Simviation Forums

Even is now too  old to talk about,(2004) this will teach to Mr Oliver Stone that to make this kind of movies, Good,and tasty for public doen't need high budget and tousand of extras ,I did like the Movie Alexander the gay , But last Night I saw TROY with Bratt Pitt and Hulk well Eric bana,great movie,more FX computarized,but its really good the argument no Biggest and expencive actors,but In my opinion was much better this one,I like this kind of movies,Ancient Grece,Romans,..Etc

I'd rather read The Illiad.

I liked Troy.  I was looking forward seeing Alexander the Great until I read the reviews.  Seems Oliver Stone found it appropriate to spend lots of time delving into the interpersonal drama and his proclivities, such as him leering at youthful males, rather than spending time on what Alexander is well known for, his military prowess.  So I passed.

I hate agendas, just tell the story as it was.

I liked Troy.  I was looking forward seeing Alexander the Great until I read the reviews.  Seems Oliver Stone found it appropriate to spend lots of time delving into the interpersonal drama and his proclivities, such as him leering at youthful males, rather than spending time on what Alexander is well known for, his military prowess.  So I passed.

I hate agendas, just tell the story as it was.

Actually, as far as I know, he was well-known for everything you listed there.  Historically, that IS telling the story as it is.  Be careful what you wish for

[quote]
Actually, as far as I know, he was well-known for everything you listed there.

Alexander was something between a genius mind and a paranoid. In fact this two aspects are always very close to each other. This is why he managed such a military achievement reaching india with much lesser forces and for the same reason he caused his best friend's (or lover's) death, eventualy meeting his own death later. A superior intelligence which made him feel superior to others, even a god but always with human weaknesses, sometimes full of compassion, sometimes merciless but civilized in his way and for the era standards (he evacuated Persepolis before burning it).
As it concerns homosexuality, it was viewed in a much different way than it is today and this holds true for the Roman era as well (before christianity).

I have not seen the movie but Alexander's personality is quite adequately depicted in the paragraph above. Despite the subject, I rarely trust movies seeking historical truth as they are made for profit rather than historical acuracy, not that all that is seen in a movie is imagination.

I understand hollywood has to take liberties to tell a story in the confines of roughly 2 hours and to keep the audience entertained.  But I hate it when hollywood takes liberties that end up misleading the audience to understand a set of events in a light that is contrary to the history.

Oliver Stone Sales his controversi,he did with kenedy, Fidel,Evita ( as guidenist),Now he screw up in a movie very expencive,and mix In his twisted mind a movie with a strange argument (NO ONE IN THIS PLANET CAN'T ASURE THE ALEXANDER THE GREAT WAS GAY)but the result was a strong criticism ,a failure in sales,a big wasted money,But what Im trying to say was,a great movie doen't need Colin,Angelina,Val,and even Sir Antony Hopkings ,A

Alrot,

I agree, completely!  

BTW, I still haven't made up my mind if I'll see WTC.

Generally speaking, I am not against basing a movie or a book, on historical events and altering them but in this case the creator has to make clear that it is a workout based on soemthing and not a historical truth. Braveheart was one of my favourite movies and I know it is not 100% precise, at least not proven to be. But I think it is mentioned in the begining anyway.

But DaVinci Code?  LOL!!!!  Because of the controversy, the author had been pressed to admit it's historical context is untrue, but other than that, the unsuspecting viewer would be led to believe the historical context was factual info.  That stuff, Dan Brown made up out of whole cloth!  LOL!!!!