Alexander Revisited (The Final Cut) DVD

[karen]

It's not material he found unsuitable -- else he wouldn't have shot it. A movie has to be approved by the studio bosses, and it has to go through trial audiences, and all sorts of stuff between the director and the theatre. I think he had orders to cut 3 1/2 hours of movie into 1 1/2 or 2 (whatever the theatrical version was) so he actually had to eliminate parts that he really didn't want to.

Besides, sometimes you can make a story work much better by switching around the order of things.

I'm hoping that, since the first director's cut was a big improvement over the theatrical, that the second director's cut will be as much as an improvement again, or more.

We'll just have to see.

With anticipation,
Karen

[alejandro]

A society so advanced in culture and philosophy and the understanding of ethos, could allow their teenagers to be prey for older men?

A society so advanced ... could allow for slaves? Well, it did.

The point is, an "advanced society" is not an absolute category, but depends on the "average society". The ancient Greeks were advanced relatively to other societies of the time in terms of philosophy or arts (and even these are open to debate, since we usually have a Western bias with respect to them), but it is a rather poor society compared to current societies where there are no slaves, women can vote, etc. The ancient Greeks were not so advanced in some areas, even compared to other contemporaneous societies (I am not sure, but I have a feeling that there were other cultures at the time that treated women better than the Greeks). Even more, there were differences between Greek cities (not to mention the "backward Macedonians"), so "some cities were more advanced than others" (in Athens slaves were not "brutally hunted as in backward Sparta!").

This means that a society can be "advanced" in one dimension and "backward" in others, so your line of argument does not lead to the conclusion that the Greeks were not involved in same-sex sexual relationships with young boys (unless you provide evidence about it). But the silogism is flawed, and so cannot be used to analyse the validity of the conclusion.

All the best,
Alejandro

[amyntoros]

Marcus wrote:

I'm quite happy to delete future messages at my discretion, but not if I'm then going to be criticised for it.

You're giving up your deleting power, then, Marcus, because it's exactly the people who write posts which ought to be deleted who'll criticize you for doing it.

I say, moderators should delete as warranted and take the subsequent railing as confirmation of the correctness of their choice

Warmly,
Karen

I’m coming late into the fray but I’ve spent the day trying to resolve major problems with my computer and this is my first opportunity. As it is, I don’t want all the responsibility to be put on to Marcus’ shoulders or all the criticism (about moderation) to be directed at him, and I need to say that I agree entirely with everything he has written. The only thing I would like to add is a suggestion that when a post is inflammatory or offensive members do not enter into a debate with the individual concerned, thus adding fuel to the flames and confusing the issue. When some Pothosians object outright to a post while others respond with logical and reasonable arguments it makes moderating decisions more difficult. As Marcus said, “once others jumped into the stew it rather muddied the waters.”

And, Beatriki, I’m also glad you’re staying because your contributions would have been sorely missed.

Best regards,

[Taphoi]

Vast numbers of clips from Alexander Revisited are now featuring on Youtube btw.

e.g. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LAx9aUVedY4

Enjoy!

Andrew

[Paralus]

No, what I find really sad is that most people have not understood this film due to their prejudices. And I also find sad that people like Stone who wanted to present the ancient world like it was and NOT like we would want it to be, has been critisized mostly by people who know nothing about Alexander (except for the Manfredi's trashy novels), and think they are better and know more than the best Alexander historian of our time, R.L. Fox.

Alexander has been mostly critisized in the USA, not in Europe, by the way, and for those reasons. Here, most historians love it and show it to their students...

Yes. The US reviews I read prior to its showing in Australia tended to criticise on the basis of a "wishy-washy" or "confused and over-sensitive" Alexander. All euphemisms, of course, for the homoerotic insinuations within Alexander's film character. My impression was that these reviewers might just have been happier had Stone contrived a character more in keeping with Russell Crowe's Gladiator.

That said, from the historical perspective, the film is not something I'd be showing to students unless it was to point up the flaws of the "benevolent, civilising and visionary conqueror" routine that seems to be gaining in popularity nowadays.

A society so advanced ... could allow for slaves? Well, it did.

The point is, an "advanced society" is not an absolute category, but depends on the "average society". The ancient Greeks were advanced relatively to other societies of the time in terms of philosophy or arts (and even these are open to debate, since we usually have a Western bias with respect to them)...

... Even more, there were differences between Greek cities (not to mention the "backward Macedonians"), so "some cities were more advanced than others" (in Athens slaves were not "brutally hunted as in backward Sparta!").

Well, precisely. Judging the ancients within the framework of modern mores is a fraught exercise.

As I wrote in the “Impressions” thread, the plaque at Thermopylae fails utterly to record the six hundred or more Laconian/Messenian slaves who fell with their overlords during that battle. Although slaves in Athens were not routinely “hunted”, one suspects that life for them in the silver mines at Laurium was about as hard and toxic as one could imagine – ditto Mt Pangaeus in Macedonia. They were, in the end, “non persons”.

Life was indescribably different for those of which we write, framed as it was by high infant mortality and death by virtue of war or the next visiting batch of bacteria. The Romans valued life and “human rights” in a totally different way than do we. Their view allowed for spectacle of death in an arena to be seen as nothing more than we see a Rugby test or the Superbowl. No one, though, is decrying the Romans as uncivilised barbarians.

Just on which, it is instructive to note that every slave “rebellion” that we know of during the Roman era did not have as its cause the abolition of slavery as such. Far from it. The object of the exercise was for the slaves involved to become “free” and then find a new life where they would have slaves attend upon them.

[alejandro]

Hi Paralus,

Although slaves in Athens were not routinely “hunted”, one suspects that life for them in the silver mines at Laurium was about as hard and toxic as one could imagine – ditto Mt Pangaeus in Macedonia. They were, in the end, “non persons”..

Yes, I agree strongly. I was trying to give examples about how easily the use of "backward" can be applied within the Greek sphere even if restricted to their own time. My comments about slaves being hunted was intended to be ironic (as was the one about "backward Macedonians"), showing that the ancient Greek society was not homogeneous and there were cities more "advanced" than others in some aspects (as one can only expect anyway).

... it is instructive to note that every slave “rebellion” that we know of during the Roman era did not have as its cause the abolition of slavery as such. Far from it. The object of the exercise was for the slaves involved to become “free” and then find a new life where they would have slaves attend upon them

I never paid attention to it, but you are totally right there Paralus! I love your cynical but accurate style! Keep it up mate!

All the best,
Alejandro

[alejandro]

oops, sorry
thought the first message was not posted

[derek]

My home pc is old and slow and the internet connection even slower, so I avoid going insane by using my pc at work when I want to log on to the internet. So I come in Monday morning, and there's been a blazing row on Pothos all weekend that's already been deleted! Blaady typical. Something interesting to read, and I missed it.

My own opinion on the film: Oliver Stone made the mistake of forgetting he had to put bums on seats. Everyone was expecting a clone of Gladiator, and instead they got an exploration of the influences and motivation of someone that most people know little or nothing about. Stone dared to hint at his sexuality and had lawyers threatening lawsuits (ridiculous or wot?), and spent time on the speeches that inspired Alexander's men, only to have them panned as dull by the critics. Then the cutting room got hold of the film and made it incomprehensible to anyone without prior knowledge of the subject, for instance, some bloke we haven't seen before suddenly stabs himself, and the next scene they're executing Philotas. What? Who? Why? Then there was the unintentional comedy - Alexander at the window dreamily espousing his vision of the future while Hephaestion croaks in the bed behind him. Obviously meant to be a moving scene full of pathos, and instead it came across as pure slapstick.

Oliver Stone made a film for those who were already interested in Alexander, not the general public. They were turned off the moment it was branded a gay movie, and those who did still go to see it must have come out bored and bewildered. He should have thrown in a car chase and a couple of explosions, and he'd have had a winner.

Anyway, I'm looking forward to seeing this new version. It'll be the story Oliver Stone wanted to tell, without regard for the paying public, political correctness or running time. It should be good.

Derek

[Paralus]

My comments about slaves being hunted was intended to be ironic (as was the one about "backward Macedonians"), showing that the ancient Greek society was not homogeneous and there were cities more "advanced" than others in some aspects (as one can only expect anyway).

Yes, I perceived that and was mildly surprised that no one took to gnawing at you. You might choose to be careful though, given the posting peccadilloes on display in this thread, lobbing Latin roots with such gay abandon in the direction of ancient Greeks or their society might result in ostracism!

My Thermopylae comment too was more than a little ironic. A plaque dedicated to the ultimate sacrifice, in the great fight for the freedom of the Greeks from Persian oppression, which niftily makes no mention of the Greek serfs who were obliterated along with their overlords.

One wonders how many helots may have made that same sacrifice in Sparta’s desperate prevail or perish clash at Mantinea in 418 (and again in 362). And, how many unheralded helots will have bitten Boeotian dust at Lakedaemon’s Waterloo on the field at Leuktra in 371? The last due to the utter hypocrisy of Sparta and its panhellenic and fiercely truculent Eurypontid king Agesilaos – consumed by a near irrational hatred of all things Theban and the embodiment of all things Spartan, including its downfall – in particular, having more front than Russia in insisting on the Boeotian cities signing as “autonomous cities”, free of the Theban yoke. That they were members of a Boeotian League mattered not one whit. Nor the fact that Sparta would sign on behalf of her league and her helots – yet again busily trading away the “autonomy and freedom” of the Greeks of Asia for the comfort of the Great King’s imprimatur.

I never paid attention to it, but you are totally right there Paralus! I love your cynical but accurate style! Keep it up mate!

Cynical? Perhaps it’s the way the html handles the text?

Most kind of you Alejandro. Nice to know someone appreciates it. I sometimes wonder how my wife and children put up with me. Very rarely though, of course….

[rjones2818]

I liked the first version, I really liked the directors cut and this 'final' cut is just magnificent. Yeah, it still has the historical problems, but as a movie it finally feels right. I think all should see this cut if they have a chance.

[marcus]

I liked the first version, I really liked the directors cut and this 'final' cut is just magnificent. Yeah, it still has the historical problems, but as a movie it finally feels right. I think all should see this cut if they have a chance.

Thanks for that. I intend to get it on Saturday - it hasn't appeared on Amazon, so I might have to get off my lazy backside and go to a shop to get it - what a novel idea!

Guess what I'll be doing on Saturday evening!

ATB

[keroro]

I also noticed that it was not on Amazon, it made me wonder if they are planning to release it in the UK. The film always had its problems, including IMHO some of the casting, but there was enough that was good and enjoyable about the cinema release that would encourage me to get this edition and give it a watch. I did get the idea that Stone wanted to do something special with the film, and that it was important to him.

I don't think I will be able to convince my girlfriend to watch it with me though - she was bored stiff through the cinema version.

[amyntoros]

I also noticed that it was not on Amazon, it made me wonder if they are planning to release it in the UK.

I not sure, but I believe it is only the Region 1 (US and Canada) version that has just gone on sale. I looked around the web for any info on a European release date and eventually found the following info on play.com.

Alexander: The Final Cut (2 Discs)
Pre-order
Due for release on 21/05/2007

Um, if that's really the case then it's probably not a good idea for me to mention that I already received my copy, with its free ticket for the 300 movie

Best regards,

[keroro]

May? How do they justify these release schedules?

Well, looks like I'll be getting a Region 1 DVD then. If anyone in the US can use a free ticket for 300 then let me know, I assume that it will not be valid in the UK.

[Paralus]

Hi koro.

Don't get it: it will not play. "Regions" are all about ensuring intellectual property and profits. In short, if it's coded for US/Canada/Mexico it will not play in Europe. Australia either for that matter.

You see, we have licensed distributors who ned to make a dollar (or multiples thereof).

If this reads rather cynically, then so be it. I can only say that I've rather a long history with the publishing game in Australia and I'm rather tired of supporting British publishing houses. It has always been these houses who decided which books - and at what price (and when) - would be available to us "Antipodeans".

Nothing has changed. I recenctly airfreighted two titles from the US (Amazon of course) for 118 USD (about 149 Aus) delivered. One of these titles alone in Australia is listed at $159.

The sun willnever set...