Update on Alexander Movies

[jan]

Nobody is going to like this suggestion but I am going to state it anyway. Years ago, when I was a child, I attended Saturday morning movies which featured western movies, starring Roy Rogers and Gene Autry. Each Saturday there was a serial movie, keeping us in suspense until the next week, always ending with a cliffhanger. I spent my youth watching movies which taught me a lot besides how to sit tight in a dark theatre.The Alexander series made especially for children should be a means of introducing the life of Alexander as an example of how young children rose to power, and each week, a new and separate plot could be aired. This would keep movie makers in business as well as educating and entertaining youngsters about the life of a really significant and important person in history.Children should not be forgotten or neglected in moviemaking. Roy Rogers always signed off with a prayer and it taught me a lot. I think that Alexander would have liked that.

[anna]

I have to agree with some of the posters - the story of Alexander is such a great story, it can't be told in one, albeit very long movie. How long can they make it? 3 hours?To concentrate on one episode, like Cleitus or Philotas or many-many interesting others is a good idea, but it will be difficult to understand for the people who are barely familiar with Alexander's life. They won't get the full subtext and the meaning...I always thought that the best idea is a mini-serial, something Mel Gibson wanted to produce awhile ago. I've heard the rumour he's still on the project. Not something of Hallmark's quality, of course, a bit more serious and accurate... Well, at least, that's what i'd prefer.And Tre, you've missed the most troubling Colin's quote - "It reads almost like a bad fiction"!!!!!! LOL

[marcus]

You are correct, of course, but it would make a much more interesting play/film if all 365 of the women in the harem were young and particularly toothsome.Actually, I seem to remember that whichever source mentions the harem (Curtius?) does specifically say that it was 365 concubines... which in itself suggests that they were young(ish) and toothsome.Oh dear, I'm breaking into a cold sweat again...All the bestMarcus

[sikander]

Of course the sources say that- the myth was a myth even then... but entry was forbidden to most people. And fantasy is often better than reality- at least where harems are concerned!

[anna]

Sigh.... You all forgot about the "apparently" inherited eunouchs along with 365 concubines. Yes, i mean, besides Bagoas. Now here's the unlimitied field for fantasy... Horrors!OK, let's start thinking positively

[gahauser]

Hey- there's nothing wrong with eunuchs! Read CRY TO HEAVEN by Anne Rice. She'll change your mind!

[anna]

No kidding! Flying eunuchs-vampires?! Or something of that sort?
Yes, it might change my mind after all (not that i had anything against them before)!

[anna]

http://filmforce.ign.com/articles/402/4 ... t=1Correct me if i'm wrong but i don't remember that Parmenio had the son named Cleitos. Philotas, Nicanor and ... oops, don't remember the last one.
But what mostly troubles me is this - "These script pages reveal that the driving force for at least the first half of the film is Alexander's mission to kill Darius, the ruler who slew Alexander's father..". Excuse me?!

[marcus]

Well, being generous......it's perfectly possible that the people who wrote the article just got it wrong, and there was so little of the script posted that they didn't pick up on it.As for the business of Darius being Philip's killer, I can understand that the concept of the League of Corinth and the whole background to the war against Persia would be somewhat complex to get into a film. The idea of personal revenge is much easier for audiences to grab in nanoseconds. So if the scriptwriters are latching on to the propaganda that Persian money was behind Philip's death, then I could understand that. Not sure I agree with it, but ultimately the reason for the invasion has to be articulated and it would take more than a three hour film to articulate the 'Hellenic Crusade' concept.All the bestMarcus

[anna]

Marcus, i absolutely understand, that some detailes were weird mainly because of internet "delivery" of the facts. I wasn't nitpicking about Parmenio's son or some other characters...
I understand it's impossible to tell the story of the league and all the turmoils that went around it and i know that the Persian "help" in Phillip murder can't be denied. It's not the fact that Darius was responcible (most likely he was)that bothers me.
It's the whole interpretation of events that drove Alexander to conquest.
And if you ask me, i don't believe that he invaded Asia simply as a reknowned leader of the Corinthian league who leads Macedon and Greece together to revenge the past. It was mostly his thurst for conquest and andventure, he had to expand his kingdom, because it was too small for him. Thinking of Alexander as some kind of avenger for his father death would simplify his person and his motives - just check the thread above about our musings, what drove the man...
Yes, they have only 3 hours, but setting the idea from the beginning about the complexity of his nature, his "unusualness" so to speak - it can be done, imho.
Maybe, this is only the first and partial script, they usually re-write it a couple of times during the production, and maybe the report gives us a wrong impression. We'll see...

[marcus]

Hi Anna,As you say, we'll see. I do agree that the motives are too complex, and as I said I don't necessarily agree with their turning it simply into a revenge plot... but I can understand why they're doing it.Of course, I don't think that Darius having anything to do with Philip's murder *is* irrefutable. It is possible, maybe probable, but I have to confess that I am in the "Darius was innocent" camp until I get more proof (the records of the Persian Secret Service, circa 336BC, perhaps?):-)All the bestMarcus

[anna]

Well, Marcus, i have to confess as well - i'm sitting on the fence in this case. I refuse to believe Alexander was involved, as for the rest - it reminds me of Agatha Cristie's mystery. Everyone has a motive and everyone is suspect. Olimpia, Demosphenos, Darius, Linkestides etc' etc'...But the bitter truth - we will never know.

[marcus]

Hi Anna,Funnily enough, I am more inclined to believe that Alexander was involved than I am to believe that Darius was... but I don't believe Alexander was, either.I was reading something over the weekend, and I wish I could remember exactly what it was, that convinced me more than ever that Olympias *didn't* have anything to do with Philip's death - the argument was to do with the boost it gave to Antipater, and how Olympias would not have done anything that furthered Antipater's cause.All the bestMarcus