-
jules.
User deleted
'Alexander' the less than great
Liz Smith
'Dreamers exhaust us... "
So intones Anthony Hopkins near the end of
Oliver Stone's "Alexander," starring Colin Farrell as antiquity's
conqueror/paranoid, Alexander the Great.
Well, 2 1/2-hour movies are pretty exhausting as well, and I fear that
Stone's trademarked, kaleidoscopic cinematic excesses slow down his
often
thrilling, magnificently photographed epic about ancient ego run amok
and
mother love gone awry.
The movie is not, as one wise- acre quipped, "this year's
'Showgirls.'"
Maybe that person was reacting to Colin's iffy bleach job or Jared
Leto (as
Alexander's lover, Hephaistion) and his fabulous eyeliner. The remark
indicated we'd be rolling in campy situations and dialogue - not to
mention
sex, sex, sex. I hate to be the harbinger of bad news, but ... no.
There's
little sex, yet lots of angst.
Stone does his serious, vivid best to impart - with considerable sweep
and
quite a bit of psychological gussying-up - the genesis of Alexander's
vast
vision of himself, as well as his torments and insecurities.
(Alexander's
life is perfect fodder for Stone - rife with betrayals and
conspiracies
and,
in the end, a very suspicious Alexander. What's in that goblet?!)
Problems start early: Mom Olympias (Angelina Jolie) is a
snake-worshiping
high priestess who cares little for her coarse, wine-soaked, one-eyed
husband, King Philip (Val Kilmer). Towheaded young Alexander sees his
share
of "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?" scenes, along with getting to
cuddle
in
bed with Mom and her reptiles. Mother says: "Snakes are like people.
...
You
can love them, nurture them ... but they can turn on you in an
instant.
Don't trust anyone. Only I love you." Obviously, the kid's already in
way
over his tunic.
Kilmer, a good actor whose self-derailed career seems back on track,
is
excellent as Philip - brutish, but not without heart and love for his
son.
(Naturally, he can't stand Olympias, but when a guy is a heavy
drinker,
being married to a woman who packs the palace with real snakes is no
help
at
all.) Jolie is simply great. Obsessed, possessed, ravishing,
repugnant,
unrepentant, a gorgeous, ambitious praying mantis. Sort of like Angela
Lansbury in "The Manchurian Candidate," with a body that just won't
quit.
She makes the screen sizzle.
AND YES, Alexander's bisexuality is addressed. But no, Farrell and
Leto
never lip-lock. They talk. They gaze hungrily. They hug, more or less
manfully. We're supposed to get it that they're lovers. But somehow
the
relationship never seems real. Aside from the fact that Alexander is
so
interested in conquering the known world, and bringing all its peoples
together - though his generals warn him that everybody may not warm to
Grecian democracy - Hephaistion is just sort of hanging around. The
great
words of love don't have much impact.
Farrell eventually takes a bride - they bark at each on their
honeymoon
night, after she pulls a knife on him. Rosario Dawson as Roxanne is a
sexy
number, and Alexander seems interested at first. But then he also
takes
another male companion, a beautiful, sloe-eyed
Persian boy, who never utters a word. It is he (played with sultry
silence
by Francisco Bosch) whom Farrell kisses on the lips. But this is not
portrayed so much as an act of affection, but rather as a sign of
Alexander's unraveling debauchery. At Hephaistion's deathbed (Stone
has him
brutally wounded between his legs) there's high, weepy drama, but I
kept
thinking Peggy Lee: "Is that all there is?"
Stone directs two massive screen battles here. The first, with Darius
and
the Persians, is one of the most visually exciting (and gory) I have
ever
seen. The second is in an Indian forest, washed in hues of bloody red,
and
not as good, though you can't help but be impressed by the fighting
elephants. Stone's visions of B.C. Babylon, a little of Macedonia and
especially great Persian palaces are stunningly realized, even if
we're
keen
to the miracles of computer-generated hocus-pocus.
Colin Farrell gives his all as Alexander, but the occasions and vistas
seem
too large for him. He is admirably equipped with fire and sensitivity
(especially in a juicy showdown with Jolie) but somehow lacks heroic
stature. Perhaps there's too much movie around him. This is not a bad
performance, but it travels under the radar. Maybe it's simply that
Colin
doesn't make a very convincing blond?
There is much in "Alexander" to relish. But Stone could easily trim 20
minutes to good effect. It's better than "Troy," though both of these
tales
of ancient time resonate with our current climate - war, arrogant
rulers,
Eastern empires, pleas for peace and the need to dominate.
Maybe some people won't mind the length, or the admirable Hopkins as
on-screen narrator Ptolemy. His three appearances bring the action to
a
thudding halt with overwrought ex- position. The film cost a fortune
and
looks it. (Audiences can't say they're not getting their $10 worth of
movie.) I am, as I have said, a real sucker for this sort of epic, so
I
give
it a thumbs-up.I can't see how Baz Luhrmann's now-"delayed" version of Alexander's
life,
which was to star Leonardo DiCaprio, can happen anytime soon. Not
unless he
gets Andrew Lloyd Webber to set it to music.
.