sieging Perinthos and Byzantium in eastern Thrace. While his father was gone, the Maedi, a Thracian tribe, revolted. Alexander led a campaign against them, succeeded, and established a new colony at Maedi and named it Alexandros. He was also allowed to refered to as a "man" after that, because he had killed an enemy in hand-to-hand combat, and that was the only way a Macadonian could be considered a "man". At that time Alexander was able to start having an insight and true understanding of his father which could have only been attained from the battle field. It was possible to comprehend his father's harsh, disciplined life which included drinking, hunting, and loving. The rest of Alexander's life was just as remarkable as his exploit in suppressing the uprising at Maedi, but the movie, in my opinion, just doesn't do justice to Alexander. A man who did what he did and in such a short time deserves better. And quite frankly, except for the poorly done battle scenes, I've seen more action in "Road Runner" cartoons. One final example which wasn't even hinted at in the movie: On his march back "home", he encountered the "Mallians", a fierce and warring nation. An assault was made on their major stronghold, and the men with the scaling ladders were late arriving. Alexander, with his impatience to storm the fortress, grabbed a ladder from the first ladder bearer to arrive and personally placed it against the wall and climbed up. Three other men followed him up the ladder and made the top with him. The men on the ground scrambled to follow Alexander, and their combined weight broke the ladder, and the king and the three soldiers were stranded on top of the battlements. The men on the ground pleaded for him to jump back down into their arms and safety, but alexander jumped into
Guest More than 1 year ago
This movie was great, the camera angles were peefect and the plcaes filmed at were wonderful, the story is perfect too.
Guest More than 1 year ago
Thank God im not the only one who loves this movie! i mean when i watched this movie opening night i thought to myself people will hate it, but critics will love it, and boy was i wrong. I loved the movie, like the other guy my main complaint is over the flash back even though i know why oliver put it in the place it went. It seemed to me after reading whatthe critics say on the movie none of them could agree about what made this movie so bad. Some say its the acting while others praise the acting and say its the story,and even more will say its all angela and colins fault how could she play his mom blah blah blah. Well she played his mom from when hes 7 to when hes 27 how old of an actress should oliver have gotten. I recomend this movie to all expecialy after reading plutarch's bio on alexander its almost exact on the movie. just shush all u nay sayers
Guest More than 1 year ago
Excellent movie, in my opinion. Who cares what the man's sexuality was? The movie was compelling and the actors and actresses chosen fit their roles perfectly. I didn't enjoy the Director's Cut as much, they took out what made Alexander, Alexander.
Guest More than 1 year ago
I had avoided the movie because of some bad reviews. I thought the movie was MUCH better than reviewed. I was amazed that Stone put as much emphasis on the gay-bisexual content. It is rare to see a glimpse of that much truth in a movie that might adversly affect ticket sales. Something else that suprised me is how much gore he put into the movie to give a better sense of "close up and personal" bloody combat. Alexander's white uniform soaked in his/victims blood. I noticed that one reviewer was amused by Alexanders helmet. That was accurate to history. The cinematography was excellent, the back/forth story line was annoying, costumes and characters were good. I wish i could have saw the uncensored/complete movie at the theater. Alas HD at home was good too.
Guest More than 1 year ago
This is a powerful and action packed movie.I can not say this movie was bad at all.I love the fighting and action in this movie.I love this movie!
Guest More than 1 year ago
As a longtime fan of Vangelis, I expected some spectacular music for this greek hero. Unfortunately this CD was a great disappointment. The music is cheesy, pompous and about as unoriginal as it gets. I would never have believed Vangelis actually wrote it, if I did not know better. I therefore caution fans to listen carefully before they buy.
Guest More than 1 year ago
I really enjoyed seeing this move. I do however agree with the critics that it was dragged out into boring scenes that really went into too much detail. I enjoyed watching it becauseb ased on my prior knowledge everything, almost, in the film is historically accurate. I do wish that Oliver Stone had included the other battles in Alexanders life. Maybe had these particular battles been added the film wouldn't have been bashed by critics so much. I feel the film did justice to the MAN Alexander was but not the CONQUERER that he was. What should one expect from a film about a man that conquered the known world in such short time? Other than that I loved it!
Guest More than 1 year ago
I went to see Alexander even after all of the critics siad that it would be a waste of time. It WAS TOTALLY NOT a waste of my time. I enjoyed every minute of this movie. Colin was a very great actor as was Angelina and Val Kilmer. I also liked how Oliver was BOLD enough to make the point of Alexander liking men so blunt. Most directors would not have had the guts to do that, and the fact that he did made the movie that much better. I reccommend this movie and TROY
Guest More than 1 year ago
If your impression of Alexander is based on Plutarch's "Lives of the Noble Grecians and Romans," then DO NOT WATCH THIS! I understand that interprative leeway is required to accomodate the 2-hour or 3-hour movie format, but this is aweful!
Anonymous More than 1 year ago
Anonymous More than 1 year ago
Anonymous More than 1 year ago
Anonymous More than 1 year ago
Anonymous More than 1 year ago
Anonymous More than 1 year ago
Anonymous More than 1 year ago
Guest More than 1 year ago
Ok so here what i got out of the whole deal. First of all the battles were pretty cool. but he wore stupid looking helmets during the first one which ruined the whole battle cause i couldnt stop laughing. Yes there were some pretty cool camera angles. but Collin Farrel is just not beleivable..........AT ALL hes almost a joke. i honestly cant beleive that they keep making more directors cuts of this movie. Angi Jolie is down right sexy and thats about the best thing about the movie. And I cant stand the fact that they made him gay throughout the whole thing. It just killed it all, regardless of the fact that it was true or not.
Guest More than 1 year ago
I had such high hopes for this movie and Oliver Stone was getting high. He seems to be stuck in the 60's. This is a period piece that's filmed like they're trying to rip off Ben HUR. The only reason I'd buy this movie is b/c Rosaria Dawson is buck naked in it. I mean hit pause and pan down. She needed to get naked in KIDS but sadly was smoking weed with the rest of the cast. If anything it should be remade b/c it has the making for a better film.