Alexander Revisited: The Final Cut

This is the best version of Oliver Stone's epic about the life of Alexander the Great. At 3 hours 33 mins it is the longest and most comprehensive version of the film.

Let me start by saying this is the only cut of this movie that I've ever seen. I'm aware of the scathing reception Alexander recieved upon release, but I'm not entirely sure of why as I never saw the theatrical release.As an unbiased viewer going into this experience with no expectations, I have to say that I imagine this is a vast improvement over it's original form. There were some questionable performance choices in terms of acting and accents, and the plot jumps back and forth a little too much for my taste. Aside from this I found Alexander to be a riveting watch, with fantastic battle sequences and gloriously rendered locations, particularly Babylon. It's not quite in the same league as some of the other historical big hitters from this era, but it's certainly worth your time!

The DVD has a three-minute introduction by Oliver Stone himself, who talks about the radical restructuring that he had overseen for the new three-and-a-half hour version. He says that this is the third cut and is for DVD only. I never saw either of the other earlier two editions of this film, so my review is blind as to how better or worse is this reconstruction. He says that he has had full freedom to do as he pleased, uncensored, and unhampered by the pressures of a cinema release or studio executives. "Those of you who loved the first Alexander will love it more, and those of you who hated it will hate it more. ... [It was] always a difficult film to understand, difficult to do." Alas there is no commentary to help us understand why this was the case and there are no extras.Being a fan of other Oliver Stone movies (JFK and Nixon) I was at first unsure about his credentials to attack a non-American historical subject, and I feared his Alexander would be just another biopic made according to the Hollywood view of history. And my only previous experience of Alexander in a visual format was Michael Wood's excellent historico-travelogue for the BBC, "In the Footsteps of Alexander the Great". But I noted that the great English scholar and expert on all things Alexandrian (and more), Robin Lane Fox, was the historical consultant to the film.The result of the restructuring is that, in effect, we have two films running at the same time - Alexander in Macedonia, and Alexander abroad. The (new) film opens on Alexander's deathbed, and then we move forward forty years to see and hear Ptolemy (Anthony Hopkins) dictating his memoirs in Egyptian Alexandria. Ptolemy's commentary is heard at various points throughout the film and binds the whole story together, summing him up in an extended passage at the very end.The film swiftly moves to the epic battle of Gaugamela, where a full twenty minutes is spent on makeshift speeches and then the gore of war. I do not know if the words put into Alexander's mouth in the film are in any way true to history, but the constant references to Greek freedom as opposed to Persian tyranny made me uncomfortable, as if this was in some way Stone condoning the debacle of Iraq, Gaugamela being sited in the Kurdish part of that blighted state. But then we see the twelve-year old Alexander being taught by Aristotle (Christopher Plummer) in which he warns his young charge that, "The East has a way of swallowing young men and their dreams." (An "I told you so!" to Bush?)The battle is portrayed on a truly massive scale with an unexpected focus on tactics, the screen bearing references to the "Macedonian left", the "Macedonian right", etc. The scenes of the two great battles portrayed (the other being that of Hydaspes on the Indian frontier) are true gorefests. Some battle scenes unfortunately suffer from undercranking (slowing the film when shooting and then speeding it back up for the screen) and there are some editing problems too throughout the film - at one point Angelina Jolie speaks without her lips moving (but, then, given her character, maybe this was intentional).No review of this film can fail to mention the prevalence of Irish accents amongst the Macedonians. Even the young Alexander aged twelve has an Irish accent, so full marks for consistency. Maybe other reviewers know why Oliver Stone did this, and I know it has come in for some criticism, but for me, once it was noted, it was soon forgotten as the film progressed. And when all is said and done, would the film be better with American accents?The more times I watched this movie, the more I appreciated its strengths. The death of Philip and the acclamation of Alexander are particularly well-handled. The cast as a whole give true and convincing performances. The fine music by Vangelis (who else?) provides complete support for the visuals of tension, romance, exoticism, and glory, so much so that I bought the CD. I could even appreciate Oliver Stone's own appearance for a couple of seconds on-screen.In the end, I had to concede that this movie's epic scale, matched by its assured intimacy, its power to carry the viewer along and its power to move, could only mean that it had to have five stars.

Alexander Revisited is, as the man himself states at the beginning of this version of the film, Oliver Stone's final, artistically free edit of the film, an edition which 'includes everything I wanted to include'. For anyone who watched the previous versions of the film and found them reasonably enjoyable and watchable, if seriously flawed - and I count myself amongst them - it's an editing basis which promises great things; possibly an entirely new angle of appreciation. Sadly, that turns out to be almost wholly not the case.The length of the film and structure are altered, on the face of it, quite significantly, with the film playing now at over three hours and being graced with an intermission half way through. This attempt on Stone's part to recreate the epic scale of 'sword and sandals' behemoths of old is one which works surprisingly well, in so far as the film is still watchable; although I couldn't detect any noticeable change in the overall mood. Frankly, it may be a wider canvass, but it is a remarkably unchanged one in the fundamentals. It feels and plays more like a longer director's cut than a genuinely new edit of the film. There is, alas, no transformation of the original material here. You soon realise that all of the old problems are still there - the difference being that they are now merely writ larger.The central issue which largely crippled the earlier versions is still present; the lack of any persuasive emotional depth. In a film which tries it's hardest to flesh out Alexander the man, as opposed to simply Alexander the conqueror or warlord, this is deeply unsatisfying. But Alexander's most enduring and passionate relationship in his life, and the supremely obvious choice for a focus to any legitimate film centring on him as an individual, as a human being - that with Hephaestion - still remains the elephant in the living room, the issue which the film still cannot fully address in any kind of coherent manner. Jared Leto's low-key perfomance is better than has sometimes been suggested, particularly with benefit of this extended version, but the whole issue is dealt with in much too perfunctory and superficial way to be persuasive. What created the bond between Hepahestion and Alexander, and what is the real dynamic of it? These questions are never answered, nor even reasonably hinted at. We are still, on the whole, left with the previous situation of insincere-seeming hugs and furtive glances.In all fairness, to suggest that this implies some kind of Hollywood weakness at tackling the subject of homosexual relationships may be premature, since a similar lack of overall form bedevils the other key relationships. Val Kilmer fits into the role of Philip of Macedon brilliantly, but the strange, unsatisfying, oedipal trinity between Philip, Olympias and Alexander is still there. We still have a lot of huffing and puffing and no real spirit which carries us along; Alexander charges into Olympias' room, accuses her of Philip's murder, they scream and shout, and within minutes they are reconciled. It all seems too superficial, too lacking in any kind of thematic drum beat. All Alexander's relationships are never adequately resolved, nor are we ever sure what to make of them. The film still does not seem particularly sure what to make of them itself. Colin Farrell runs a perfectly competent and moderately convincing perfomance as Alexander, but he is still wedded to a script which never seems to excite or provoke, or raise Alexander beyond the favourable but conservative historical template of Robin Lane Fox. We are told a variety of things by Ptolemy (Anthony Hopkins) but rarely do we feel fully convinced. The film is still dry and much too concerned with telling us the basic story, rather than getting on and making that story come alive for the screen.The film is still, alas, too restrained, too lacking in confidence. It needed to charge headlong into the subject of Alexander's personal relationships with a will and a total disregard for convention, or else - the more commercially palatable option - largely ignore them and simplify them to the basics, and focus on making the film a big-scale Hollywood bloodfest. In the end, even in this final edit, it can still not fully commit itself to either.Alexander, like all biographical films, is a difficult one to judge if a viewer has a good knowledge of the subject in question. You are basically familiar with the tale. Baring massive artistic license, you are not in for any big surprises in terms of the story. But good films of this genre can bring out a new angle on a familiar yarn through persuasive characterisation and a good script, two things which Alexander, even at the ultimate stage, is not able to really summon up. That is a great shame for a film which aims high, but if this edit of the film succeeds in anything, it is in finally confirming that the definitive modern film version of Alexander of Macedon's life is still to be made.

Es gab genau eine Szene, die mir seit damals im Gedächtnis blieb und das war die, wo Alexander gegen Poros gegenüberstand. Selbst beim erneuten Gucken des Films nach vielen Jahren fand ich diese Szene bemerkenswert gut gemacht.Das unerwartete Färben ins rote Spektrum nach der Verwundung mag auf den ersten Blick ungewöhnlich sein, jedoch hätte die Stelle dann keinen bleibenden Eindruck hinterlassen.Es gibt weitere Stellen im Film, die deutlich machen, dass dieser mehr Potenzial hatte, was leider nicht ausgenutzt wurde.Eventuell wäre der Film bei heutiger Erstveröffentlichung besser angekommen, wenn man z. B. den neuesten Napoleon-Film bedenkt und was sonst noch aus historischen Persönlichkeiten gemacht wird in gewissen Dokus/Filmen.Alexander ist historisch korrekter als manch andere Filme, nimmt sich jedoch auch Freiheiten und interpretiert Alexander als eine tragische Heldenfigur, die, wie andere griechische Legenden auch, den Weg des Leidens ertragen muss und dafür unsterblich bleibt.Der große Hang zur historischen Korrektheit mag mitunter dafür verantwortlich sein, weshalb der Film ein Flop war, da er nicht wie andere große Filme auf das Mainstream-Publikum geschnitten war.Andere wiederum bemängeln die schlechte Schauspielleistung der Hauptdarsteller sowie wichtigen Nebenfiguren, was aus meiner Sicht unverständlich ist.Einzig Angelina Jolie wirkt für mich wie eine Fehlbesetzung: In der englischen Sprache hat sie einen merkwürdigen Akzent und irgendwie kauft man ihr die Rolle der Mutter nicht so richtig ab.Was ich kritisch an Alexander sehe, ist die Art wie Szenen in die Länge gezogen wurden. Dies betrifft nicht alle Szenen, sondern die Tanzszenen sowie einige Szenen wo nur geredet wird oder manch Szenen in den Schlachten. Ein früherer Schnitt ins nächste Bild wäre an vielen Stellen besser gewesen.Die Sex-Szene empfinde ich als unnötig, zumal diese zu lang ist, jedoch kann man diese zumindest überspringen.Wofür der Film nichts kann, ist die Altersfreigabe: Ab 12 Jahren ist sehr großzügig angesetzt, da wäre eine FSK ab 16 Jahren eher angebracht zwecks der Darstellung der Gewalt.Es gibt mehrere Versionen des Films, was für mich ein Indiz ist, dass Oliver Stone mit der Kinofassung nicht zufrieden war (was darauf hindeutet, dass er anscheinend den Film nicht so haben wollte wie die Kinofassung es zeigt und eventuell wollte das Studio es anders als Oliver Stone).The Final Cut soll alles enthalten, was Stone in Alexander haben wollte. Dementsprechend ist diese Fassung die längste und die Vergangenheit des Alexander wurde so in den Film eingebaut, dass man Parallelen zu der Gegenwart und seiner Vergangenheit sehen kann, was ich als eine interessante Wahl betrachte.Ich bevorzuge den Final Cut.Aus meiner Sicht hatte dieser Film Potenzial mehr aus sich herauszuholen. Er ist nicht so schlecht wie von den meisten dargestellt, aber eben nicht fürs einfache Publikum gemacht und somit ist es klar, dass viele den Film als langweilig betrachten oder schlecht gemacht.Insgesamt ist Alexander für mich ein Film, der mit Leidenschaft kreiert wurde, jedoch durch seine Schwächen runtergezogen wird.Doch lieber gucke ich mir einen Film an, bei dem man merkt, dass dahinter Liebe und Arbeit steckt als einen Film, der nur der reinen Geldmacherei dient und politisch korrekt sein möchte (was bei denm Großteil der heutigen Filme bzw. seit einigen Jahren ersichtlich ist).Auch wenn mein größter Kritikpunkt sich durch den größten Teil des Films zieht, bin ich froh, dass ich diesen Film in meiner Sammlung habe.

I fell in love with the movie because of the soundtrack by Vangelis. Later on I became very interested of Alexander because of this movie. This version is the best in my opinion. I've seen it many times and I will watch it many times more.

El producto llegó puntual y en perfecto estado.Hay tres versiones en total de la película "Alejandro Magno": A parte de La versión de los cines, está "Alexander - The Ultimate Cut" y esta última, "Alexander - Revisited The Final Cut". Recomendable si te encanta la película, porque no tienen nada que ver estas dos últimas versiones a la primera estrenada en los cines en 2005.Si las quieren comprar tengan en cuenta el idioma,ya que no hay traducción al castellano en ambos films.Ultimate Cut viene sin traducción al castellano y con subtítulos en español.Revisited Final Cut viene sin traducción y sin subtítulos.

Tutto bene arrivato nei tempi previsti, film molto bello l' ho regalato a mio figlio che ha studiato Alessandro Magno ed è appassionato di storia

Esta reseña es de la versión director’s cut de Alexander, la versión extendida de la película de Oliver Stone. Para quien tenga dudas sobre adquirirla o no, está en versión original pero con subtítulos en español latino neutro. Por lo tanto se puede reproducir en cualquier bluray y se puede entender todo sin problemas. La versión vale mucho la pena, si os gustó la de cine no os la perdais, dudo que la eidten nunca en España.