when mike nad i saw it all we said was wow that was 3hours of gay jokes! yeah i was VERY disappointed in the movie... but it did have AJ *grynz*

But even her character was awful -- she didn't age a day, ever. It seemed like the only person that actually tried in that movie was Val Kilmer. I think that's saying a lot.

I started at Blockbuster (again) yesterday. All seven hojillion copies were checked out during most of my shift, and that was all anybody wanted to rent. I tried to console them with the fact that, gayness aside, it was really not a good or even mildly interesting movie, but to no avail.

Jeezum fuck, what am I doing up at 9:00?

Well, in the anonymous customer's defense, they could've wanted to see for themselves. I mean, that was my reason for renting it. I'd been told it was boring, it just didn't hit the mark, things like that.. but I had no idea just how incredibly bad it was. And that's an all-over thing, really. It never built up any emotion, everyone acted like they were "acting" instead of becoming a role.. I mean, seriously. When you can tell the most effort came from Val Kilmer for his sporadic and ugly on-screen time, there's just no hope. I mean, I'll always like Val Kilmer -- Real Genius is a forever-favorite -- but come on. If his totally fake "missing eye" makeup is the most convincing thing in the movie.. well, you get the point.

Ah ... well, I've always been touch-and-go with Ollie Stone. He tends to get stuck in a single theme and grinds it into a mushy, bitter pulp. Yes, Alexander was bisexual - just about everyone was pre-Christianity - but what should have been an interesting side-note became the true focus of the film. It's like, during his research, Mr. Stone found this tasty, fascinating tidbit of history and thought, "Wow! This will piss some people off and spark a revolution! I'm going to make every scene in the film revolve around it." It's like he was trying to be Gore Vidal ala Julian and I just wasn't feeling it.

Things that made Alexander interesting: He was an astounding young man who conquered the known world. He was a genius with an amazing gift for problem solving and tactics. He brought civilization and culture to the world and opened trade routes for all of Messopotamia. Versions of his tactics are still used today. The fact that he diddled around with other boys is noteworthy, but being from a society where everyone diddles around with everyone regardless of gender, it's rather unremarkable.

Oddly, Troy was a superior movie. But then again, the pre-Christian warrior in my may just have the hots for Brad Pitt. ;-P

Gad! I'm bored. Let's invade something.

I guess it's because I've watched movies about men strugging with their sexuality that were actually good. I mean, I thought that Farinelli (also known as Il Castrato) was interesting and possibly even worth the price of purchasing a copy for myself. I felt ripped off for spending $2.50 on a rental of Alexander.

I actually had similar problems with Troy, though, too -- it never built any emotion, the music was all wrong and had the worst timing (I mean, for crying out loud, a 10-year-old Rusted Root song is used for the big dance scene in Alexander), the acting was sour save for one person (Pitt and Kilmer, respectively.. though the guy who played Hector, Paris' brother, whose name I can't think of right now, also did well), the story deviated from the actual important things that made it interesting to begin with.. gah. Just.. bad! Though I think Troy was disappointing where Alexander just made parts of my brain die.

If Stone was trying to make a statement with this one, I'm actually not sure what it was. It seemed, at least to me, like he was saying you can't be gay (because Alexander sure as heck wasn't portrayed as bi) and be a leader. 'Cause you'll go crazy.