Gay conquerors
There are some posts I wish Alex had blessed Mastodon City with. His review of Alexander is one of them.
Go enjoy it.
Go enjoy it.
 |
 |
 |
 |
||
 |
||
 |
January 2007: Sweet fancy Moses, Alex got engaged! Also, alphabet.
2 Comments:
I'm glad you liked my write-up.
Argh. This movie really ruined my weekend. I'm very angry about the shoddy treatment of Alexander's chronology and his sexuality. I think the one thing Stone got right was when he came up with the idea that Alexander was both pan-sexual *and* pan-national, and that the two intersected in some strange way. Great. That's fascinating and inventive.
But, for a movie that was supposedly Stone's dream project, and his life's work, the treatment of both those subjects is just embarrassingly bad. And I don't care if it's ultimately the dreaded studio or MPAA that said, "No kissing dudes." Stone should have said, "F---, you." I'm doing this right. "We're going to see cock, we're going to see balls, because that's how it was." He should have held out, financed it with his own money, canvased for foreign investors; anything to get it right. But man, if he couldn't even pull off the sex stuff (and really, those are tiny easy-to-produce scenes), it's no surprise that Stone failed to deliver on the giant parts of Alexander's career.
I'm sad about the knot part. I don't have much interest in epic battles and conquering. But that story is a hoot. Stone blew it.
Also, I have no intention of seeing this movie either way. Even if it had the knot story.
Post a Comment
<< Home